DIRECTED BY OLIVER STONE
STARRING: SHIA LABEOUF, MICHAEL DOUGLAS, CAREY MULLIGAN, JOSH BROLIN, ELI WALLACH, SUSAN SARANDON AND FRANK LANGELLA
‘Wall Street 2’ or rather ‘Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps
’ makes sense from the first scene and sticks to its point from there on – except that it really doesn’t have much to say. I mean, I look at Gordon Gekko, I see Hannibal Lecter, like turning an edge against another, like a common enemy and hence a friend, but it’s just not going to be as simple as that. Things are interweaved, it’s easier thus to navigate between character-interactions, Winnie (Carey Mulligan) shares a common knot. Of course, Jacob Moore (Shia Labeouf) does too and so does Bretton James. I guess I don’t even have to mention Mr. Gekko in this list.
What I mean to say is that it’s much easier on the writer’s part to construct a scenario, but where it stands on shaky grounds is based on the fact there’s actually no ground at all. The factor of ‘greed’ taking a Buddhist turn appears to be at the forefront, the girl helps hold things up tight in the middle and stop people from falling apart. There’s not much of a pushing force to alienate the characters either way, Bretton James is easily way less fierce than Gekko from ‘Wall Street
’ the original. True, Josh Brolin underperforms too, he should probably get back to the storyboard on ‘W
’ instead of trying to motorcycle his way ahead – he’s hardly the shark he’s supposed to be. I think I’m mistaken, though, I think I’ve completely got the wrong end of the thread. Maybe I’m antagonizing the wrong person that my choice leaves me hardly shaken, despite one of my character-liaisons Louis Zebel (Frank Langella) bows out in front of a subway train.
Maybe it’s all about the market, as less as we see about it. This is a film where we hear more than we see; more than we feel. I can swear that I found more impact in a film like ‘the Girlfriend Experience
’ than this one, despite all the hype and humdrums – at least in terms of being hit by the recession. I see people walking around with their foreheads wrinkled, palms on their faces, sobriety hovering around, but I really don’t get to ‘be’ there. I guess you’d get that right if you got your hands on this one.
I really do not want to call this film unconvincing, though. I’m torn between staying loyal to character consistencies and further development, radical changes, what not. It’s like liking ‘Spiderman 3
’ because of a Stan Lee craze – entirely misdirected as it sounds. Am I to marvel at Mr. Gekko’s line-dropping, be it the ‘if someone took this place right now, there’d be no one left to rule the world’ or the ‘three words: Buy my book’, which certainly appears to be more effective, or should I seriously take the point of this film into consideration and hence call it a pot-boiler without much of places to stick it on? I’ve got no complaints regarding Shia Labeouf (this guy needs something bigger is all I can say) or Carey Mulligan, who ends up more or less the doll-face despite discontent with being the same, particularly because of this fact that when I see them, I see two people as one and not as two people trying to work something out. It’s not Bud Fox laying around with a Daryl Hannah prototype, this tends to make sense. And honestly, it could have been loads better if they didn’t inhabit a room with such a view – that’s like a blooper, a camera where it’s not supposed to be. A literal boom-mike fiasco.
I do not have a verdict on this one. I guess I watched it through, I liked the things I ought to like, there’s still a bit of faith on line-dropping and youthful extravagance, and I walked on the other parts. Hey, at least I didn’t sleep on them! (this to you, Mr. Eli Wallach)