Author: LitaPitasMusings

The Big Short Review

Synopsis (Sorry it is super long, this is partially due to explaining more difficult finance terms):  The Big Short is the story of 5 men whose lives intertwine and they all somehow end up on team, “I predicted the Great Recession.”

The movie starts off with Ryan Gosling’s character trader Jared Vennett (who does a lot of the movie’s narrating) explaining what is mortgage backed security is and how it got its start in 1978. But it was not until the mid-2000s that they were widely being used. Then the film focuses to the hedge fund manager Michael Burry (played by Christian Bale) who gives us an introduction into his life.  He says that as a child he did not have the best social skills and that things essentially became worse for him when during a football game, his glass eye fell out.  And perhaps, it is that solitude which helped him be more contemplative and cerebral later in life. After all, like Cassandra predicted the Fall of Troy, he was able to predict the bust of mortgage backed securities. He noticed that for years they were in decline. When he went to bankers asking for credit default swaps on their mortgage backed assets (credit default swaps by the way are basically insurance against a bond, and if the bond does poorly then the owner of the credit default swap has to get paid) they all thought that he was crazy and readily agreed.

Varrett learns of Burry and is convinced that he is onto something. He wants to bet against the mortgage backed securities via credit default swaps as well. Somehow how accidentally calls the often prone- to- gaffe- Baum (hilariously played by Steve Carrell). He is a man who is loud and ooh so awkward. He enters a support group session really late,  interrupts a man who is talking about his personal tragedy, starts talking about his own issue, and leaves the session midway talking loudly on a call he took. It is soon learned through conversations with his wife (played very calmly and compassionately by Marisa Tomei) that his brother jumped off of a building.  This has made him more cautious about his actions, his career, and path in life. Perhaps because of this emotional impetus he and Varrett decide to team up to invest in credit default swaps. Along the way he Varrett discovers that another impending doom to the economy is CDO’s (packed up bad loans) that are given good credit ratings by agencies when they are really bad.  So when investors buy/invest in CDO’s they are actually investing in something that has a good reputation, but is really bad. Baum attends a forum in Vegas where he learns that there is a man out there who believes so much against the mortgage backed securities and CDO’s, and credit default swaps that bet against them, that he created a tool that deals with investing in packed credit default swaps (known as a synthetic cdo). Baum feels that the whole economy will crash eventually thanks to this…

Young investors Charlie Gellar and Jamie Shipley who have followed some of Varrett’s published writings, and wish to take part on Credit default swaps against mortgage backed securities. But they lack the financial assets to be allowed to have credit default swaps by the organization that regulates credit default swaps. So, they ask help from their former neighbor Ben Rickert (played by Brad Pitt) who helps them out by taking them to a forum in Vegas, where they are able to successfully get credit default swaps. It should be noted that Ben Rickert is rather jaded by the whole banking industry. Ben currently lives in Singapore, but when he did live in Colorado next to Charlie and Jamie he was so jaded with the banking industry and society as a whole that he lives off his own land/garden fertilized by his own.. Urine!

I won’t totally spoil the ending for you but what can be said about all these characters is that they make huge profits for themselves and a few others, but all are disillusioned when they see how when the economy tanked, so many people’s lives were destroyed. Two of them even try to go to newspaper writers to warn the public about the possible collapse. Sadly, this did not happen. Like Cassandra’s pleadings, and beggings as she foretold the doom of troy in the Iliad that go unbelieved, so is the similar fate of these men on Wall street. Tragic.

What the Big Short Does Well

The Big Short does well on giving a fast paced account of a group of key players who knew about the economic meltdown of 2008. The pace of Wall Street is often fast-paced and frenetic (have you ever seen images/video of Wall Street when watching the news?). But couple that with the zany, eccentric personalities who find out about the different facets of bad economic practices on-the-go, which are all really bad puzzle pieces of a bad reality, and you have a chaotic but exhilarating movie!

