Captain America: Civil War (or why Civil War is better than Batman vs Superman)

(M) ★★★★

Director: Anthony & Joe Russo.

Cast: Chris Evans, Robert Downey Jr, Scarlett Johansson, Sebastian Stan, Anthony Mackie, Don Cheadle, Jeremy Renner, Chadwick Boseman, Paul Bettany, Elizabeth Olsen, Paul Rudd, Emily VanCamp, Tom Holland, Frank Grillo, William Hurt, Daniel Brühl.

"Wait - are we running to something or away from something?"

BEING the nerd that I am, it’s difficult to assess this, the 13th entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), without comparing it to Batman vs Superman: Dawn Of Justice, the second film in the DC Cinematic Universe (DCCU).

(It’s also difficult to write this review without going overboard on the acronyms – do I really have to write out Batman vs Superman: Dawn Of Justice and Captain America: Civil War, or can we get by with BvS and CA:CW?)

Both films deal with similar ideas – in a world where superheroes exist, who keeps the superheroes in check? It’s the very question at the centre of the greatest superhero graphic novel of all time, Alan Moore’s Watchmen – “who watches the watchmen?”. How would the world function with so much power in the hands of so few people? And how would you minimise the collateral damage if those few people started throwing their weight around?

Both films also focus on a large number of super-powered characters, introducing new ones and revisiting old favourites. Both films also take great pride in pitting the heroes against each other – that’s the raison d’etre of BvS and CA:CW.

The thing about comparing these two films – and this is the point where the DC fans on Twitter will start calling me a paid-off Marvel shill – is that CA:CW does all of the above really well. BvS, by comparison, does almost all of the above poorly.

CA:CW centres on the fallout from some of the previous MCU films (a working knowledge of the MCU is helpful but not necessarily essential). The mismatched bunch of heroes known as The Avengers has been gallivanting around the globe avenging, but unfortunately innocent civilians have been getting in the crossfire.

The UN, personified by General Ross (Hurt, last seen in the MCU in The Incredible Hulk), presents The Avengers with an ultimatum – sign up as UN-sanctioned superheroes and do as you're told, or don’t. Unfortunately the “don’t” means you will likely be regarded as a vigilante and potentially a criminal.

Tony Stark AKA Iron Man (Downey Jr) is confronted by the repercussions of his actions and decides to sign on. Steve Rogers AKA Captain America (Evans) is still haunted by the deception of his previous bosses (as seen in Captain America: The Winter Soldier) and feels The Avengers work best independent of governmental meddlings. This sets up a super-powered schism that is not likely to end well.

There are other factors in play, such as the loose threads of what happened to The Winter Soldier (Stan) and the arrival of Black Panther (Boseman), but mainly this is about building up to Captain America and Iron Man duking it out, as was the case with Batman and Superman in BvS.

CA:CW builds to that punch-up in a smart, measured way. The heroes discuss the problem, express their ideological viewpoints in a balanced manner, but continually fail to agree, with the stakes getting higher and higher until they reach the metaphorical equivalent of pistols at dawn. In other words, it’s pretty much the opposite of the illogical and awkward set-up that led Batman and Superman to go tete-a-tete in BvS, where the film had to actively work to avoid its two heroes from having a sensible conversation as it would have quickly resolved all the issues that supposedly underpinned the story, making the much-anticipated titular fight redundant.

Furthermore, CA:CW’s approach raises the stakes. Batman and Superman could have easily sorted things out by talking, but instead made them both come off as irrational macho idiots when they finally fought (although, to be fair, it is a good fight). Meanwhile, most of the 12 (yep, a whole dozen) heroes who battle it out in CA:CW have legitimate arguments for believing what they believe, and thus they are fighting for a cause or a truth they hold dear. This is not fighting for the sake of fighting because it says that’s what has to happen on the movie poster – this is action driven by characters, and narrative compelled by decisions, choices and ideas. In other words, the big battle makes sense in the scope of the story and is an inevitable outcome.

And where BvS struggled to incorporate Wonder Woman (who could be edited out of the film with little impact on the story) and its other numerous cameos (which could have been cut even more easily), CA:CW breezes through its role call of caped crusaders like it’s no big deal. It introduces Spider-man and Black Panther with easy, natural dialogues (although to be fair Spider-man’s introduction is a little forced) and gives them reasons to take part in proceedings. It also handles its 10 other characters comfortably – they contribute to the narrative, set-pieces, themes, discussion, and humour of the film (on that last point I should point out I have no issue with the ‘dark’ tone of BvS). Every character is far more than a gratuitous easter egg thrown in to merely spruik the next movies – they are pieces in the story’s puzzle.

