The Big Short (Adam McKay, 2015)

[FrauBlucher]

Trailer

I just watched this film and I think it's great. The screenplay is sheer brilliance. It sheds light on a very dark period in recent times. The performances are unforgettable. Christian Bale and Steve CarelI are at the top of their games. I don't want to say anymore until folks start to see this. I look forward to reading the comments. I'll be surprised if this isn't an overwhelming favorite on this site.

[Swift]

I genuinely can't tell what the tone of the film is. The ridiculous hairpieces and the presence of Adam McKay lead me to believe it's comedic, but the trailer didn't particularly lean that way otherwise.

[Ribs]

The pitch seems to be a considerably tamer version of Wolf of Wall Street with a dash of American Hustle, and given the Box Office performance of those in this frame two years ago I cannot blame them.

[FrauBlucher]

The pitch seems to be a considerably tamer version of Wolf of Wall Street with a dash of American Hustle, and given the Box Office performance of those in this frame two years ago I cannot blame them.

There is a similar feel to those films, but not as over the top and cartoonish as Wolf of Wall Street. McKay has other ingredients in here that makes it his own film and not a ripoff of others. For me the subject matter was the main character, where as the subject was secondary to the characters in Wolf... and ...Hustle.

I genuinely can't tell what the tone of the film is. The ridiculous hairpieces and the presence of Adam McKay lead me to believe it's comedic, but the trailer didn't particularly lean that way otherwise.

It's not a comedy. There is snappy, witty, and at times funny dialogue. But this is a serious look at the housing collapse and the collapse of world markets.

[FrauBlucher]

NY Times on the truth about The Big Short and the housing bubble. Even though this is not a critique of the film, there are spoilers so you may want to read after seeing the film.

[dx23]

Just saw the film in a completely empty theater. And like the film says, there are a lot of distractions in the world that make people blind to see stuff like the financial crisis in advance. I really loved the film, especially Steve Carell's performance. Yes, there is an uneven tone as the film tries to be funny and serious at the same time, but Carrell and Brad Pitt's character put into a real perspective the whole aspect of the people who were truly affected by the financial and mortgage crisis (Not the 1% to say the least). And like Carrell's character, I felt completely pissed, disillusioned and pessimistic about our immediate future. Right now Puerto Rico is going through it's worst financial crisis in modern times and it's just a repeat of the exact same thing that happened in the US mainland. Seeing as how the top bankers are getting richer, rich outside investors are buying premium land on cents on the dollar, government is turning a blind eye while people keep losing their jobs and houses makes me incredibly sick.

[lacritfan]

This is a good film with a great cast but I just don't see how it's currently the Oscar front runner. If it wins Adapted Screenplay I have no problem with that, I still don't understand everything about credit default swaps and CDOs but they did succeed in making it easier to understand and they injected some wit and cleverness to keep your attention. Christian Bale once again disappears into his character but I didn't think he was any better than his co-stars, let alone nominee material. Adam McKay's direction from Will Ferrell comedies to this seems more like Jay Roach going from Austin Powers to his HBO political movies, good but not Best Director great. Actually if you take away the four A-list cast members a good HBO movie is about the level it ends up being.

As a side note having Margot Robbie in a bubble bath explain sub prime loans makes it harder not easier to understand because you're not paying attention to what she's saying.

[Michael Kerpan]

A well done film that I laughed at from time to time -- but at the end I felt utterly depressed and demoralized (not due to the film but due to the reality connected to the film).

[Black Hat]

Like many hearing Adam McKay was attached to The Big Short was a surprise, but being a fan of his I was curious what he would do with the subject matter. Therein lays the problem with the film, it's very much an Adam Mckay movie. Normally this would be great because I find McKay fun and The Big Short is one helluva fun movie, but this isn't supposed to be a fun story. This isn't supposed to be a story with laugh lines, running gags and so forth. This isn't supposed to be a story making likeable characters out of real people who profited off the backs of the anguish of millions. McKay took an earnest, focused story and turned it into this quick pitched, flippant sprawling narrative. From Anthony Bourdain to a naked bubbly Margot Robbie to The Beeb's former squeeze their cameos had me paying less attention, not more. Think about it if you have to leave your main characters for celebrity cameos to explain your story how strong can your main characters be? This lack of faith is perhaps the greatest indictment of McKay's directing because both Steve Carrell and Christian Bale were fantastic playing great characters. The supporting players — outside of a terribly miscast Brad Pitt who I half expected at some point would shave, take over the movie and save the day — were also very good. To be fair Pitt's character wasn't important enough to sink the film. Nor, despite the attempt, was Pitt important enough to be its moral conscience. Ryan Gosling, a la Dean Martin at one of his roasts, played host to all this and fell completely flat. Even with Pitt and Gosling's characters McKay still had it all there in front of him, all the ingredients for masterpiece stew. If only he didn't serve it to us with a straw.