Narration as the Glue that Holds Emotions Together

The different narration qualities enhance the effect of the movie. Narrators offer an omniscient point of view that helps the audience understand what is going on; and in a movie filled with huge financial terms, quick cut editing, and short shots it helps at times to have a voice that sets the background context and the future. But in this movie, it is does more the narration does more than explain the past and future. . When we the audience see the shambles of the American economy, we are watching in disarray. Not only do we see shambles, but our emotions of shock, anger, and disbelief are scattered. The narrative quality of both Ryan Gosling’s and Christian Bale’s character help make our emotions more cohesive. They help give us words to resonate with, when we are numb at what we are seeing.

Screwball Documentary

The film also does a great job of using images from the real meltdown reality/history- which give a very veracious, semi- documentary like feel to this movie. You definitely feel that what you are seeing is tight to history and real lives. That coupled with the quirky characters portrayed give the movie a screwball documentary effect.  A screwmentary anyone? Ok, bad joke..

Masculinity and Emotional Introspection

I wonder what the film says about masculinity and emotional introspection. I say this because with the exception of Vernett’s smug stares and slightly-know it all manner of speaking (not to mention his nice thread), most of the leading male characters all have quirks to them. Burry is self-admittedly not the best at socializing with humans, the two young’un’s Charlie and Jamie is green and still talk about their mothers and garage bands , Ben Rickert eats veggies fertilized by his own pee, and Baum.. Well where does one start with him? He was uptight and crazily detail oriented as a kid ( as scene by a flashback with the Rabbi talking to his mom about certain Godly questions), and blurts more than he talks! Yet Baum cared so much about his brother, and worries about the American people. The young’un’s go to the newspapers to ward off others. I cannot help but wonder if they were portrayed  or really were more macho men.. If these same concerns and actions would take place.

Greek Tragedy and Ancient Worlds

The film definitely has Greek tragedy elements to it. Instead of one priestess Cassandra  who knew the truth while nobody listened, we had 5 men who took her place. Ryan Gosling’s and Christian Bale’s narrative qualities both served as sort of blind bards narrating the contexts before and after the stories depicted. It’s not a Greek tragedy in the most conventional sense, but instead of the Fall of Troy it was the fall of The American Middle Class. It’s funny, just before I watched this movie I saw Michael Moore’s Capitalism: A Love Story twice. In it the film starts with a reenacted documentary of Ancient Rome while a narrator discusses the flaws and problems with Ancient Rome that lead to its downfall. But as the narration continues the scenes go back and forth between ancient Rome and modern America at the time of and before the great recession- which many say is the beginning of the fall of the American Middle Class. Hmm.. all these ironies..

The one area the film could have been a bit better

I am sure that people are going to hate me for this, but the area of the film which could have been better is that of explaining the financial terms better. NOW, the film does attempt to this and humorously at that. It cuts during the story to bring up outside guest stars to explain different the complex murky terms of CDO’s, Credit Default Swaps, etc. Early on they have Margot Robbie in a tub drinking champagne explain one concept, then they have Anthony Bourdain, and then finally a professor and Selena Gomez.

But even I got confused as to what was what in the move- and I took an economic sociology class! I admit that before I wrote this review, I had some brushing up to do.

I admit that though I am slightly criticizing the movie, I don’t know of a better way for filmmakers to explain such complex financial systems. And this movie, did make a great effort. I would just give the film a B in terms of clarification efforts.

But as a whole this film is better than that and gets an A-. Go see it.

4.25 out of 5 stars

We as a society often discuss the lingering effects of The Economic Downtown (a friend’s mother started calling it Ted) or the Global Recession of 2008. More specifically: That the middle class is now disappearing because of it; that regulation is now needed otherwise 2008 will be a repeat, that the housing industry is back, and yet that the recession is over but is the economy is not well. But do you know how it happened? Perhaps you have had a class where there was a discussion of mortgage backed-securities, ratings agencies, bank bailouts, but you yourself are still a bit fuzzy on what all these terms mean?

Well, truth be told, I took a class on an economic sociology class entitled “Economic Crisis” focusing a bit on the housing market, and on the 2008 recession. And as someone who is at times fascinated by economics and particularly the economics behind the Great Recession, I always seem to be watching something on it. For instance, I saw Capitalism, a Love Story when it came out in theaters, then on DVD again, and then I saw Inside Job, Queen of Versailles, and the Madoff Mini Series etc.