But that’s enough of the nerd fight. On it’s own CA:CW is another fine addition to the MCU. It combines the usual humourous banter and the life-on-the-line drama, with the climax providing a real sense that the MCU will be irrevocably changed after the credits roll.

It’s getting harder for these intertwined films to stand alone, but CA:CW works hard to be watchable without requiring homework, while also rewarding the dedicated followers of the MCU and the comics they’re loosely based on. For example, newcomers will quickly figure what Ant-Man is all about, while the return customers will revel in Captain America throwing back to his first film by saying “I can do this all day” – a line that, in context, says a lot about the character.

Speaking of the comics, this Civil War is very different to the Civil War of its source material, but carries on Marvel’s ability to cherry pick ideas from its pages successfully to create something new that still feels true to the source in some way. The scope of this film is smaller than the Civil War of the comics, but the directors and MCU brains trust have made the Civil War idea work in the MCU.

The Russos have kept some of the conspiracy thriller tone they used in Captain America: The Winter Soldier, but married it with action sequences edited like a modern war movie. At times it borders on the blizzard editing that is far too prominent in current actioners, but mostly it stays on the right side of watchable.

The cast is uniformly great. If it hasn’t been said enough already, let’s say it again – Marvel have cast their movies impeccably. We can’t imagine anyone other than Downey Jr and Evans as Iron Man or Captain America, but ditto for everyone else. Rudd confirms he was a great choice for Scott Lang aka Ant-Man, Paul Bettany’s Vision is a weirdly wonderful creation, and so far it seems like the casting directors have outdone themselves yet again with their new Spider-Man.

I feel sorry for DC fans. Marvel continues to hit it out of the park with its movies. They made an Ant-Man movie and one with a talking raccoon in it for chrissake, but DC can’t even get Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman to work well in a movie together.

Now, where do I collect my Marvel shill cheque?

Read More

Eddie The Eagle

(PG) ★★★½

Director: Dexter Fletcher.

Cast: Taron Egerton, Hugh Jackman, Jo Hartley, Keith Allen, Iris Berben, Tim McInnerny, Jim Broadbent, Christopher Walken.

"I thought I told you to shave those sideburns!"

IS it possible to do a sports movie that isn’t completely overflowing with clichés?

Probably not. Cinematic sport can’t exist without the underdogs, the redemptions, the montages, and the impossible dreams becoming realities. These components (minus the montages) typically make up the real stories we love to find in actual sports – tales of triumphing against the odds, of coming from nowhere and ending up somewhere, of surprising the doubters and naysayers.

This film about Eddie The Eagle certainly doesn’t shy away from the sporting clichés. The true story of British ski jumper Eddie Edwards is resplendent with them, but just for good measure, the filmmakers have thrown in a heap of made-up ones as well.

In fact, don’t expect much truth at all in this biopic. What it gets right though is the spirit of Eddie’s endeavour and heart and goodwill that generated, which the film replicates.

Egerton plays Edwards, the plasterer who became the star of the 1988 Calgary Winter Olympics thanks to his sheer enthusiasm rather than his sporting prowess.

Edwards is portrayed as a single-minded individual whose only desire is to be an Olympian. After being cut from the downhill ski team by a snooty official (McInnerny), Edwards switches to ski jumping as there are no other Brits taking part in the event, making qualifying easier.

He’s helped along the way by washed-up ski jumper Bronson Peary (Jackman), a boozy American booted from the sport for his rebellious ways.

Peary is a good example of the film’s love of a good cliché – he’s an entirely invented character that adds a whole new bunch of tropes to the story on top of Eddie’s own no-hoper-does-good exploits.

With so many typical turns, the film survives almost on heart alone. Egerton does a fantastic job of winning our sympathies, gurning away with great sincerity as he smashes and bashes his way towards his dream, but amid the fictionalisation is an almost unbelievable true story of how one man effectively gatecrashed the Olympics. That seed at the centre of the film helps win you over and build up an immense amount of goodwill for the character.

It would be easy to mess up a film like this but the narrative is played out unfussily, the tone is kept light, and the whole enterprise has a vibe about it that matches Eddie’s can-do attitude and everpresent smile. Sure, it’s corny but it’s genuinely heartwarming.

