list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Wall Street on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/Wall_Street/37416/default.aspx Title: Wall Street
Year: 1987
Director: Oliver Stone
Plot: "Greed is Good." This is the credo of the aptly named Gordon Gekko (Michael Douglas), the antihero of Oliver Stone's Wall Street. Gekko, a high-rolling corporate raider, is idolized by young-and-hungry broker Bud Fox (Charlie Sheen). Inveigling himself into Gekko's inner circle, Fox quickly learns to rape, murder and bury his sense of ethics. Only when Gekko's wheeling and dealing causes a near-tragedy on a personal level does Fox "reform"-though his means of destroying Gekko are every bit as underhanded as his previous activities on the trading floor. Director Stone, who cowrote Wall Street with Stanley Weiser, has claimed that the film was prompted by the callous treatment afforded his stockbroker father after 50 years in the business; this may be why the film's most compelling scenes are those between Bud Fox and his airline mechanic father (played by Charlie Sheen's real-life dad Martin). Ironically, Wall Street was released just before the October, 1987 stock market crash. ~ Hal Erickson, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 31
Number of Lists: 30
Number of blog posts: 9
Number of discussion threads: 4
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 02:15:49 GMTWall Street1987Oliver Stone"Greed is Good." This is the credo of the aptly named Gordon Gekko (Michael Douglas), the antihero of Oliver Stone's Wall Street. Gekko, a high-rolling corporate raider, is idolized by young-and-hungry broker Bud Fox (Charlie Sheen). Inveigling himself into Gekko's inner circle, Fox quickly learns to rape, murder and bury his sense of ethics. Only when Gekko's wheeling and dealing causes a near-tragedy on a personal level does Fox "reform"-though his means of destroying Gekko are every bit as underhanded as his previous activities on the trading floor. Director Stone, who cowrote Wall Street with Stanley Weiser, has claimed that the film was prompted by the callous treatment afforded his stockbroker father after 50 years in the business; this may be why the film's most compelling scenes are those between Bud Fox and his airline mechanic father (played by Charlie Sheen's real-life dad Martin). Ironically, Wall Street was released just before the October, 1987 stock market crash. ~ Hal Erickson, All Movie Guide31Tag Target (>10)30943http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/u50518nteu1.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Wall_Street/37416/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/jjgittes/archive/2008/11/13/37278.aspx Post By: jjgittes
Post To: jjgittes Blog
Post Date: 11/13/2008 2:12:04 PM
Body: I tend to be down on Oliver Stone films. More often than not, they emphasize style over substance - flashy camera work or editing to mask an inability to tell a story effectively. I think one notable exception is WALL STREET, the Reel 13 Classic from the first Saturday in October. While there are occasional moments that Stone makes his presence felt (zooms that feel so wrong, occasional whip pans and of course, the old dolly-in/zoom-out that filmmakers love to overuse), for the most part, he lets the story unfold on its own. He (generally) doesn't force matters, which is unusual for him and allows, to my mind, for a more effective and interesting narrative.And so, it's the script that's front and center in WALL STREET and that is what I think is the key to the film's effectiveness. Stone, along with co-writer Stanley Weiser, craft a very detailed and well-structured story with terrific, snappy dialogue that is clever without being overly so and therefore, remains believable. This gives the cast something meaty to work with and most of the ensemble doesn't disappoint. Of course, Michael Douglas' portrayal of Gordon Gekko is now legendary and quite possibly, deservedly so. He exudes both confidence and menace at all times, but occasionally reveals glimpses of vulnerability and humanity that make the character three-dimensional. It's never enough to diminish his on-screen authority, but just enough to round out Gekko. Even Charlie Sheen is quite strong through most of the movie, that is, until he gets truly tested in the third act. In other words, he nails ambition, greed and confidence. When he has to play betrayed, embarrassed, angry, devastated and hurt, he falters greatly. It may come as no surprise that the one member of the cast that is a complete waste of space is Daryl Hannah as the femme fatale caught in the middle. She doesn't even look good (though that may be my 2008 sensibility speaking), let alone present an interesting character that we might actually root for. Her scenes are like nails on a chalkboard and add absolutely nothing to the narrative. Perhaps the character's storyline might have worked with another actor (I know that Diane Lane was around then…), but as it stands, you mentally plead with Sheen's Bud Fox to dump her ass as soon as possible so we can return to the real story.This is just another of a handful of flaws that prevent WALL STREET from being a wholly satisfying experience. Hannah, Stone's sporadic stylistic flights of fancy and the unnecessary coda at the end all fall into that category, but ultimately they are overshadowed by the strength of the story and script. There is enough quality within the narrative to keep the viewer invested, in spite of the intermittent hiccups along the way. (For more information on this or any other Reel 13 film, check out their website at www.reel13.org)
]]>Thu, 13 Nov 2008 19:12:04 GMTjjgittesjjgittes Blog11/13/2008 2:12:04 PMI tend to be down on Oliver Stone films. More often than not, they emphasize style over substance - flashy camera work or editing to mask an inability to tell a story effectively. I think one notable exception is WALL STREET, the Reel 13 Classic from the first Saturday in October. While there are occasional moments that Stone makes his presence felt (zooms that feel so wrong, occasional whip pans and of course, the old dolly-in/zoom-out that filmmakers love to overuse), for the most part, he lets the story unfold on its own. He (generally) doesn't force matters, which is unusual for him and allows, to my mind, for a more effective and interesting narrative.And so, it's the script that's front and center in WALL STREET and that is what I think is the key to the film's effectiveness. Stone, along with co-writer Stanley Weiser, craft a very detailed and well-structured story with terrific, snappy dialogue that is clever without being overly so and therefore, remains believable. This gives the cast something meaty to work with and most of the ensemble doesn't disappoint. Of course, Michael Douglas' portrayal of Gordon Gekko is now legendary and quite possibly, deservedly so. He exudes both confidence and menace at all times, but occasionally reveals glimpses of vulnerability and humanity that make the character three-dimensional. It's never enough to diminish his on-screen authority, but just enough to round out Gekko. Even Charlie Sheen is quite strong through most of the movie, that is, until he gets truly tested in the third act. In other words, he nails ambition, greed and confidence. When he has to play betrayed, embarrassed, angry, devastated and hurt, he falters greatly. It may come as no surprise that the one member of the cast that is a complete waste of space is Daryl Hannah as the femme fatale caught in the middle. She doesn't even look good (though that may be my 2008 sensibility speaking), let alone present an interesting character that we might actually root for. Her scenes are like nails on a chalkboard and add absolutely nothing to the narrative. Perhaps the character's storyline might have worked with another actor (I know that Diane Lane was around then…), but as it stands, you mentally plead with Sheen's Bud Fox to dump her ass as soon as possible so we can return to the real story.This is just another of a handful of flaws that prevent WALL STREET from being a wholly satisfying experience. Hannah, Stone's sporadic stylistic flights of fancy and the unnecessary coda at the end all fall into that category, but ultimately they are overshadowed by the strength of the story and script. There is enough quality within the narrative to keep the viewer invested, in spite of the intermittent hiccups along the way. (For more information on this or any other Reel 13 film, check out their website at www.reel13.org) http://www.spout.com/blogs/davisfreeberg/archive/2008/10/8/36040.aspx Post By: davisfreeberg