What made the film even more difficult to process is its overwhelming liberal tone. Well it's more than a tone, it's closer to a scream. Admittedly at times I enjoyed this, but McKay could have tried to reach people and by people I mean those outside the liberal bubble, instead he catered to it. McKay and I have two completely different visions on how to tell this story. Mark Ruffalo's one ridiculous scene aside, the understated approach Tom McCarthy took with Spotlight would have fit the subject infinitely better. In The Big Short McKay's choices reeked of liberal conceit. It's a shame because stories where people get hurt are a chance to make your audience feel and be better.

[MichaelB]

What made the film even more difficult to process is its overwhelming liberal tone. Well it's more than a tone, it's closer to a scream. Admittedly at times I enjoyed this, but McKay could have tried to reach people and by people I mean those outside the liberal bubble, instead he catered to it. McKay and I have two completely different visions on how to tell this story. Mark Ruffalo's one ridiculous scene aside, the understated approach Tom McCarthy took with Spotlight would have fit the subject infinitely better. In The Big Short McKay's choices reeked of liberal conceit. It's a shame because stories where people get hurt are a chance to make your audience feel and be better.

Can you explain this paragraph for the benefit of non-Americans who almost certainly have a somewhat different understanding of the term "liberal"?

[Professor Wagstaff]

I'm American and I wasn't clear about what that paragraph was specifically referring to either. Black Hat, if specific moments stood out to you as representing this problem you had, I'd love to hear them.

[Black Hat]

The film overpowers you not only with democratic talking points, but with the party's left flank. The film relentlessly bashes the banks, but leaves out the government's role. A clear line is drawn, you either agree with this and side with our 'heroes' or you're an idiot. Who are your main 'heroes'? Four simple archetypes. The cool funny guy in control pulling strings — Gosling. The troubled misunderstood too smart for his own good genius — Bale. The intense truth to power speaking moralist who is haunted by failing to live up to the standards he sets for everyone else in his own life — Carrell. The brilliant I'm over everything character who decides to go on one last adventure to help young ones — Pitt. Every single character in the film that's not a 'hero' is either an asshole, arrogant, dumb, all three, a combination of or worse. McKay ridicules these people over and over again. Then there's the celebrity chef, blonde in a hot tub, the teen pop princess all explaining, re: making how obvious everything is. It felt like being a moron is the only explanation possible for someone to not see this story the way McKay was telling it. Is this really all he has to give the audience about the greatest financial catastrophe of our time? It felt reductive, manipulative not eye opening. I sat there watching the movie thinking to myself, "Wow this is like a Bernie ad". Unsurprisingly when I looked up the film I found out McKay is in fact a big fan of Bernie Sanders.

Professor Wagstaff, 'problem' is an interesting word from a cinematic standpoint to consider. What constitutes a 'problem' on a movie based on true events, especially one as important as the recent financial collapse? Where is that line? Also it's not a word I actually used, what I wrote was the film's politics made it 'difficult to process'. In this way it reminded me very much of Zero Dark Thirty. The fact of the matter is I enjoyed the movie very much, but hated how the capital T, Truth of the story was represented. It's because of this I can't put it on a list, nor is it one I could see myself watching again, but for the two hours I did, I liked it.

[Michael Kerpan]

On the other hand, I think the humor is precisely what made this film effective. I would have been relatively unenthused by an "earnest" presentation of the same story. (the old Failsafe vs. Strangelove dichotomy). The humor ultimately left me more gobsmacked, because it caused me to let more defenses down.

[Black Hat]

Effective how? As a piece of entertainment, work of social conscious or both? Also what do you mean by the humor having let your defenses down?

[Michael Kerpan]

Effective as both.

> what do you mean by the humor having let your defenses down?

You laugh at something -- and then feel bad at having laughed when you see the events in a different context.

[mfunk9786]

This seems to be all but out of theaters in my area - why oh why do studios push films for Oscar contention and find no way to make them available in a high-ish streaming quality before the Oscar ceremony? There's even been a screener leaked for weeks and rather than release the film to diffuse the low quality copy floating around like the record industry has learned to do, instead it's just in limbo.

[domino harvey]

It'll be out on Blu-Ray on March 15th

[domino harvey]

Disappointed in this one, as it covers ground already far better done in Wolf of Wall Street and Too Big To Fail, (the latter of which takes on the government role the poster above was wanting more of). I thought McKay's direction was awful, and the editing intercutting rando things to represent the time movement was obnoxious. Of the much-discussed celeb cameos, Selena Gomez' is the only one that worked, namely because McKay bothered to use his visual set in congress with the concept being explained, rather than Bourdain throwing fish parts in a pot while mostly just addressing the audience or Robbie sipping champagne while in the tub for no reason. The film is all over the place tonally-- sometimes it's a comedy, sometimes it wants to Get Serious and let you know how Important it is. Carrell's final speech about blaming immigrants and poor people is right out of some Occupy Wall Street Literotica fantasy. If you're interested in the crash, do yourself a favor and check out the clever Too Big To Fail, which likewise features a bunch of stars (actually, far more than even here) reenacting what went wrong, though one of its great strengths is it almost never slows down to explain itself and the viewer has to play catch-up at all times while the real-life figures trade playscript-worthy barbs and go deeper down the rabbit hole. It's funny that the HBO movie felt more like an Oscar-worthy social problem pic than the real thing, but here we are...

