Reviews

.... clever plot! Interesting characters! The intense Samuel L Jackson! ( Dominic Cooper does a good job, too!). Great shots of Chicago ( of personal intetest to me). Yes, i was hooked watching it all unfold! Suspenseful ... in that it is successful. THEN, come the climax, all the Hollywood cliches, Perils of Pauline, Dudley Do-Right. ( Oh, there are the typical computer cliches elsewhere as well.) Oh it's so neatly wrapped up! Just suspend your belief, accept the unrealistic, and enjoy another Hollywood comic book on video. Agree with others: the screen time does not belong to Samuel L Jackson, but he certainly adds his characteristic intensity, otherwise this would be pretty bland and uninspiring. Again, the plot is clever, but at this point, couldn't ANYONE write such a resolution?

I exited the biz in '06 but saw the signs from my front line view as an underwriter, whereas this takes a more corporate look. This is probably the best accounting of the '08 meltdown that I've seen, but is not a solid hit. The expense account segment is irrelevant. The rating agencies and investors' finagling doesn't explain why that makes John Doe go into foreclosure. One segment talks of a homeowner duped by a dishonest loan officer. Some people interviewed were high rollers with probably jumbo loan amounts-their default would hardly affect Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac. Banks can go under but that doesn't affect YOU, the homeowner. Yes, housing values plummeted, but that hardly affects your ability to make payments on the house YOU contracted for; you've got to live SOMEwhere, and borrowers on car loans are almost always upside down, so these are talking pts. Yeah, you can blame Reagan or W Bush but that doesn't excuse Congress, Clinton or Obama for doing the banking lobby's dance. ( Bush called for Fannie auditing but was quickly called a racist and backed off). Risky subprime loans? The meltdown affected just as many prime borrowers-that made foreclosures widespread.

The movie DOES touch on the recession beginning in '07! But what CAUSED the recession? Maybe the stampede to move jobs overseas, taking dollars out of the economy? Y'think?

Turning govt agency approval software over to commission loan officers is a moral hazard.

Selling off loans like a hot potato : also moral hazard, but that's designed to free up dollars to re-lend.

It was a numbers game for the execs. No one wanted to turn the lights out and miss the big bucks.

Agencies lowering standards, getting into volatile subprime lending, and forcing banks to develop giveaway loans for targeted lending groups for political electioneering-not good. ( Last week I read of standards being lowered, again).

Banks exacerbated their own dilemma by refusing to accept common sense short sales when a good but distressed borrower was moving to keep employed and pay bills. This dumped foreclosures on the market making values plummet for others wanting to move or wisely downsize-they were stuck.

Various Obama 'distressed borrower' rescue funds rarely got to the borrower. Where'd that money go?(This movie was too soon after the meltdown to review this).

Common sense dictated when the crisis hit, a core sample of loans should have been reviewed to determine common causes, but I knew that would never happen. How can you fix a problem when you can't identify it?

Dialogue / plot development is glacially slow, suggesting to me that were the story to be told normally, perhaps you would consider it weak or uneventful. So the special effects and million subplots take over. It is-as one reviewer mentioned-a stitched together quilt of several other major films; a space age perils of Pauline, a grand mirage to sucker the viewer( like several movies) , confusing scenes toggling between past ( which YOU have to figure out), present, and other real-time sites, muddied with the usual character relationship issues playing throughout time. Special effects are riveting and acting is strong. One person in our group liked it, others thought it confusing. Just a weak offering on a grand scale. Another reviewer said it didn't seem to know what it wanted to be-I agree. But I know there are those who will delight in it.