Post To: Davis Freeberg's DVD AllStars
Post Date: 10/8/2008 3:00:34 PM
Body: Wall St. has been a cult classic for finance types for well over 20 years and is still relevant today. It's a classic tale of the pitfalls of greed and a refreshing look at how slipperly that slope can be. The movie produces a number of really good quotes including, lunch is for whimps, money never sleeps and of course Gordon Gekko's famous greed is good speach. While the final message of the movie is a warning against the excesses of success, it also does a good job of highlighting the struggles of those who play by the rules.
]]>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 19:00:34 GMTdavisfreebergDavis Freeberg's DVD AllStars10/8/2008 3:00:34 PMWall St. has been a cult classic for finance types for well over 20 years and is still relevant today. It's a classic tale of the pitfalls of greed and a refreshing look at how slipperly that slope can be. The movie produces a number of really good quotes including, lunch is for whimps, money never sleeps and of course Gordon Gekko's famous greed is good speach. While the final message of the movie is a warning against the excesses of success, it also does a good job of highlighting the struggles of those who play by the rules. http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/10/8/36028.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 10/8/2008 12:01:23 PM
Body: Stanley Weiser, co-writer of Oliver Stone’s Wall Street, penned a terrific piece titled “Wall Street’s’ message was not Greed is Good” for The Los Angeles Times on Sunday, in which he lamented the mythologizing of Michael Douglas’ master of the universe Gordon Gekko with the following: Gekko’s character was written to create an engaging, charming, but deceitful and brutal being. I have nevertheless run into quite a number of younger people, who upon discovering that I co-wrote the film, wax rhapsodic about it . . . but often for the wrong reasons. A typical example would be a business executive or a younger studio development person spouting something that goes like this: “The movie changed my life. Once I saw it I knew that I wanted to get into such and such business. I wanted to be like Gordon Gekko.” The flattery is disarming and ego-stoking, but then neurons fire and alarm bells go off. “You have succeeded with this movie, but you’ve also failed. You gave these people hope to become greater asses than they may already be.” While I can understand Weiser’s horror in this idolization of amoral Gekko, especially in the wake of the real Wall Street’s collapse, I also couldn’t help but think back to a column I wrote in which I dissected Malcolm McDowell’s portrayal of Alex in A Clockwork Orange. Kubrick also was sufficiently horrified by the hero-worshipping of Alex, by the copycat crimes by droog wannabes that occurred in England after the film’s release (enough to yank it from distribution in that country). But the idea that either Weiser or Kubrick would be shocked (“utterly shocked” in Weiser’s sarcastic appraisal of Gekko’s view of the financial meltdown) by this pedestal raising strikes me as either naïve or disingenuous. Put sexy actors in passionate roles and what do you think is gonna happen? For people are attracted to Gekko, they want to be like the ruthless financier, for the same reason they’re attracted to sociopathic Alex – not because he’s greedy or evil, but because he’s passionate. Villains are often sexy because they’re the ones onscreen with the most creative fire in their bellies. For Gekko money is just tangible proof of power, a by-product of desire, not a goal in and of itself. If someone is inspired to be like Gekko it’s not the trampling on bodies that is the allure, but the love of the game, of the hustle. (I’d venture to guess Gordon Gekko in jail would make for a fascinating sequel. I’m sure he’d still be wheeling and dealing with the inmates – as addicted to the hustle as a past-his-prime fighter to the ring.) Like with Alex the bodies that pile up are merely collateral damage (save for Terence Stamp’s Larry Wildman who like a rival Mafioso had it coming – and Donald Trumped Gekko in the end). For lest we forget, that infamous “greed is good” speech also includes a reference to the “greed of love,” for it’s all the same to Gekko. Greed is only the catalyst towards pursuing passion. Gekko’s point that everyone who excels at what they do is greedy is the simple, unvarnished truth. (Even those who society deems “selfless” – the Mother Theresa’s of the world – do what they do because it makes them feel good, the more they give the more they get back in the adrenaline high of love.) Gekko’s enthusiasm – his love of the financial chess games – is addictive. It’s the rush of seeing how much you can get away with – how fast you can go without crashing – how close and for how long you can dance on the edge. Who wouldn’t want this ultimate high? “Better than sex,” is how Gekko describes his first real estate deal – and no wonder. Power is one mind-blowing orgasm. In other words, the recent Wall Street woes could be read as a result of too much unbridled, unchecked passion, and not the fault of greed – or passion – itself. Weiser also notes that “After so many encounters with Gekko admirers or wannabes, I wish I could go back and rewrite the greed line to this: ‘Greed is Good. But I’ve never seen a Brinks truck pull up to a cemetery.’” Yes, Gordon Gekko certainly would agree that everything in moderation, including sex and greed, is good. For as Gekko learned over two decades ago, and Wall Street’s titans only two weeks ago, the problem lies not with corporate capitalism, but with our ever-changing definition of moderation itself. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 16:01:23 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com10/8/2008 12:01:23 PMStanley Weiser, co-writer of Oliver Stone’s Wall Street, penned a terrific piece titled “Wall Street’s’ message was not Greed is Good” for The Los Angeles Times on Sunday, in which he lamented the mythologizing of Michael Douglas’ master of the universe Gordon Gekko with the following: Gekko’s character was written to create an engaging, charming, but deceitful and brutal being. I have nevertheless run into quite a number of younger people, who upon discovering that I co-wrote the film, wax rhapsodic about it . . . but often for the wrong reasons. A typical example would be a business executive or a younger studio development person spouting something that goes like this: “The movie changed my life. Once I saw it I knew that I wanted to get into such and such business. I wanted to be like Gordon Gekko.” The flattery is disarming and ego-stoking, but then neurons fire and alarm bells go off. “You have succeeded with this movie, but you’ve also failed. You gave these people hope to become greater asses than they may already be.” While I can understand Weiser’s horror in this idolization of amoral Gekko, especially in the wake of the real Wall Street’s collapse, I also couldn’t help but think back to a column I wrote in which I dissected Malcolm McDowell’s portrayal of Alex in A Clockwork Orange. Kubrick also was sufficiently horrified by the hero-worshipping of Alex, by the copycat crimes by droog wannabes that occurred in England after the film’s release (enough to yank it from distribution in that country). But the idea that either Weiser or Kubrick would be shocked (“utterly shocked” in Weiser’s sarcastic appraisal of Gekko’s view of the financial meltdown) by this pedestal raising strikes me as either naïve or disingenuous. Put sexy actors in passionate roles and what do you think is gonna happen? For people are attracted to Gekko, they want to be like the ruthless financier, for the same reason they’re attracted to sociopathic Alex – not because he’s greedy or evil, but because he’s passionate. Villains are often sexy because they’re the ones onscreen with the most creative fire in their bellies. For Gekko money is just tangible proof of power, a by-product of desire, not a goal in and of itself. If someone is inspired to be like Gekko it’s not the trampling on bodies that is the allure, but the love of the game, of the hustle. (I’d venture to guess Gordon Gekko in jail would make for a fascinating sequel. I’m sure he’d still be wheeling and dealing with the inmates – as addicted to the hustle as a past-his-prime fighter to the ring.) Like with Alex the bodies that pile up are merely collateral damage (save for Terence Stamp’s Larry Wildman who like a rival Mafioso had it coming – and Donald Trumped Gekko in the end). For lest we forget, that infamous “greed is good” speech also includes a reference to the “greed of love,” for it’s all the same to Gekko. Greed is only the catalyst towards pursuing passion. Gekko’s point that everyone who excels at what they do is greedy is the simple, unvarnished truth. (Even those who society deems “selfless” – the Mother Theresa’s of the world – do what they do because it makes them feel good, the more they give the more they get back in the adrenaline high of love.) Gekko’s enthusiasm – his love of the financial chess games – is addictive. It’s the rush of seeing how much you can get away with – how fast you can go without crashing – how close and for how long you can dance on the edge. Who wouldn’t want this ultimate high? “Better than sex,” is how Gekko describes his first real estate deal – and no wonder. Power is one mind-blowing orgasm. In other words, the recent Wall Street woes could be read as a result of too much unbridled, unchecked passion, and not the fault of greed – or passion – itself. Weiser also notes that “After so many encounters with Gekko admirers or wannabes, I wish I could go back and rewrite the greed line to this: ‘Greed is Good. But I’ve never seen a Brinks truck pull up to a cemetery.’” Yes, Gordon Gekko certainly would agree that everything in moderation, including sex and greed, is good. For as Gekko learned over two decades ago, and Wall Street’s titans only two weeks ago, the problem lies not with corporate capitalism, but with our ever-changing definition of moderation itself. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/9/16/35197.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 9/16/2008 2:01:08 PM
Body: I’m probably the least financial-minded person there is, and I’ve never owned a stock, bond or whatever else people invest in. But I am an expert on being broke, being poor, being frugal and, most importantly, putting things into perspective. What I mean is, whenever I feel like things just can’t get any worse for me money-wise, I think of the people who are or were actually worse off than I am. And by people, I mostly mean characters from the movies. So, as you may be worrying about your finances after Black Monday, consider dropping by the video store on your way home from the office (or job interview) today. Invest a few bucks into your own sanity and happiness by renting one of the following movies. Don’t worry, I’ve tried to make the selections rather common and accessible. If you’re like any of the financial guys and girls I know, you’re not likely the sort to go for obscure or difficult cinema. And if you are of the sort, then you probably don’t need this list anyway. The Grapes of Wrath (1940) Let’s begin with one of the basics, a movie that will make you glad you at least aren’t living through the Great Depression. There are tons of films from and about the era, but this is perhaps the definitive example, adapted from John Steinbeck’s definitive story of the Okie migration. At times I’ve felt like I can identify with the financial hardships of the Joads, particularly when I’ve been after a job that tons of other people are after, too. But there’s really no comparison, and you’re likely to agree. After seeing the family’s struggle, you’ll be glad you don’t have it so bad. But you’ll also hopefully be lifted up by the conclusive speeches of both Tom and Ma Joad, who inspire us all to keep on keeping on, no matter what the setback. American Madness (1932) Going back a little earlier, here’s another film dealing with the Great Depression (though not as directly), and one that’s more relative to the current situation of bank failures. Its plot deals with a bank that is robbed and then rumored to be out of money, leading to a withdrawal panic. Released one year prior to the creation of the FDIC, it may be a comforting reminder of how much more secure your deposits are today. (Even if it is a potential problem that the FDIC doesn’t exactly have as much money as it insures against.) Nine Queens (2000) A lot of films dealing with cons can be watched to ease the suffering of financial woes. But then you have to realize that while you may be better off than the victim who has lost all his savings or seen his casino vault emptied, you’ll still want to hate the con artist who gets away with the fortune. With Nine Queens, there is indeed one of those guys you’ll be upset with in the end, but the film has an extra level to it than most movies about a long con, because it’s set amidst Argentina’s economic collapse at the turn of this century. Like the desperate bank run scenes from American Madness, a similar scene involving a crisis at a Buenos Aires bank should leave you a little more optimistic about the current situation in the U.S. Surely we could never experience as critical an economic failure as they did in Argentina, right? One more thing: don’t dare rent the inferior American remake, Criminal, which just doesn’t have the same relevance. I Served the King of England (2006) You won’t find this in the video store just yet, but hopefully it’s playing in a theater near you (currently it’s on 37 screens). I’ve so far contrasted your possibly upsetting financial situation with that of sufferers of the Great Depression and of the Argentine economic crisis. Now, here’s the worse-off situation of the Czechs under Nazi occupation and then communism. Filled with irony and wit, this film should, unlike some of the rest, put a smile on your face while also making you thankful that you didn’t have the misfortune of becoming a millionaire right on the brink of your nation’s change to communism. If there’s anything worse than losing your fortune, it’s losing your fortune and being sent to prison for having such a fortune. Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room (2005) On the other side of the coin, you may want to watch this documentary about the Enron scandal if you are more angry about your economic situation and would rather see a villain sent to prison for corruptly amassing a great fortune. Of course, while the protagonist of I Served the King of England is a lot more lovable, his riches aren’t exactly free from sin, either. And if you’re completely averse to watching either a doc or a foreign film, you could just watch Wall Street again and take out your frustration on Gordon Gekko. Bicycle Thieves (1948) Hopefully you’re not against foreign films, though, because anyone experiencing a financial crunch should take a look at this Italian neorealist classic. Any time I’ve felt helpless due to unemployment or lack of money, I remember that at least I have a certain level of education and skill to fall back on, unlike poor Antonio, who can’t get work after his bicycle is stolen. Films with similar stories inspired by DeSica’s masterpiece, including Cyclo and Man Push Cart (but probably not Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure), may also be worth a look. Grey Gardens (1975) Also, hopefully you aren’t completely against watching a documentary, especially one that’s a little more lighthearted than Enron. Of course, watching two nutty former socialites living in squalor and allowing a once-beautiful mansion to fall apart could possibly make you just as irate. Just be glad that your own riches to rags story doesn’t involve tons of feral cats and a seemingly oblivious daughter who will one day be a poster girl for drag queens. Trading Places (1983) Despite whatever happens with the current economic disaster, America will always be a place where one can get rich as quickly as one can lose it all, and no movie focuses on that truth as well as this comedy, about a bet to see how easily a bum can be made a millionaire, and a millionaire can be made a bum. Plus, it’s always nice to watch the greedy Duke brothers get their just deserts in the end. Just don’t watch Coming to America afterward, so as to pretend they never come back. The Pursuit of Happyness (2006) A lot of people are too cynical to enjoy this movie, but when you’re down in the dumps, especially financially, it’s a good pick-me-up, both for the uplifting story and the general American dream idea that one can truly rise from such poverty to such success as the real Chris Gardner did. Of course, given the current events, getting excited about a man struggling for a career in the financial world may not be so easy. I wonder if there are any good movies about working hard and making it big that don’t involve finance, sports or the entertainment industry. The Gold Rush (1925) In the Depression-set movie Sullivan’s Travels, it’s realized that audiences struggling with financial difficulties and other real-life woes would rather watch comedies than serious films focused on social problems. In that film, it’s a Disney cartoon called Playful Pluto that gives evidence of this, but it’s widely known that Preston Sturgis intended to use a Chaplin picture instead. So, as the final movie selection for the economically depressed, here’s one of the more fitting Chaplin features. While any film involving the Little Tramp could possibly serve to relatively lift you up, there’s just nothing better than watching Chaplin eat his boot and then being thankful for what you’ll be eating for dinner tonight. Now, I must address the possible outcry over the idea of making oneself feel better through the suffering of others. Yes, it’s terrible what people have had and still have to go through, both in America and around the world. Poverty is no joke, and it’s not exactly something that exists merely to balance out the brattiness of those not living in and with such poor conditions. So, I encourage you to, after watching whatever movie lifts your spirits up, find it in your heart to also be inspired to help someone less fortunate than yourself. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 16 Sep 2008 18:01:08 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com9/16/2008 2:01:08 PM I’m probably the least financial-minded person there is, and I’ve never owned a stock, bond or whatever else people invest in. But I am an expert on being broke, being poor, being frugal and, most importantly, putting things into perspective. What I mean is, whenever I feel like things just can’t get any worse for me money-wise, I think of the people who are or were actually worse off than I am. And by people, I mostly mean characters from the movies. So, as you may be worrying about your finances after Black Monday, consider dropping by the video store on your way home from the office (or job interview) today. Invest a few bucks into your own sanity and happiness by renting one of the following movies. Don’t worry, I’ve tried to make the selections rather common and accessible. If you’re like any of the financial guys and girls I know, you’re not likely the sort to go for obscure or difficult cinema. And if you are of the sort, then you probably don’t need this list anyway. The Grapes of Wrath (1940) Let’s begin with one of the basics, a movie that will make you glad you at least aren’t living through the Great Depression. There are tons of films from and about the era, but this is perhaps the definitive example, adapted from John Steinbeck’s definitive story of the Okie migration. At times I’ve felt like I can identify with the financial hardships of the Joads, particularly when I’ve been after a job that tons of other people are after, too. But there’s really no comparison, and you’re likely to agree. After seeing the family’s struggle, you’ll be glad you don’t have it so bad. But you’ll also hopefully be lifted up by the conclusive speeches of both Tom and Ma Joad, who inspire us all to keep on keeping on, no matter what the setback. American Madness (1932) Going back a little earlier, here’s another film dealing with the Great Depression (though not as directly), and one that’s more relative to the current situation of bank failures. Its plot deals with a bank that is robbed and then rumored to be out of money, leading to a withdrawal panic. Released one year prior to the creation of the FDIC, it may be a comforting reminder of how much more secure your deposits are today. (Even if it is a potential problem that the FDIC doesn’t exactly have as much money as it insures against.) Nine Queens (2000) A lot of films dealing with cons can be watched to ease the suffering of financial woes. But then you have to realize that while you may be better off than the victim who has lost all his savings or seen his casino vault emptied, you’ll still want to hate the con artist who gets away with the fortune. With Nine Queens, there is indeed one of those guys you’ll be upset with in the end, but the film has an extra level to it than most movies about a long con, because it’s set amidst Argentina’s economic collapse at the turn of this century. Like the desperate bank run scenes from American Madness, a similar scene involving a crisis at a Buenos Aires bank should leave you a little more optimistic about the current situation in the U.S. Surely we could never experience as critical an economic failure as they did in Argentina, right? One more thing: don’t dare rent the inferior American remake, Criminal, which just doesn’t have the same relevance. I Served the King of England (2006) You won’t find this in the video store just yet, but hopefully it’s playing in a theater near you (currently it’s on 37 screens). I’ve so far contrasted your possibly upsetting financial situation with that of sufferers of the Great Depression and of the Argentine economic crisis. Now, here’s the worse-off situation of the Czechs under Nazi occupation and then communism. Filled with irony and wit, this film should, unlike some of the rest, put a smile on your face while also making you thankful that you didn’t have the misfortune of becoming a millionaire right on the brink of your nation’s change to communism. If there’s anything worse than losing your fortune, it’s losing your fortune and being sent to prison for having such a fortune. Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room (2005) On the other side of the coin, you may want to watch this documentary about the Enron scandal if you are more angry about your economic situation and would rather see a villain sent to prison for corruptly amassing a great fortune. Of course, while the protagonist of I Served the King of England is a lot more lovable, his riches aren’t exactly free from sin, either. And if you’re completely averse to watching either a doc or a foreign film, you could just watch Wall Street again and take out your frustration on Gordon Gekko. Bicycle Thieves (1948) Hopefully you’re not against foreign films, though, because anyone experiencing a financial crunch should take a look at this Italian neorealist classic. Any time I’ve felt helpless due to unemployment or lack of money, I remember that at least I have a certain level of education and skill to fall back on, unlike poor Antonio, who can’t get work after his bicycle is stolen. Films with similar stories inspired by DeSica’s masterpiece, including Cyclo and Man Push Cart (but probably not Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure), may also be worth a look. Grey Gardens (1975) Also, hopefully you aren’t completely against watching a documentary, especially one that’s a little more lighthearted than Enron. Of course, watching two nutty former socialites living in squalor and allowing a once-beautiful mansion to fall apart could possibly make you just as irate. Just be glad that your own riches to rags story doesn’t involve tons of feral cats and a seemingly oblivious daughter who will one day be a poster girl for drag queens. Trading Places (1983) Despite whatever happens with the current economic disaster, America will always be a place where one can get rich as quickly as one can lose it all, and no movie focuses on that truth as well as this comedy, about a bet to see how easily a bum can be made a millionaire, and a millionaire can be made a bum. Plus, it’s always nice to watch the greedy Duke brothers get their just deserts in the end. Just don’t watch Coming to America afterward, so as to pretend they never come back. The Pursuit of Happyness (2006) A lot of people are too cynical to enjoy this movie, but when you’re down in the dumps, especially financially, it’s a good pick-me-up, both for the uplifting story and the general American dream idea that one can truly rise from such poverty to such success as the real Chris Gardner did. Of course, given the current events, getting excited about a man struggling for a career in the financial world may not be so easy. I wonder if there are any good movies about working hard and making it big that don’t involve finance, sports or the entertainment industry. The Gold Rush (1925) In the Depression-set movie Sullivan’s Travels, it’s realized that audiences struggling with financial difficulties and other real-life woes would rather watch comedies than serious films focused on social problems. In that film, it’s a Disney cartoon called Playful Pluto that gives evidence of this, but it’s widely known that Preston Sturgis intended to use a Chaplin picture instead. So, as the final movie selection for the economically depressed, here’s one of the more fitting Chaplin features. While any film involving the Little Tramp could possibly serve to relatively lift you up, there’s just nothing better than watching Chaplin eat his boot and then being thankful for what you’ll be eating for dinner tonight. Now, I must address the possible outcry over the idea of making oneself feel better through the suffering of others. Yes, it’s terrible what people have had and still have to go through, both in America and around the world. Poverty is no joke, and it’s not exactly something that exists merely to balance out the brattiness of those not living in and with such poor conditions. So, I encourage you to, after watching whatever movie lifts your spirits up, find it in your heart to also be inspired to help someone less fortunate than yourself. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/groups/Weekly_Theme/Re_Weekly_Theme_for_September_1_Work_Sucks/625/34732/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: unclefestering
Post To: Weekly Theme
Post Date: 9/4/2008 9:46:30 AM
Body: [quote user="SkyPilot"]Are there any movies (including government propaganda) that encourage and excite you guys about working?[/quote] I dunno Gordon Gecko and Danny DeVito both made being an 80's style coprporate raider look like a sweet deal. They got to live large in the Hamptons and Manhattan. Of couse, Gecko's going to PMITA prison at the end of Wall Street is a pretty high price. Then again, he did make Charlie Sheen cry.
]]>Thu, 04 Sep 2008 13:46:30 GMTunclefesteringWeekly Theme9/4/2008 9:46:30 AM[quote user="SkyPilot"]Are there any movies (including government propaganda) that encourage and excite you guys about working?[/quote] I dunno Gordon Gecko and Danny DeVito both made being an 80's style coprporate raider look like a sweet deal. They got to live large in the Hamptons and Manhattan. Of couse, Gecko's going to PMITA prison at the end of Wall Street is a pretty high price. Then again, he did make Charlie Sheen cry. http://www.spout.com/blogs/jj79/archive/2008/6/17/31332.aspx Post By: JJ79
Post To: JJ79 Blog
Post Date: 6/17/2008 2:53:17 PM
Body: Released: December 11, 2987 Director: Oliver Stone ***** The brilliance of arguably Oliver Stone's seminal film is its pace. Wall Street is an unrelenting, balls to the wall, keep up or you're lost two hour theater production. From the instant the movie begins straight through to the end, the story does not stop to explain the mechanics, personal relationships or stockbroker language. It dives head on into the rise and fall of Bud Fox (Charlie Sheen) at the hands of Gordon Gekko (Michael Douglas, Oscar winner for his role here), demands the audience keep up and never looks back. I call this a theater production because the narrative is never contingent on splashy special effects, locations or the ability to go outside. It is, from start to finish, about people. Fox transforms right before our eyes from a naive newcomer to Gekko, Jr. Notice how he answers the phone, dresses and talks to people as the movie progresses. And Douglas may never have a role like Gekko, one that lets him stop just short of all out villany in his quest to be the most wealthy, most powerful and altogether best. But it all, ultimately comes back to the story. Stone allows us to understand and follow along without stopping to give us a primer on the industry. Fox