Director Dexter Fletcher gets good mileage out of his ‘80s-style onscreen titles and an excellent ‘80s replica soundtrack, largely penned by Take That’s Gary Barlow, which helps capture the era perfectly.

It’s closest cousin is undoubtedly Cool Runnings, and while it won’t endure like its Jamaican relative, Eddie The Eagle is an enjoyable Olympic underdog tale that’s hard to hate.

Read More

The Jungle Book (2016)

(PG) ★★★★

Director: Jon Favreau.

Cast: Neel Sethi, (voices of) Bill Murray, Ben Kingsley, Idris Elba, Lupita Nyong'o, Scarlett Johansson, Giancarlo Esposito, Christopher Walken.

"Soft kitty, warm kitty, potential child-eating kitty."

NOT that long ago in cinematic history, special effects reached a point where it became possible to put anything you could imagine on screen and have it look real – like, really real.

The dinosaurs of Jurassic Park, the ape of Peter Jackson's King Kong, the tiger in Life Of Pi, the worlds (and Jar Jar Binks) of the Star Wars prequels, the entirety of Avatar – for better or worse, the advent of computer animation meant photo-realistic digital creations that could sit smoothly alongside real world people and environments were just a million or so mouse-clicks away.

In hindsight, the aforementioned movies and their CG animals and settings (throw the simians of Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes in there too) point directly to Favreau’s live-action version of Disney’s The Jungle Book. This film seems like an inevitability; as though the technology was being developed just so we could one day see a life-like take on Mowgli’s story without the spectre of animal cruelty hanging over it.

It’s a perfect mesh of subject matter and special effects, not unlike Life Of Pi and Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes – two stories that benefited from tech wizardry finally catching up with the potentials of visual storytelling.

Favreau’s film owes more of a debt to Disney’s 1967 cartoon than Rudyard Kipling’s original tales, but is an intriguing mix of the two, while also striking out on its own occasionally with the narrative to find new directions. It follows Mowgli (Sethi), the “man cub” raised in the jungle by wolves, as he struggles to escape from the evil tiger Shere Khan (Elba) and return to civilisation with the aid of Baloo the bear (Murray) and Bagheera the panther (Kingsley).

The darker tone of Kipling’s work, which Walt Disney deliberately steered his version away from, is here in places, but so are a couple of the 1967 songs from The Sherman Brothers and Terry Gilkyson. As such, the movie moves in and out of the light and shade, but be warned that this may scare the pants off the younger kids – Shere Khan is a wonderfully malicious villain and some animals die (although in a bloodless, mostly off-screen fashion).

It’s the light-and-shade combo that is the biggest sticking point with the movie. Its photo-realism and occasional animal-on-animal violence sits awkwardly at times alongside, say, a giant ape voiced by Christopher Walken singing a song (yes, that really happens in the film).

There are also moments when The Jungle Book looks a bit like a computer game - CGI still has its limitations - but by-and-large it is a beauty to behold. The animals are amazing, as are the largely animated environments. Sethi, probably the only tangible thing in most of the scenes, rarely seems out of place alongside his digital counterparts.

The cast is generally impressive. Finding a Mowgli was apparently quite a challenge, but newcomer Sethi does a good job. There are a few Jake “Ani Skywalker” Lloyd-like moments, but they’re mostly forgivable.

Kingsley is a good match for Bagheera, while Elba is an even better one for Shere Khan – Elba drops menace into syllables like Dr Dre drops beats (ie. with ease), and it’s a frighteningly good voice performance. Murray has fun with his role although he runs dangerously close to letting Bill Murray trample over the top of Baloo the bear. Similarly, it’s impossible to separate Walken’s voice from Walken, even when it’s coming out of an animated Gigantopithecus. Walken plays King Louie like a mob boss and it’s kinda fun, but also kinda distracting.

Generally speaking, this re-imagining of The Jungle Book is impressive. It has a sense of wonder and spectacle to it often lacking in big blockbusters, genuinely offering up a visual feast we have not partaken of before, which is all the more impressive when you consider how many times this ‘book’ has been told.

But importantly, Favreau hasn’t lost sight of the heart and emotion at the centre of this story amidst the CG wizardry bringing it to life. This is still the moving tale of a boy struggling to find his place in the world, torn between his nurture and his nature, and all the positives and negatives that each side brings.

Read More

Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice

(M) ★★

Director: Zack Snyder.

Cast: Ben Affleck, Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Jesse Eisenberg, Diane Lane, Laurence Fishburne, Jeremy Irons, Holly Hunter, Gal Gadot.