[How rude!]

Disappointed in this one, as it covers ground already far better done in Wolf of Wall Street and Too Big To Fail, (the latter of which takes on the government role the poster above was wanting more of). I thought McKay's direction was awful, and the editing intercutting rando things to represent the time movement was obnoxious. Of the much-discussed celeb cameos, Selena Gomez' is the only one that worked, namely because McKay bothered to use his visual set in congress with the concept being explained, rather than Bourdain throwing fish parts in a pot while mostly just addressing the audience or Robbie sipping champagne while in the tub for no reason. The film is all over the place tonally-- sometimes it's a comedy, sometimes it wants to Get Serious and let you know how Important it is. Carrell's final speech about blaming immigrants and poor people is right out of some Occupy Wall Street Literotica fantasy. If you're interested in the crash, do yourself a favor and check out the clever Too Big To Fail, which likewise features a bunch of stars (actually, far more than even here) reenacting what went wrong, though one of its great strengths is it almost never slows down to explain itself and the viewer has to play catch-up at all times while the real-life figures trade playscript-worthy barbs and go deeper down the rabbit hole. It's funny that the HBO movie felt more like an Oscar-worthy social problem pic than the real thing, but here we are...

This really was a dog's breakfast. Christian Bale's 'performance' was embarrassingly awful. Steve Carrell chewed an awful lot of scenery. On a personal note , the silly haircuts/wigs? really conjured up 2006 for me.

It seemed like someone decided to do a feature film version of a Michael Moore doco.

Ryan Gosling got into the spirit of things, but for me, it was the performance by Jeremy Strong that came off as the, ahem, strongest.

Domino's right, the direction, editing, screenplay, pretty much the whole damn thing, was way off.

This would have been up there with Crash had it won the oscar for best film.

[Ribs]

Realized a few weeks back that this takes a lot of what I like so much about 24 Hour Party People (one of my favorites of the century) and uses them to exactly opposite ends for some soap-box preaching about how banks are bad and thinking our minds should be blown by this revelation. There's no great reveal, we just know how it's going to end and are expected to be shocked that this is how it all did happen.

Steve Carrell in this movie was basically playing the one episode of the Office where he has to pretend to be on an important call and so is walking up and down the hallway yelling about nonsensical numbers into his phone.

As if the movie wasn't starting to grate on me it dropped a Murakami quote with pretty much no relevance at all, like a literature-obsessed student on Tumblr might do.

[mfunk9786]

Thrilled to hear that I don't need to see this, and can just let it fade into obscurity. Good looking out, forum.

[swo17]

I don't disagree with the criticisms being made, but I liked Gosling and the math/economics stuff enough to give it a mild recommendation for the curious. The cameo cutaways were a bit condescending (and, as mentioned, apart from the Selena Gomez one, not particularly illustrative), the woozy, aimless direction of the Bale scenes was pretty trying (if this is what Knight of Cups is like, then count me out), and I love Steve Carell but he really needs to go back to only playing the put-upon and/or clueless endearing everyman (no more accents please!) And there are plenty of groan-worthy moments like when the cocky mortgage brokers end up at a Best Buy (wah wah). But I still think there's like half of a really good movie in here.

[PfR73]

Talk about an obscure title. It takes 1 hour, 29 minutes, and 50 seconds before the big Short finally appears!

[flyonthewall2983]

But in the frame it's rather...diminutive

[oh yeah]

This has to be one of the most awkwardly-directed movies I've ever seen, or certainly to have been a major awards contender. McKay's cut-n-paste style plays like a laughable copy of Scorsese's masterful Wolf of Wall Street, except whereas it made sense there and was brilliantly (and strategically) deployed, here such editing-room pyrotechnics simply seem messy and unmotivated. McKay's use of voiceover and needle-drops only heighten the impression of a tepid Wolf ripoff. But even taking all the more ambitious flourishes aside, the "normal" scenes are shot and cut like an 18 year-old amateur film student was at the helm, desperate to try out a little zoom here and a jerky pan there, and do ten cuts really quick over here just because it looks, like, cool. I haven't even broached the actual content of the film, but the form was just that poor for me, it really distracts from everything else (which is more or less as preachy as many have said, anyway -- ugh, those celeb cutaways). The whole thing spends so much time explaining and talking (down) to the viewer that there's no room left for drama, tragedy, intrigue, comedy, what have you.

Just a fucking bizarrely bad movie. Could have been alright with a better director.