and Gekko engage us from the start, as does a roster of supporting characters played by Martin Sheen, Sean Young, Darryl Hannah, Hal Holbrook and John McGinley. What each of them bring to the finished production is depth, soul and reality. It's not enough just to move the main plot from A to B to C. We have to buy into Wall Street as a real world, which we do thanks to a 2+ hour running time and easily recognizable character archetypes. Not that I'm complaining: any more substance and Wall Street might collapse in on itself. This isn't an easy movie to watch and remain engaged in; even Gekko's legendary "Greed...is good" line tends to be too full of itself to be completely affecting. And it isn't until the final credits roll do we honestly know what has transpired. One notable detriment to the production is Hannah, completely out of her element in a sleazy, fast paced film. She exudes negative charm, if that's even possible, making us want her interior designer Darien Taylor to drop off the face of the film as quickly as she enters. Hers is a small role, something which adds to the themes of the film, yet not much more. It's a case of "hangers on," people on board for the ride until they fear for themselves. Either she was given very bad direction from Stone (unlikely, based on the other actors), there is no character for her (more likely, considering she is one of three women with any appreciable lines) or she's just a bad actress (the best explanation).
]]>Tue, 17 Jun 2008 18:53:17 GMTJJ79JJ79 Blog6/17/2008 2:53:17 PMReleased: December 11, 2987 Director: Oliver Stone ***** The brilliance of arguably Oliver Stone's seminal film is its pace. Wall Street is an unrelenting, balls to the wall, keep up or you're lost two hour theater production. From the instant the movie begins straight through to the end, the story does not stop to explain the mechanics, personal relationships or stockbroker language. It dives head on into the rise and fall of Bud Fox (Charlie Sheen) at the hands of Gordon Gekko (Michael Douglas, Oscar winner for his role here), demands the audience keep up and never looks back. I call this a theater production because the narrative is never contingent on splashy special effects, locations or the ability to go outside. It is, from start to finish, about people. Fox transforms right before our eyes from a naive newcomer to Gekko, Jr. Notice how he answers the phone, dresses and talks to people as the movie progresses. And Douglas may never have a role like Gekko, one that lets him stop just short of all out villany in his quest to be the most wealthy, most powerful and altogether best. But it all, ultimately comes back to the story. Stone allows us to understand and follow along without stopping to give us a primer on the industry. Fox and Gekko engage us from the start, as does a roster of supporting characters played by Martin Sheen, Sean Young, Darryl Hannah, Hal Holbrook and John McGinley. What each of them bring to the finished production is depth, soul and reality. It's not enough just to move the main plot from A to B to C. We have to buy into Wall Street as a real world, which we do thanks to a 2+ hour running time and easily recognizable character archetypes. Not that I'm complaining: any more substance and Wall Street might collapse in on itself. This isn't an easy movie to watch and remain engaged in; even Gekko's legendary "Greed...is good" line tends to be too full of itself to be completely affecting. And it isn't until the final credits roll do we honestly know what has transpired. One notable detriment to the production is Hannah, completely out of her element in a sleazy, fast paced film. She exudes negative charm, if that's even possible, making us want her interior designer Darien Taylor to drop off the face of the film as quickly as she enters. Hers is a small role, something which adds to the themes of the film, yet not much more. It's a case of "hangers on," people on board for the ride until they fear for themselves. Either she was given very bad direction from Stone (unlikely, based on the other actors), there is no character for her (more likely, considering she is one of three women with any appreciable lines) or she's just a bad actress (the best explanation). http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/4/9/27153.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 4/9/2008 7:01:33 PM
Body: It started off seeming like a joke. But Oliver Stone’s Bush biopic was legit — even if it then appeared to indeed be “a joke”. And now, because the internet can’t lay off writing about the thing (Bush=traffic), we are able to see just how much of a joke the thing is. Thanks to The Hollywood Reporter’’s Risky Biz Blog, we can read the first three pages of the script (originally titled Bush, now known as W), which looks like it was written by a student in a high school creative writing class (it was in fact written by Wall Street scribe Stanley Weiser). Well, obviously Bush experts would declare it inaccurate. Are we to really believe that Bush called Karl Rove a “turdblossom”? If the script wanted to get the facts straight, he would have used “butthead” instead. Though we only get the film’s opening, others have seen the whole thing. Earlier this month, ABC chimed in with its review, and this week Slate joined in the fun: Page 20: Now for that near-death experience. While watching the 2002 Miami Dolphins-Baltimore Ravens playoff game at the White House, W. gets a pretzel stuck in his throat. He “pounds his chest with his fist” then “faints, falling to the floor, hitting his head.” Only then does the pretzel dislodge. W. “takes a long, deep breath, feeling lucky to have survived.” Wait, that really happened. Who’s calling this thing inaccurate, again? Slate also references a few moments in the film dealing with Bush’s need to prove himself to his father. Funny, sure, but let me be the one to spoil the ending of Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay (which I reviewed here): the stoner comedy sequel beats Stone to the punch, and hits the joke harder, by having Bush smoke pot with the title characters and then high-dial his dad. As for the recent cast additions of Ioan Gruffudd as Tony Blair and Thandie Newton as Condoleezza Rice, Libertas reaffirms my belief that Stone is going for complete authenticity here: Around the time of the unwatchable Beloved, Newton was thrust on us as The Next Big Thing, but that quickly fizzled. A little warmth is always appreciated by the public in their next big things, and Newton gives off less warmth than a Frigidaire. That’s not to say she’s not lovely to look at or even talented, but her icy distance is much better suited as the women scorned who had it coming. This lack of warmth is precisely why I had a problem with her being in Run Fatboy Run (which I reviewed here). But as Rice, she is perfect. And there’s absolutely nothing funny about her. So, my current belief is that Stone will be treating the material in W totally seriously, regardless of what you think you see on the page. And if you think I’m being serious, too, then you’re some kind of a turdblossom. