Admittedly the movie is cold and without frills but I think this is a move that everyone should see and should probably be in every high school history class next year.
One night, one firm, one last chance before the market collapses. The acting is stellar and the film doesn't take a stand or value judgement on the characters, it just lets you watch them react to the crisis.
It was a bare bones movie but that's all it needed to be. It has a couple of great monologues (albeit no "Greed is Good" iconic moment) but in terms of the times, it's basically the Wall St. of this era.
A lot of people will think it's too slow. I don't like those people. I don't see any way that this story could be handled better.
It was particularly interesting to me, because I've been thinking lately about leaving academia (long story). If I did that, the standard next direction would be to become a quant, like Quinto's character, at one of the big banks. A lot of my friends from grad school have done that, both before and after the crisis. I wouldn't say I've been considering it very seriously, but it's been on my mind. I think this movie made it a little bit less so.
10. "it wasn't suppose to "reveal" anything..." In response to Reply # 9
...the story is based on a firm averting their own financial meltdown PRIOR to any other firm making a move to do so. it's a precursor to the pending financial crisis. they realize they're over leveraged and try to dumb their toxic assets. that's it.
11. "liked it, Jeremy irons killed it imo " In response to Reply # 0 Mon Jan-02-12 02:56 AM by calminvasion
I see some of the praise for Spacey, and its well justified, but irons stole the show for me.
I guess my only gripe is the climax, imo at least, came in the middle and it was just tying up loose ends from then on. That was the board room scene with the CEO after he arrived. Everything else was just playing out what was decided. Also I guess I had a stronger connection to the other characters and felt some kind of way about the last 30min focusing on Spacey.
lol @the 23 yold, reminds me of so many BAs I've had on teams, down to the obsession with senior peoples salaries.
>I see some of the praise for Spacey, and its well justified, but irons stole the show for me.
I enjoyed this film. I love when movies have scenes like in the boardroom specifically designed for the slow people in the audience to get caught up. When Irons' character tells him to break it ALL THE WAY down, I'm like, "thank you!"
14. "See, I thought that was great because it's how business works" In response to Reply # 13
That part wasn't just for the audience, it's how a lot of businesses work. The higher you get up the food chain, the less you know how things actually work. People always think the people up at the top have their pulse on the company but more often than not, they've become so far removed from the day to day that they wouldn't be able to function if they had to go back to square one again.
And the guy who discovered it all? The movie starts with the company telling him that he's disposable. (And, in the end, they bring him back, not to listen to him, but to shut him up.)
The idea that Wall Street's greed ran our economy into the ground is less unsettling than Wall Street not even seeing the collapse coming before it's too late. It frames faith in the market as a form of religious fanaticism.
The writing and performances here were sharp. As a thriller, it was Michael Clayton without having to resort to assassinations.
17. "It was a damn good film" In response to Reply # 0 Fri Sep-06-13 10:09 AM by final_prospect82
but I dont see how this belongs in history class.
Too Big to Fail, while not as good a movie, deserves to be in a history class more.
Still alot is missing from it.
Problem with movies on these subjects that in order to fully understand the problem you have to have good finance knowledge or they have to do a really good job of dumming down the complexities while keeping the audience attention
happiness is a mediocre standard for a middle class existence - S. Williams
I don't not like you because you have dumb ideas about the world, I don't like you because you have other people's dumb ideas about the world. - Rjcc
19. "Soul Honk mentioned this already but..." In response to Reply # 18
>This director showed he could handle potential dry subject >matter, suspenseful pacing, and some big actors who are very >capable of phoning it in (or hamming it up) if they don't >respect you. > >That said, the writing got a little cute at times. I counted >three separate instances of the "talk to me like I'm stupid" >Sorkin exposition trick.
I think this "trick" worked well in this instance since it showed the higher up you go the less those people really know. Unless that's the staple of the Sorkin trick itself.