"No, my mother is Martha!"

IT’S the year of the superhero showdown.

Magneto and Professor X will be at it again in X-Men: Apocalypse in May, Captain America and Iron Man throw down in Civil War in April, and right now we have the Caped Crusader duking it out with Kal-El of Krypton in Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice.

The latter is DC Comics’ attempt to build their own universe much like rival superhero stable Marvel has done with great success over the past decade. Following on from Superman reboot Man Of Steel, this is DC’s pre-Justice League warm-up, introducing a new (but old) Batman and giving audiences the about-bloody-time debut of Wonder Woman.

While the sound of a billion dollars flowing into their coffers will ease the pain, this is not the universally acclaimed appetite whetter DC was hoping for. It’s an out-and-out mess for much of its running time and only really hits its stride in the final act when the titular biffo begins.

Up until then, we’re saddled with a confusing and scattershot plot. Batman (Affleck) is on the hunt for a possible terrorist threat, all the while eyeing off Superman (Cavill), who Batman sees as a threat to humanity. The Dark Knight is not alone – Superman is the subject of much debate and political discussion as America tries to figure out if this seemingly omnipotent alien is going to be a happy god or a vengeful god.

Meanwhile, Lex Luthor (Eisenberg) is trying to figure how to make this whole superhero thing work to his advantage, Lois Lane (Adams) is hunting terrorists in Africa, and Wonder Woman (Gadot) is attending functions and being mysterious.

Batman v Superman does a few really good things, the best of which is putting Ben Affleck in the Batsuit. Using an older, more cynical Dark Knight is one of the better ideas in the film, as it sets their Son of Gotham apart from the many that have come before, but it’s Affleck who really makes it work. He has the physicality, the suaveness, and the gravitas needed for the Batman/Bruce Wayne duality, and he absolutely nails it.

Equally good is Irons’ Alfred, who’s just as world-weary as his master and complicit in his vigilantism, despite his own protestations. It’s a relationship that feels lengthy and lived-in from the moment they pop up on screen together.

Cavill is also good – despite Man Of Steel being a disappointment, at least he was an ideal Superman. The same can be said for Adams as Lois Lane. Slightly less convincing is Gadot as Wonder Woman, although she’s given so little to do that’s it’s difficult to tell and probably too early to judge. Her place in this movie feels tacked on – it would be easy to edit her out of this film without losing any important plot details.

The award for biggest piece of miscasting goes to Jesse Eisenberg, whose Lex Luthor misses the mark by a mile. He never comes off as dangerously intelligent or a serious threat – instead he is a mess of tics and nerdiness that’s probably supposed to be a mix of Heath Ledger’s Joker and Eisenberg’s own Mark Zuckerberg from The Social Network. Unfortunately his performance is a big ball of crazy, but it’s never scary-crazy or entertaining-crazy or funny-crazy or even interesting-crazy – just bad-crazy. His turn is like watching an actor try to chew the scenery only to have his dentures fall out at the crucial moments, except you don’t laugh – you just feel bad for him.

Eisenberg is not the film’s biggest problem though. That lies in either the script or the edit, or most likely both. The cleverest thing the movie does is take the biggest criticism of Man Of Steel – it’s mindless third-act carnage – and turn it into a jumping-off point for the better plot strands of Batman v Superman. It’s the reason why Batman and parts of American society don’t trust Superman or see him as a potentially apocalyptic liability. But this thread gets lost amid the adventures of Lois Lane, the shoehorning of Wonder Woman, the sprawling and nonsensical machinations of Lex Luthor, and a handful of bizarre dream sequences that add nothing (except for an idiotic and pointless Flash cameo). Two or possibly three movies have been squished into one, and it’s not a comfortable fit.

As is typical of Snyder, the film often goes for “looks awesome” over “makes sense”. Case in point is a dream sequence in which Batman fights a bunch of gunmen in a desert – it features the longest and most elaborate take in the entire movie but contributes nothing to the plot. Ditto for the “Dawn Of Justice” add-on, which consists of a handful of cameos that unnecessarily slow the film down just when it’s getting good.

It’s not a total waste of time. The dark tone sits well and is a nice counterpoint to the jokey reality of the Marvel cinematic universe, the Affleck-Irons double team is great, the ending is bold, and the title fight is pretty good.

The problem is the film struggles to find its focus for close to two hours. It’s only when its heroes begin punching each other in the face that it figures out what it’s supposed to be doing, and starts doing it well, which will be too little, too late for some.

