The Big Short

[+ Cash4Trash]

Easily my favorite so far this year - Adam McKay the director found a very entertaining way to explain the

financial crisis. So much creativity and talent went into this movie. And hey, Christian Bale, Ryan Gosling,

Finn Wittrock, Billy Magnuson and Brad Pitt ain't hard to look at either.

[stop]

I saw this on Friday, amd yes this was a great movie. It is probably #3 on my list of best movies this year. casting was great and the story telling was clever. wasn't expecting it to be so funny and itmade me feel guilty at times laughing considering the subject matter. I thought they did a great job of explaining the details in a funny way.

 

It took me awhile to realize that was Brad Pitt. I thought it was Robert Redford for awhile.

[MrMiniver]

I never got past the first 30 minutes. All the jerky camera work gave me a headache. I don't know how anyone can watch stuff like that. There may have been a good movie in there but with that kind of camera work and editing I'm not going to stay around to find out.

 

I preferred 99 Homes which was brutal and well-acted.

[+ beethoven]

I agree with Mr Miniver, but I watched the entire movie. As he says, it could have done without all the cutting and jerking from one scene to another. I just love the movies of the late 30s and early 40s on TCM. Dammit, if you have a story to tell, TELL IT! These directors, such as the director of "The Big Short," just want to show off. Many of those who liked this movie liked it because the director and the actors flexed their their cinematic muscles -- but it didn't do much for the audience, at least not for me. It could have been a better movie. How accurate were these portrayals? I doubt that the Christian Bale character would have been allowed to walk around without a keeper. And some medical school somewhere gave him a degree?

 

"99 Homes," which was mentioned in some of the reviews of "The Big Short," stars Michael Shannon (of "Boardwalk"), and was a much more realistic and dramatic portrayal of the housing collapse of 2007-8.

[MrMiniver]

I agree with Mr Miniver, but I watched the entire movie. As he says, it could have done without all the cutting and jerking from one scene to another. I just love the movies of the late 30s and early 40s on TCM. Dammit, if you have a story to tell, TELL IT! These directors, such as the director of "The Big Short," just want to show off. Many of those who liked this movie liked it because the director and the actors flexed their their cinematic muscles -- but it didn't do much for the audience, at least not for me. It could have been a better movie. How accurate were these portrayals? I doubt that the Christian Bale character would have been allowed to walk around without a keeper. And some medical school somewhere gave him a degree?

 

"99 Homes," which was mentioned in some of the reviews of "The Big Short," stars Michael Shannon (of "Boardwalk"), and was a much more realistic and dramatic portrayal of the housing collapse of 2007-8.

 

I thought 99 Homes (except for the end, which I didn't care for) was much more honest and brutal and Michael Shannon was superb. You wanted to kick his teeth in.

 

I just couldn't watch Big Short and all the jerkiness and editing and shaky cameras. It felt like a film school project.

[actor61]

I agree with Mr Miniver, but I watched the entire movie. As he says, it could have done without all the cutting and jerking from one scene to another. I just love the movies of the late 30s and early 40s on TCM. Dammit, if you have a story to tell, TELL IT! These directors, such as the director of "The Big Short," just want to show off. Many of those who liked this movie liked it because the director and the actors flexed their their cinematic muscles -- but it didn't do much for the audience, at least not for me. It could have been a better movie. How accurate were these portrayals? I doubt that the Christian Bale character would have been allowed to walk around without a keeper. And some medical school somewhere gave him a degree?

 

"99 Homes," which was mentioned in some of the reviews of "The Big Short," stars Michael Shannon (of "Boardwalk"), and was a much more realistic and dramatic portrayal of the housing collapse of 2007-8.

 

I feel the same way about any movie Rob Marshall makes. I hated the camerawork in "Chicago" and it virtually ruined the film for me. "Memoirs of a Geisha" was so dark and the camera movements so jerky that I had no idea what was going on most of the time. "Nine" and "Into the Woods" were likewise headache inducing. I know it's an old fashioned notion but I always think of what Fred Astaire used to say about filming musicals: just plant the camera so people can see the whole picture. "The Big Short" wore me out and I just don't get the nominations it received this morning.

 

The Oscar nominations this year are rather mystifying. Where's Lily Tomlin for "Grandma"? Rachel McAdams??????? Why's Vikander in Supporting Actress for "The Danish Girl"? Why's Mark Ruffalo likewise in Supporting Actor for "Spotlight"? Sam Elliot should be in Supporting for "Grandma". I honestly thought Julie Walters should have a Supporting nomination for "Brooklyn". If Judi Dench can win for 8 minutes of screen time, Walters should also get a nod for her brief but delightful work. Where's the kid from "Room"? He was stunning. Just as good as Haley Joel Osment years ago when he was nominated for "The Sixth Sense". I could go on and on.

