Use this search box to find articles that have run in our newspapers over the last several years.
Date: 1/7/2016
In this week’s film column I’ll discuss two theatrical releases – one of which is a must-see and one of which is definitely not.
I was pretty skeptical about how this movie would play out. Considering it is an adaptation of the book of the same name, which described how the economic meltdown of 2008 came about and how a handful of financial managers recognized the housing marketing would collapse, I couldn’t imagine how a writer and director could make it work.
I was even more concerned when I learned that Adam McKay was the director. McKay has directed Will Ferrell in some of his biggest hits and I didn’t think he was packing the great to present this story in a cogent, yet entertaining way.
My concerns were needless. “The Big Short” is a masterful adaptation that takes audiences through the details of the near depression in such a way that is entertaining during the first half and compelling in its conclusion.
Ryan Gosling’s character Jared Vennett acts as the film’s narrator, introducing the audience to explanation about the concepts we need to understand – which are wittily done – and to the principal characters such as Dr. Michael Burry (Christian Bale).
Burry asked himself the questions of what kind of mortgages are being grouped together in these highly profitable mortgage bonds and discovers to his dismay that many of them are bad loans and too many of them are already on the road to default. He notices the higher rate of the variable rate loans will kick into effect in 2007 and realizes that is when the housing market will collapse.
Several other financial managers reach similar conclusions and all of then essentially make bets with banking institutions that the collapse will take place. If the economy fails, they will win.
What is fascinating about this story is how this handful of people slowly realizes that while they may make millions it will be at the cost of the world’s economy.
In this highly political year, “The Big Short” is essential viewing. This is not a film about the left or right. This is movie about the haves and the have-nots, with most of the world in the latter category.
I’m sure this film will figure very largely in this year’s awards races.
Next, I’m going to read the book.
I was very curious about director Quentin Tarantino’s new film, a movie that is the first one in many years to be shot not only on old-fashioned film, but also in Panavision’s 70 mm wide screen process.
For this film to be shown in the manner it was intended, Tarantino’s distributor actually found, reconditioned and installed projectors in key theaters as well as trained projectionists to operate the machines.
This film must be well worth all of this effort, right? Of course I’m in the minority opinion here, but the finished product was not.
Essentially, this post-Civil War Western returns to the concept of the Tarantino’s first film “Reservoir Dogs.” We have a bunch of violent characters in one location with their interactions and secret agendas causing tension.
Only this time, the violence and gore elicit laughter from audiences, as it is so over the top. While the production presents beautiful vistas, the period details are appallingly lacking at times. There are no “good guys,” so unlike “Reservoir Dogs” ultimately the audience doesn’t identify with anyone. Instead it’s like watching a wrestling match of villains. If you don’t like profanity or the very liberal use of the “n word,” then this is not the film for you.
There is one major set piece of dialogue that is so out of character for the person who delivers it, one is waiting for the revelation that is a lie designed to enrage another character. That admission never comes.
I like many of Tarantino’s films, but when he misses it’s usually a pretty big miss as this film is.