Read More

Zootopia

(PG) ★★★★½

Director: Byron Howard & Rich Moore.

Cast: (voices of) Ginnifer Goodwin, Jason Bateman, Idris Elba, J.K. Simmons, Nate Torrence, Octavia Spencer, Jenny Slate, Shakira.

"He's behind me, isn't he?"

THERE are moments in Disney’s latest animated classic-in-waiting where you have to remind yourself you’re watching a kids movie.

It’s as if the directors and the seven people credited with the story decided to see how many “grown-up” ideas they could throw at the script before people would notice.

That seems the most reasonable explanation for this wonderfully smart piece of computer animation, which is basically a police procedural about racism and prejudice peppered with references to The Godfather and Breaking Bad.

To put it in a more child-friendly way, it’s also the tale of a rabbit and a fox who team up to find some missing animals while learning lessons about being true to yourself and good to others, filtered through a Looney Tunes lens and references to Frozen (and there’s a decent Let It Go-style uplifting number called Try Everything to boot).

This multi-layered delivery makes it excellent entertainment for all ages – in fact, the only criticism is the film seems to pander more to the adults than the young’uns at times.

Goodwin voices Judy Hopps, a country-born rabbit following her dream of being the first of her species to become a police officer in the big city of Zootopia – an animal-built city where predator and prey live together in something close to harmony.

Hopps crosses paths with con-fox Nick Wilde (a perfectly cast Bateman), who may be the key to finding a missing otter and helping Hopps keep her badge.

The Disney team has created a compelling world that begs for sequels – the credits roll leaving you wanting to spend more time in Zootopia and its rural surrounds because it feels like a functioning place and not just an excuse for a barrage of animal gags (although I can’t help but wonder what the carnivores eat if it’s not their herbivorous neighbours).

Within this world, Judy and Nick are fascinating guides – the courageous yet naive rabbit and the cunning but cynical fox make for a great odd couple pairing that deserve more than one movie, mostly because they are well-rounded and nicely developed characters.

But will the kids like it? There are long stretches that feel better suited to the older audience, not because of “adult themes” but because how many kids watch detective dramas? You could hear the younger children squirming in the audience, waiting for the next big action scene or joke involving a sloth.

There are a couple of good scares in here too, and coupled with the sleuthy plot and its anti-prejudice undertones, it’s enough to keep the very young ones away. But the reality is this is a kids movie that will grow with the kids – they will find more to appreciate and understand with every viewing, which is the sign of a truly great family film.

Zootopia is a surprisingly sharp examination of racial profiling, prejudice, equality and stereotyping, and how often can you say that about a kids movie? It’s also the latest in a strong run of animated movies from Disney, who churned out a lot of average fare in the ‘00s but have delivered a quality streak (Tangled, Wreck-It Ralph, Frozen, Big Hero 6, and now this) since the turn of the decade.

Adults and children alike should walk away impressed by this fun yet thoughtful adventure.

Read More

10 Cloverfield Lane

(M) ★★★½

Director: Dan Trachtenberg.

Cast: Mary Elizabeth Winstead, John Goodman, John Gallagher Jr.

"What do you mean 'tabletop gaming'? It's a goddamn boardgame!"

WHAT is this film?

Is it a sequel to the awesome 2008 found footage monster movie Cloverfield or not?

The answer is definitely maybe. Cloverfield’s writer Drew Goddard, director Matt Reeves, and producer JJ Abrams all serve as either producers or executive producers, and the film theoretically could be taking place in the same filmic universe. Abrams has also called 10 Cloverfield Lane a “blood relative” of Cloverfield.

However he has also described the new movie as merely a “spiritual successor”, while some of the makers have said there are connections to Cloverfield, but that the movie exists in a different filmic universe.

So, as previously stated, it’s definitely maybe a sequel. Or not.

But what is this film?

The trailers gave away little so we’ll keep this as spoiler-free as possible. The basic premise is that three people (played by Winstead, Goodman, and Gallagher Jr) are living in a well fitted-out bomb shelter. The hows and whys of them being there are the film’s raison d'être, as are the many further questions that come from the answers to those hows and whys.

Winstead is in every scene and does a great job. She’s our audience surrogate, but so much more – her character is plucky, brave and resourceful in between bouts of terror and the weird calms that come before the movie’s dramatic storms. Winstead handles all those highs and lows with aplomb.