 

Not one African American, Hispanic or Asian performer nominated this year. Disgraceful.

[MrMiniver]

I feel the same way about any movie Rob Marshall makes. I hated the camerawork in "Chicago" and it virtually ruined the film for me. "Memoirs of a Geisha" was so dark and the camera movements so jerky that I had no idea what was going on most of the time. "Nine" and "Into the Woods" were likewise headache inducing. I know it's an old fashioned notion but I always think of what Fred Astaire used to say about filming musicals: just plant the camera so people can see the whole picture. "The Big Short" wore me out and I just don't get the nominations it received this morning.

 

The Oscar nominations this year are rather mystifying. Where's Lily Tomlin for "Grandma"? Rachel McAdams??????? Why's Vikander in Supporting Actress for "The Danish Girl"? Why's Mark Ruffalo likewise in Supporting Actor for "Spotlight"? Sam Elliot should be in Supporting for "Grandma". I honestly thought Julie Walters should have a Supporting nomination for "Brooklyn". If Judi Dench can win for 8 minutes of screen time, Walters should also get a nod for her brief but delightful work. Where's the kid from "Room"? He was stunning. Just as good as Haley Joel Osment years ago when he was nominated for "The Sixth Sense". I could go on and on.

 

Not one African American, Hispanic or Asian performer nominated this year. Disgraceful.

 

"Chicago" is one of the worst movie musicals ever made. The editing was atrocious. But if you're going to hire people who can't sing or dance you have to have quick edits so no one notices. At least in the old days when they hired a brilliant actor to play a part (prime example: Deborah Kerr in The King and I) and they couldn't sing, they had the good sense to dub the singing.

 

I agree with a lot of what you said except I didn't like "Grandma" at all. It even felt like Oscar bait.

 

As for Vikander, she should win which is why the producers wanted her in supporting. She had no chance in lead. But she should be nominated for lead for TESTAMENT OF YOUTH which was one of the best films of the year.

 

All the actors in Spotlight were "supporting" and I didn't feel any of them were particularly memorable. The film, in general, was just average. Don't get the love for it at all.

 

The best thing in "Room" was the kid. Brie Larson was fine but I don't get all the acclaim for that performance.

 

I don't honestly care what the race of the performers is. And whenever someone brings that up I say "okay, name the actor who shouldn't be nominated and the "person of color" who should be in their place. That usually ends the discussion.

 

For me, I would have nominated Michael B. Jordan for CREED over Michael Fassbaender for STEVE JOBS, a movie I hated. And I did correctly predict that Sorkin's script would not be nominated.

 

The biggest shocks to me were Ridley Scott (who most assumed would be the winner) not being nominated for Best Director and the song "See You Again" -- easily the best movie song of the year -- from Furious 7 not being nominated. Stunning.

[tyro]

"See You Again" wasn't nominated?!

T

[MrMiniver]

"See You Again" wasn't nominated?!

T

 

Nope it wasn't. But they nominated a Gaga song from a freakin' documentary!

[Moondance]

I started reading this thread before I saw "The Big Short" last night, so I was looking for what irritated some of you...

I never got past the first 30 minutes. All the jerky camera work gave me a headache.

I agree with Mr Miniver, but I watched the entire movie. As he says, it could have done without all the cutting and jerking from one scene to another. I just love the movies of the late 30s and early 40s on TCM. Dammit, if you have a story to tell, TELL IT! .

...[and] how accurate were these portrayals? I doubt that the Christian Bale character would have been allowed to walk around without a keeper. And some medical school somewhere gave him a degree?

... and I saw what you were talking about, but I liked the movie. I thought that the camera work, and the characterizations, and the weird cut-aways to have Anthony Bourdain or Selena Gomez do some 'spainin,' effectively underscored the craziness-as-the-norm at the heart of the financial crisis, and kept a long-ish movie with a complicated story to tell galloping along at a brisk pace. Just my take on it.

 

(Although, like Beethoven, I often enjoy a more traditional narrative approach, and would gladly hang out with him and watch old films on TCM.)

[N13]

Can't believe that I agree with MrMiniver about something. I did not care for "The Big Short." I found it too 'cute' to take seriously and too 'smug' to be funny. A big waste of talent.....imho!

[MrMiniver]

I think with a traditional narrative and a stationery camera I probably would've liked the film, alas, as is I wouldn't see it for free.