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Wed, 09 Apr 2008 23:01:33 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com4/9/2008 7:01:33 PMIt started off seeming like a joke. But Oliver Stone’s Bush biopic was legit — even if it then appeared to indeed be “a joke”. And now, because the internet can’t lay off writing about the thing (Bush=traffic), we are able to see just how much of a joke the thing is. Thanks to The Hollywood Reporter’’s Risky Biz Blog, we can read the first three pages of the script (originally titled Bush, now known as W), which looks like it was written by a student in a high school creative writing class (it was in fact written by Wall Street scribe Stanley Weiser). Well, obviously Bush experts would declare it inaccurate. Are we to really believe that Bush called Karl Rove a “turdblossom”? If the script wanted to get the facts straight, he would have used “butthead” instead. Though we only get the film’s opening, others have seen the whole thing. Earlier this month, ABC chimed in with its review, and this week Slate joined in the fun: Page 20: Now for that near-death experience. While watching the 2002 Miami Dolphins-Baltimore Ravens playoff game at the White House, W. gets a pretzel stuck in his throat. He “pounds his chest with his fist” then “faints, falling to the floor, hitting his head.” Only then does the pretzel dislodge. W. “takes a long, deep breath, feeling lucky to have survived.” Wait, that really happened. Who’s calling this thing inaccurate, again? Slate also references a few moments in the film dealing with Bush’s need to prove himself to his father. Funny, sure, but let me be the one to spoil the ending of Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay (which I reviewed here): the stoner comedy sequel beats Stone to the punch, and hits the joke harder, by having Bush smoke pot with the title characters and then high-dial his dad. As for the recent cast additions of Ioan Gruffudd as Tony Blair and Thandie Newton as Condoleezza Rice, Libertas reaffirms my belief that Stone is going for complete authenticity here: Around the time of the unwatchable Beloved, Newton was thrust on us as The Next Big Thing, but that quickly fizzled. A little warmth is always appreciated by the public in their next big things, and Newton gives off less warmth than a Frigidaire. That’s not to say she’s not lovely to look at or even talented, but her icy distance is much better suited as the women scorned who had it coming. This lack of warmth is precisely why I had a problem with her being in Run Fatboy Run (which I reviewed here). But as Rice, she is perfect. And there’s absolutely nothing funny about her. So, my current belief is that Stone will be treating the material in W totally seriously, regardless of what you think you see on the page. And if you think I’m being serious, too, then you’re some kind of a turdblossom. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/groups/FilmCouch/FilmCouch_39/302/20202/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: paul
Post To: FilmCouch
Post Date: 9/28/2007 11:06:54 AM
Body: Talk of our economy is rampant and underneath it all we're questioning again Michael Douglas' oscar-winning statement, "Greed is good." We discuss the economy by watching a heart-breaking new issue doc called The Price of Sugar and Oliver Stone's classic, Wall Street. Paul interviews Price director, Bill Haney. FilmCouch 39
]]>Fri, 28 Sep 2007 15:06:54 GMTpaulFilmCouch9/28/2007 11:06:54 AMTalk of our economy is rampant and underneath it all we're questioning again Michael Douglas' oscar-winning statement, "Greed is good." We discuss the economy by watching a heart-breaking new issue doc called The Price of Sugar and Oliver Stone's classic, Wall Street. Paul interviews Price director, Bill Haney. FilmCouch 39 http://www.spout.com/blogs/eagle795/archive/2007/8/26/18796.aspx Post By: eagle795
Post To: eagle795 Blog
Post Date: 8/26/2007 2:45:03 PM
Body: Greed is good indeed.
]]>Sun, 26 Aug 2007 18:45:03 GMTeagle795eagle795 Blog8/26/2007 2:45:03 PMGreed is good indeed. http://www.spout.com/blogs/gahnzz/archive/2007/8/12/17893.aspx Post By: gahnzz
Post To: M.A.D. by Gahnzz - (Movie A Day)
Post Date: 8/12/2007 12:00:28 PM
Body: When I first saw Wall Street about 20 years ago, I loved Michael Douglas’ performance. For me, it represented a complete fusing of actor and role. Add to that, director Oliver Stone’s willingness to do long, uninterrupted takes (particularly during monologues) and what came through was some truly fine writing, compelling acting and it was all wonderfully shot. The triumvirate of Douglas, Charlie Sheen and Martin Sheen really drive this movie. And throwing in John C. MGinley in a supporting role, filling out the second tier with James Karen and Hal Holbrook you have some fantasically solid performances. Granted, once you hit up the female side of the equation, things kinda drop a bit. Through no fault of her own, Daryl Hannah is a bit mis-cast. Her demeanor and her delivery just don’t wash as a high-end interior designer and Sean Young is completely miscast as Douglas’ wife. She just comes off as an after-thought. Luckily, neither of these roles are truly important to the story being told - so their sub-par casting and performances don’t hamstring the movie very much. What amounts to basically a morality tale, Wall Street simply shines. Watching it again after two decades, I had a brief moment of the film being horribly dated - it being one of the hallmarks of 80’s cinema. However, the designers (costumer, set, etc.) nailed it, going with classical design options and staying away from overtly contemporary design choices. These add to an ultimately timeless and classical look. Wall Street survives as a clear time capsule of that time in America. A time that would eventually implode with the Stock Market Bubble of the mid-90’s, but it was still a time that epitomized the “Me” generation and did so shamelessly. Powered by ScribeFire. Originally posted on:john's blog
]]>Sun, 12 Aug 2007 16:00:28 GMTgahnzzM.A.D. by Gahnzz - (Movie A Day)8/12/2007 12:00:28 PMWhen I first saw Wall Street about 20 years ago, I loved Michael Douglas’ performance. For me, it represented a complete fusing of actor and role. Add to that, director Oliver Stone’s willingness to do long, uninterrupted takes (particularly during monologues) and what came through was some truly fine writing, compelling acting and it was all wonderfully shot. The triumvirate of Douglas, Charlie Sheen and Martin Sheen really drive this movie. And throwing in John C. MGinley in a supporting role, filling out the second tier with James Karen and Hal Holbrook you have some fantasically solid performances. Granted, once you hit up the female side of the equation, things kinda drop a bit. Through no fault of her own, Daryl Hannah is a bit mis-cast. Her demeanor and her delivery just don’t wash as a high-end interior designer and Sean Young is completely miscast as Douglas’ wife. She just comes off as an after-thought. Luckily, neither of these roles are truly important to the story being told - so their sub-par casting and performances don’t hamstring the movie very much. What amounts to basically a morality tale, Wall Street simply shines. Watching it again after two decades, I had a brief moment of the film being horribly dated - it being one of the hallmarks of 80’s cinema. However, the designers (costumer, set, etc.) nailed it, going with classical design options and staying away from overtly contemporary design choices. These add to an ultimately timeless and classical look. Wall Street survives as a clear time capsule of that time in America. A time that would eventually implode with the Stock Market Bubble of the mid-90’s, but it was still a time that epitomized the “Me” generation and did so shamelessly. Powered by ScribeFire. Originally posted on:john's blog http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Classic/MemberTagFilms.aspxClassic
Number of films tagged: 816

