Any movie with Paul Giamatti in it is guaranteed to suck.

There aren't enough ways I can put this post to rest. First off, he is probably the most respected character actor working today. Second off look at his filmography. Sideways, 12 years a slave, Cinderella man, barneys version, too big to fail, the ides of March, John Adams, straight outta Compton, American splendor, the illusionist, parkland, the last station. He is an amazing actor. One of my favorites.

Here's a discussion. You're clearly a troll.

I've like him in several things including Man in the Moon years ago and recently, Straight Outta Compton. He's a really good actor.

I was about to type the same thing. The OP is clearly a troll.

Always look for the positive in every situation.

I'm afraid you're mistaken, though you are entitled to your opinion. I feel that Paul Giamatti makes a film better just by being in it, and if the movie he's in sucks, HE never does. Sure, Fred Claus looks like a dumb movie, but Paul's the one thing keeping it afloat. I also think he brings a sort of charm to his characters. For example, his role of a slave trader in 12 Years a Slave (and Planet of the Apes to a lesser extent), the guy was a piece of trash, but Paul played him with such elligence and charm that I found I couldn't hate the guy (character) as much as I should.
Plus I think Paul's character of Ralph in Saving Mr. Banks perfectly balanced out the cold-hearted Mrs. Travers and the charming, but forceful Walt Disney.
So if you cast Paul Giamatti in your movie, you're guaranteed an enjoyable performance from him, and if the movie sucks, he will NOT.

Discuss what? That you seem like an idiot?

You're clearly just an internet troll trying to start an argument with someone. Or you're just an idiot with no taste in movies or actors. I think pretty much anything he is in is at least going to be a decent movie cuz he's in it

I agree overall with everyone's positive reviews/comments re: Giamatti. He's played numerous very interesting, often quite unusual character roles over the past 25+ years. I can't think of ANY performance he's done that falls below a 'very good to great' acting
level. He continues to surprise me in role after role. He nails it every time in a wide array of performances, from very dark, cynical roles to sarcastic, comedic characters as well as playing the inflexible, twisted, dysfunctional drama pieces such as "The Hawk is Dying". He's extremely talented in an often rather understated way. He doesn't jump off the screen -- he brings you into the film. He can be riotously funny yet touching through his great delivery of sarcasm, such as in "Sideways" as well as incredibly dark and troubling in films like "The Hawk is Dying", which made me shudder.

You have a right to your own opinion -- without a doubt -- and this is exactly one of the perfect places to 'voice' your views on all the people and productions involved in film, TV and an array of media forms. I don't believe people like you should automatically be dubbed a 'troll', simply because you post a dissenting opinion or other viewpoint about someone or a production. If we had no dissenters on IMDb, it would  not encourage posters to more deeply consider their positions. As long as IMDbers show reasonable courtesy and respect toward others in sharing their views, I
say, have at it!

Your comment made me go back and consider which of Giamatti's film or TV work really stands out for me. There's a lot in his work to date to admire, IMHO. Even when I don't much care for the character he's playing, i.e. 'Chuck Rhoades' in the new series "Billions", it's typically because he's so convincing in playing the part that I truly come to somewhat personally dislike the character. He's damn good . . .

So, in summary, thanks for prompting me to do a more personal evaluation of his acting strengths. I believe he adds A LOT to some very unique productions -- And. I   eagerly look forward to his next film or show!!!