Cinematography, setting, were absolutely great. Acting great. The feeling that 'you were there' --great. And it draws you in. Only one scene seems unnecessary--gratuitous (the scene with the mother and child), but like so many others pointed out, PLOT HOLES, PLOT HOLES, PLOT HOLES, turning this into what I generally hates about American movies--outrunning bullets and implausible situations. Would LOVE for someone to legitimately explain: 1. The two start out over open country with the distinct possibility of being picked off, yet start with bayonets fixed, though crawling past/over barbed wire WITH bayonets. Later, when in the burned out town with German infestation at close range, no bayonet, just when needed. Also, 2 The soldier runs off without his rifle. To me, this is inexplicable: hostile territory, behind enemy lines, and he's going to outrun bullets and enemy soldiers, dodging this way and that (as he did in the trench, astonishingly). Thanks. The close-range shooting by the injured German sniper also bothered me--just a flesh wound, eh. The French mother holed up with her child in a nasty burned out town infested with Germans...strange but not a plot issue. Certainly strong points to the movie, but coming off as cartoonish in plot action. Still, the action is compelling. Sometimes found the accents hard to understand, particularly when talking as 'asides' or muttering to one another. I don't understand the need for some to try to wish this into a true story. It was never pitched as true, and doesn't need to be. Other war moves (Platoon, Full Metal Jacket, Saving Private Ryan, Hamburger Hill) do a great job of communicating the horrors of war. Some '10'-raters seem to treat this as a genre-setting standard, which I don't see.

[Disclosure: I was an abortion moderate until re-thinking it after the 2019 push for making life or death decisions after birth]. Politics aside, the acting--and story--are first rate on their own. The passion and emotion actress Ashely Bratcher displays as she moves from giddy rookie volunteer to total-business ace director then her agonizing awakening should be an award winning performance....unbelievable range. Other actors are spot on--this is not some maudlin political manipulation. The story plays out in a manner that I found extremely difficult to take, and the first 20 minutes felt like a gut punch. I've had to photograph a driver who had burned up in a tanker fire (for the coroner) and seen my share of war movies, but nothing...nothing...compared to this. No swearing, no violence, no stalking of women, open wounds, gashes, knifings, gun play, illicit drug use, chases of terrified women, car crashes and explosions or any of the standard Hollywood fare, yet it earned an R rating for what half the country considers a routine surgical procedure, depicted in black and white, on a monitor. You're kidding, right?

Unfortunately, this third installment is probably the weakest. One and Two are absolutely compelling, the realism and effects astounding, and the blending of current TV 'reporting' as part of the plot masterful! The book is very lengthy, dissuading some from tackling it, so bravo for the effort in bringing it the screen! Some drawbacks: since this project lacked major studio support and the undertaking was so huge, the budget seemed to dwindle and major characters had to be played by differing actors in each episode(which makes continuity a little confusing). Yet the plot is compelling and chillingly current. Nothing suffers here due to the age of the original story! My big gripe--in this 3rd episode: Galt's speech to the citizens of America squandered the earth-moving climax. In my mind (in the book), I 'heard' a Charlton Heston...a James Earl Jones...a commanding Shakespearean voice from a well seasoned, almost crusty veteran with vast life experience. Here, Galt is a youthful love interest for Dagny, too young to have been the great creator from Century Motors of decades before, and lacking a commanding presence. He is underwhelming. I would have loved to have rated this higher; the first 2 episodes were in the 8,9 range. This concluding episode pulls it down, unfortunately. BUT, this is a tough project, and the other reviews show the difficulty in trying to please all tastes.

Not sure how this can be topped: most people will already know the story, so the movie has the task of keeping interest and building tension without cheap tricks and manipulative gimmicks. The story and conflict is multi-leveled, and must be developed while building tension. Hanks gives the performance of a lifetime. The visuals must give us a feel for the vastness of the ocean, the immenseness of a cargo ship, the majesty of our overpowering Navy, danger and desperation, yet successfully play small ball with a cramped lifeboat and villains from another culture. Some say there are better movies, but I'll bet those movies started with a clean slate. Keeping the tension and interest at a high level throughout, and Hanks' 2nd half presentation of a desperate man--and his nuanced yet believable 'breakdown' scene--make this worthy of 10 stars to me. This was a real group effort, from screenwriters, actors, directors, and cinematographers. Other movies can be AS good, but none can top this.