Equally impressive is Goodman as Howard, the glue that holds the sheltered trio together. His turn is central to the film’s quirks and intricacies, and it’s one of his best performances outside a Coen Brothers movie.

It’s difficult to describe this film without giving anything away, but it runs the gamut of styles. It opens like an indie romance, swerves into Saw territory, settles into light comedy, adds large helpings of horror and sci-fi, and wraps the entire thing up in mystery. For the most part, this mixture works.

Its confined setting and story ramps up the claustrophobia and makes for an intriguing take on its subject matter that somehow suits this mish-mash of vibes. It unfolds in a solid way, letting the pacing ebb and flow, although it does leave many of its questions unanswered, which is largely a positive.

Unfortunately some twists feel like a stretch, keeping the film from being great instead of just good. However the biggest let-down is the whole Cloverfield connection. It’s unnecessary and potentially deliberately misleading – the fact the film started life as an unrelated script called The Cellar makes the whole Cloverfield thing a touch disingenuous.

But this compact little shocker is certainly fascinating and worth checking out, monster movie connections or no.

Read More

The Big Short

(M) ★★★★

Director: Adam McKay.

Cast: Christian Bale, Steve Carell, Ryan Gosling, John Magaro, Finn Wittrock, Hamish Linklater, Rafe Spall, Jeremy Strong, Brad Pitt.

"Why is your hair so weird?"
"Why is your hair so weird?"

THE Global Financial Crisis was a mess – a catastrophic economic meltdown that left millions homeless and jobless across the US and rippled across the world sending entire nations to the wall.

Fittingly, the movie about how that all came to pass is also a mess, albeit a vivid, fast-paced and enjoyable one.

The Big Short is based on Michael Lewis’ novel detailing some of the people who profited from the US housing market bubble bursting (and triggering the GFC) by basically betting that such a thing would happen.

These were the clever cookies who could see the market was built on bad mortgages and fraudulent foundations and destined to collapse, despite everyone in Wall Street working on the assumption the market was too big to fail.

On paper, the story has limited appeal, as most people’s eyes tend to glaze over when they hear terms such as “subprime loans”, “credit default swaps”, and “collateralised debt obligations” – terms The Big Short is teeming with.

But director/co-writer McKay is all too aware of this and makes every effort to jazz up the subject matter wherever possible. Hence we have Margot Robbie in a bathtub drinking champagne as she explains subprime loans to camera, or Selena Gomez at a blackjack table demonstrating how synthetic CDOs work.

McKay throws everything at the screen – hence the mess analogy. The fourth wall is broken repeatedly, while stock footage-style montages pop-up in between quotes from Mark Twain and Haruki Murakami, onscreen diagrams, abrupt edits and a blend of documentary and filmic shooting techniques.

It could come off as desperation or style over substance, but Gosling’s narrator willingly tells us early on that this is boring subject matter that needs to be dressed up. The film runs with the gag, lightening the tone and making its dry topic palatable, no doubt leading to its Oscar win for best adapted screenplay. In some ways, The Big Short is like a flashier version of another Lewis adaptation Moneyball, which made another dull matter – baseball statistics – surprisingly interesting.

The script is accentuated by a couple of key players. Bale is great as real-life neurologist-turned-hedge fund manager Michael Burry, making the character’s eccentricities seem normal and resisting the urge to go full Rain Man.

But even better is Carell, who manages to make the unlikeable Mark Baum (based on real life hedge fund manager Steve Eisman) something close to likeable. It’s another well-rounded dramatic turn from Carell to go with his roles in Foxcatcher and Little Miss Sunshine.

There are good laughs to be had, mostly coming from Baum and his team of financial pessimists, and an oddly emotional moment that stands out because it’s the only one of its kind in the film.

This is the part of The Big Short that is somewhat lacking. While Carell’s Baum gives the film a surprising heart towards the end, it’s a bit “too little, too late”. It’s narrow focus also misses the wider ramifications of the GFC, although there is a nice moment when Brad Pitt’s character points out what has to happen to millions of lives for the main players to make their billions of dollars betting against the banks. A bit more heart might have gone a long way in this very cynical tale.

And, as mentioned, the film is a stylistic mess. As such, sometimes it goes too far, other times it doesn’t go far enough. Thankfully, for the most part it works, but it rides a tightrope a lot of the time.

If nothing else, this film now means McKay AKA the director of Anchorman and Step Brothers has an Oscar to his name. No one saw that coming.

Read More