Number of people who tagged: 312

Number of times used: 1453

]]>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 22:54:36 GMT8163121453Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/overrated/MemberTagFilms.aspxoverrated
Number of films tagged: 152

Number of people who tagged: 106

Number of times used: 240

]]>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 23:37:37 GMT152106240Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/crime/MemberTagFilms.aspxcrime
Number of films tagged: 401

Number of people who tagged: 70

Number of times used: 303

]]>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:51:32 GMT40170303Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/father/MemberTagFilms.aspxfather
Number of films tagged: 3580

Number of people who tagged: 51

Number of times used: 213

]]>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:51:56 GMT358051213Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/money/MemberTagFilms.aspxmoney
Number of films tagged: 508

Number of people who tagged: 46

Number of times used: 145

]]>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:03:25 GMT50846145Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/power/MemberTagFilms.aspxpower
Number of films tagged: 606

Number of people who tagged: 39

Number of times used: 104

]]>Wed, 19 Aug 2009 19:43:55 GMT60639104Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/greed/MemberTagFilms.aspxgreed
Number of films tagged: 592

Number of people who tagged: 32

Number of times used: 64

]]>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 17:40:23 GMT5923264Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/business/MemberTagFilms.aspxbusiness
Number of films tagged: 1747

Number of people who tagged: 27

Number of times used: 70

]]>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 13:05:14 GMT17472770Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/fashion/MemberTagFilms.aspxfashion
Number of films tagged: 202

Number of people who tagged: 26

Number of times used: 47

]]>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 05:18:07 GMT2022647Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/wealth/MemberTagFilms.aspxwealth
Number of films tagged: 749

Number of people who tagged: 26

Number of times used: 70

]]>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 05:18:07 GMT7492670Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/ambition/MemberTagFilms.aspxambition
Number of films tagged: 429

Number of people who tagged: 22

Number of times used: 39

]]>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 19:18:42 GMT4292239Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/1980s/MemberTagFilms.aspx1980s
Number of films tagged: 21

Number of people who tagged: 14

Number of times used: 25

]]>Fri, 24 Apr 2009 21:10:09 GMT211425Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/ethics/MemberTagFilms.aspxethics
Number of films tagged: 331

Number of people who tagged: 12

Number of times used: 18

]]>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 13:07:18 GMT3311218Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Best-Actor/MemberTagFilms.aspxBest-Actor
Number of films tagged: 78

Number of people who tagged: 9

Number of times used: 87

]]>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 05:35:20 GMT78987Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/values/MemberTagFilms.aspxvalues
Number of films tagged: 453

Number of people who tagged: 9

Number of times used: 13

]]>Tue, 14 Oct 2008 22:01:10 GMT453913Tag