The Gucci family is not pleased with the new film House of Gucci, saying in a statement that the portrayal ‘couldn’t be further from the truth’ and that they take issue with how members were painted ‘as thugs, ignorant and insensitive to the world around them.’

The film, directed by Ridley Scott and starring Adam Driver and Lady Gaga, hit theaters on November 24 and raked in $21.8 million during its first five days — but the heirs of Aldo Gucci, who was played by Al Pacino in the movie, are criticizing it for inaccuracies.

They released a statement in Italian saying they were ‘a bit disturbed’ by the film’s narrative. Furthermore, the filmmakers claim that it is extremely painful and insulting to the heritage on which the brand was built.

Unimpressed: The heirs of Aldo Gucci, who was played by Al Pacino in House of Gucci, are not pleased with the movie

Unimpressed. The movie is not pleasing the heirs of Aldo Gucci who were played by Al Pacino during House of Gucci.

In a statement released in Italian, they say they are 'a bit disconcerted' because 'the film carries a narrative that is far from accurate' (pictured: Aldo Gucci in 1982)

A statement was released in Italian by them stating that they feel ‘a little disconcerted’ at the movie’s portrayal of a storyline that’s ‘far from accurate’.

According to Variety, the statement reads: ‘The Gucci family takes note of the release of the film “House of Gucci” and is a bit disconcerted because, although the work claims to want to tell the “true story” of the family, the fears raised by the trailers and interviews released so far, are confirmed: the film carries a narrative that is far from accurate.

‘The production of the film did not bother to consult the heirs before describing Aldo Gucci — president of the company for 30 years — and the members of the Gucci family as thugs, ignorant and insensitive to the world around them, attributing to the protagonists, events, a tone and an attitude that never belonged to them. 

The statement continued, “This is very painful from a person’s point of view and insult to the legacy upon which the brand was built today.”

‘Even less objectionable is the reconstruction which becomes almost paradoxical when it gets to the stage of suggesting an indulgent ton towards a women who is definitively convicted for the murder of Maurizio. This is not just in the film but in statements by cast members as a victim struggling to survive within a masculine corporate culture.

Hurtful: They say that the misrepresentation is 'extremely painful' and 'an insult to the legacy on which the brand is built today' (Aldo Gucci pictured in 1982)

Hurtful: They say that the misrepresentation is ‘extremely painful’ and ‘an insult to the legacy on which the brand is built today’ (Aldo Gucci pictured in 1982)

'The production of the film did not bother to consult the heirs before describing Aldo Gucci,' they said

'The film carries a narrative that is far from accurate,' they said

“The film’s production did not take the time to consult the heirs before allocating Aldo Gucci’s description,” they stated.

'Moreover, in the 70 years of history in which it was a family business, Gucci was an inclusive company,' they said

They stated that Gucci had been an inclusive business for 70 years, despite being a family-owned company.

‘This couldn’t be further from the truth. Gucci has been inclusive throughout its 70-year history, which was part of a family enterprise. 

‘Indeed, precisely in the 1980s — the historical context in which the film is set — women were in different top positions: whether they were members of the family or extraneous to it, they included the president of Gucci America, the Head of Global PR & Communication, and a member of the board of directors of Gucci America.

Gucci is a family which lives in honor of the contributions of its ancestors. The memory is too precious to have to put on a film that doesn’t tell the truth and does no justice to its characters.

“The Gucci Family members reserves all rights to protect their loved ones’ names, images, and dignity,” the statement ends.

Aldo Gucci’s heirs are not the only people displeased with the film — and the fact that the players involved in the drama were not consulted.  

Patrizia Reggiani also said she was not happy that Lady Gaga didn't show her the 'courtesy' of meeting her before playing her in the movie

PatriziaReggiani stated that Lady Gaga had not shown her the courtesy to meet her before she played her role in the movie. 

In 1997, Reggiani, now 72, was convicted and sentenced to 29 years in prison for hiring a hitman who shot and killed her ex in March of 1995

Reggiani was 72 years old when she was convicted of hiring a hitman to kill her ex. 

'I'm annoyed by the fact that Lady Gaga is portraying me in the new Ridley Scott film without even having the courtesy or the good sense to come and meet me,' Patrizia (right) said

Patrizia (right), said that Lady Gaga portrays me in Ridley Scott’s new film, “I am annoyed at the fact that Lady Gaga doesn’t even have the courtesy and the common sense to meet me.”

Patrizia, pictured in her mugshots, said: 'I believe that any good actor should first get to know the person that they are meant to be playing'

Patrizia (pictured in her mugshots) said that she believes that every actor who wants to do well should get to know their character.

Patrizia Reggiani — whose plot to hire a hitman to kill her ex-husband, Maurizio Gucci, is portrayed in the film — also said she was not happy that Lady Gaga didn’t show her the ‘courtesy’ of meeting her before playing her in the movie.

Reggiani (now 72) was sentenced in 1997 to 29 years imprisonment for employing a hitman, who killed and shot her ex in March 1995. After 18 years of service, Reggiani was freed in October 2016. 

In March, she complained to the Italian news agency Ansa that she was displeased that Gaga didn’t meet her ahead of filming House of Gucci, accusing the star of being disrespectful.

She said, “I am upset that Lady Gaga plays me in Ridley Scott films without ever having the kind of courtesy or the sense to visit me.”

It has nothing to do money. I will not take a penny from the film. She said that it was about “common sense” and respect.

“I believe any actor of merit should know who they’re supposed to play. I don’t think it was fair that I wasn’t contacted. This is with all of my empathy and gratitude for her. 

'It's nothing to do with money because I won't be taking a single cent from the film. It's about common sense and respect,' Patrizia added

“It has nothing to do about money, because I will not be making a dime from this film. It is about respect and common sense,’ Patrizia said. 

'I think it is not right that I wasn't contacted,' Patrizia said (pictured in 1998)

Patrizia stated, “It is wrong that I was not contacted,” (photo in 1998). 

Patrizia, pictured on trial in 1998, was released in October 2016 after serving eighteen years

Patrizia is seen in this 1998 trial. After serving 18 years, she was freed in October 2016.

The singer also indicated to British Vogue that she didn't want to be influenced by whatever story Reggiani told about herself (pictured in January 2019)

British Vogue also reported that the singer had stated to Reggiani, “I don’t want to get influenced” (pictured January 2019,).

Gaga did not appear to be able to show respect to anyone who had been killed. 

“I was reluctant to go to her place because it became clear that the woman wanted to be made famous for her murder and to be known as the criminal,” she stated. Good Morning America.

“I was not willing to conspire with something I did not believe in.” She also pointed out her husband’s murder. 

The singer also indicated to British Vogue that she didn’t want to be influenced by whatever story Reggiani told about herself.

‘I only felt that I could truly do this story justice if I approached it with the eye of a curious woman who was interested in possessing a journalistic spirit so that I could read between the lines of what was happening in the film’s scenes,’ she said.

“Meaning that nobody would tell me the identity of Patrizia Gucci. Not even Patrizia Gucci.’