I would love to hear comments from you all if you've seen Oliver Stone's new Wall Street II. Yesterday, my companion and I went to see the movie and nearly walked out after 15 minutes, it was that bad. Blaming speculators for the "Crisis," irrelevant discussion of "Moral Hazard," the Lehman and Bear Sterns references, heroic yet cutthroat actions of the bankers, artful cutouts of the talking heads of CNBC, the Oracle of Omaha, the improbable plot line, the horrible dialogue, Michael Douglas' insufferability, the resurrection of the corpse of Eli Wallach, the Phoenix like rise of Gordon Gekko, the tangled plot line!!!

I could go on and on. Does anyone else agree with me or am I overreacting? Frankly, instead of wasting my money on this horrible movie, I wish I would have sat home watching the local Spanish Channel watching my favorite telenovela, where the passion is real, and the revenge is sweet…and believable.

Sushil Kedia writes:

I attended the movie too. One good thing was the movie hall, the seats were extra comfortable, and it had a really good ambiance. Some things in India have changed for the better, in such measure.

But that's not all. Michael Doulgas resembled someone too popular on Wall Street. Someone whose name reads backwards and forwards the same kept coming to mind on the facial lines and contours that Douglas exuded effortlessly. The flinch, the long deep gaze, so many other things were all pretending to mimick the famous name. Was it a flawed make up design or a purposeful resemblance created for getting "eyeballs"?!

As a movie making exercise, this seems to me an outright fraud. But then again, I did witness such fraud pass by in the form of a movie effortlessly. The crowds in India may not have noticed it, really.

In the same vein, my two humble cents submitted herewith are that for non Wall Streeters the movie could well be a good entertaining account of so many things relating to lives on the Wall Street. A movie is after all an illusion and an entertainment. For those from the Street and around it, of course the real stuff is so much more real that forget Oliver Stone, any other movie maker will find it difficult to please us and to get close to portrayals of genuine resemblance.

But then, how could Douglas be made to resemble the big name so well. Accident? Design? Transferred Epithet?

The human touch, the daughter, the fetus, the tears all came in to show that the street does have living beings. Huh! I would say the guy scripting the story forecasted the depressing markets would be lasting until the 3rd quarter of 2010 and settle with a simpler way of reasoning why the movie is what it is: It wasn't made for educating this universe about what Wall Street is. It was made for making money while the makers forecasted the Street would still be not making any. Bad forecast, that's all. Else the movie being a movie is fine.

Jeff Watson writes:

Did you notice the photo-shopped picture on the fireplace mantle of Josh Brolin with his character and the Palindrome? I got a kick out of that one.





Speak your mind

5 Comments so far

  1. Warren on October 11, 2010 6:01 pm

    Did you ask for a refund?

  2. Andre Wallin on October 12, 2010 8:23 am

    it was better than inception. it’s popularity reminds me how almost everyone is caught up in some type of fairytale land without realizing it.

  3. Wall Street II « Masteroftheuniverse’s Weblog on October 12, 2010 11:37 am

    […] Wrote this little blurb over at Daily Speculations. What did you think of the movie? […]

  4. Anonymous on October 12, 2010 11:05 pm

    Had it been any other drama of the week it may have been passable, but the Wall Street name set the bar. The original had burned so many quotes into my mind - the greed speech, rip out his eyes, suck his skull introduced me to the art of war, the glory of commerce. My expectation was a completely unrepentant Gekko out with revenge on the mind instead we get a lonely, penniless and apologetic one. The supporting cast was most uninspiring but for my Money Carey Mullingan seemed completely unbelievable and incongruent as Gekko’s kid…

  5. gman on October 12, 2010 11:15 pm

    Well, the film "inside job" is actually the documentary of the 2008 Wall Street events.

    Where the plot is truly incomplete is that a guy with the same name as a famous steelers' hall-of-famer was working at Freddie Mac until 2005 and that he brought-up the inadequate protection (under-priced risk) on the GSE credit portfolio to senior management and Capitol Hill. He proposed selling all of the GSE risk to european banks and russia for the piddly cost of ~$4-5billion back then. Who shot it down?

    Barney Frank

    To compound problems this person was excused from Freddie Mac for not being a team player. The insolvency was a complete fraud and it was engineered to be that way. All we have accomplished is to strengthen China's global influence and undermine western civilization. The next scam is underway. I hope you all stick to your risk management parameters because you're going to need all the discipline you can muster. The fix is in.

    New Zealand is looking pretty good these days.


Resources & Links