Well for those of us who would like a low-down on the economics behind the Great Meltdown, then this is the movie for you!!! This movie brings about famous guests (Spoiler: Selena Gomez and Margot Robbie) to explain economics of the mortgage crisis. But, it is a comedy and showcases different types of comedic acting and characters who not only understand economics but have interesting and at times head-shaking quirks. The narration and vibrant settings make this film even more appealing. But the most unique aspect of this film is that unlike the other films on the same subject matter- this one showcases the main characters as people who foreshadowed the recession and tried to warn others. How they figured this out and went about this, needs to be seen. Go see it.

(Spoiler Alert, Although Not Everything is Explained in the Exact Order of the movie) Joy is a movie about a woman who’s family is on who nourished her, and yet at times destroyed her. Joy is one of two daughters of Rudy Mangano (played by the Great Robert DeNiro), and Terry (played by Virginia Madsen). Although Joy’s mother is in the picture, it is her grandmother who is truly the Matriarch of the family. Joy’s parents bicker and her mother has succumbed to a life of constantly watching daytime soap operas, and never getting out of bed. Joy is seen as an imaginative child who comes up with ideas about different gadgets and different worlds. Her parents eventually divorce, which needless to say was not easy for Joy.
Yet, needless to say Joy is able to thrive under her pressure cooker- of- a- family conditions. She goes on to be a valedictorian and even gets accepted Joy later falls for a man who is a charming musician, but not the most responsible type. They get married and have two children together. Eventually, however they divorce-but Tony just lives in the basement. We see Joy as she finds herself as an airline ticket attendant supporting her family and sometimes helping her father do his accounting and taxes for his company. And so happens that on her father’s new girlfriend’s boat that Joy’s ex Tony spill wine on- and which Joy has to mop up. And in dealing with the shards of glass through mop string—that Joy’s Miracle Mop idea is born. As far as what happens next, well you need to see the movie. Although I will say that it involves some serious rivalry all the way to the end, death of a matriarch, a father who-brings you up and down, a best friend who trips us up on the notion that blood-is-thicker than water, a husband who is a better friend confidant, business cheatings, and a hell of handsome QVC executive-turned-friend known as Neil Walker and brilliantly played by Bradley Cooper. Now that synopsis has ended, let the review begin!
Jennifer Lawrence does an amazing job acting, from the way she tells Neil Walker that she wants to change one thing in her outfit, when she changes the entire look by wearing a simple blouse and pair of pants. Or when her mother floods the floor of her bedroom and Joy works to fix the plumbing issues. The way she holds the tools on the floor it is both natural, yet fierce, and very real. Her simple gesture of putting the flowers on top of a grave, the look of her eye as she cuts her hair.. are all so powerful! It is a joy to see her act- even in the most gut wrenching scenes. But apparently I am in the minority on this sentiment. I was like, “Ouch!”
A woman in the Ann Arbor area I was talking to was telling me that she liked the other David O. Russell, Jennifer Lawrence, and Bradley Cooper combinations. But that she did not like this one. She said that it was completely Joyless.
Then again in a very, very faint way, I can kind of see why this woman feels this way.
I am a person who loves biopics. I think I fell in love with them in the mid-2000s with movies like Ray and Walk the Line. Both these movies, especially Ray had an amazing way of making the most humorous and heart wrenching scenes of the movie entertaining. It has been a while since I have seen both of those films, but I remember watching them over and over on DVD because they were just captivating yet easy to follow. Joy, has a great story line- about a woman who had very palpable yet overwhelming struggles who lived at times a mundane life, but thanks to her genius twist on a mundane product- the mop- she changes her life trajectory. But, although Joy Mangano’s life story is fascinating and makes you do a double take, next time you spot her on QVC—the movie does not have the fully cohesive feel-good-ness that movies likes Ray and Walk the Line did.
I cannot quite but my finger on it. Perhaps, it is because the movie puts a little bit too much attention on Jennifer Lawrence, and not as much on the characters- thus making it a little less cohesive.
Not that the other characters did not have anything to say; they had plenty. First there was the narrator Grandmother, then the TV bound mother, and who can forget Robert DeNiro’s character’s quips?? I love how he said that his ex-wife was someone who we did not hear or see, or smell but was killing us all.
I also loved when Jennifer had lost a lot of blood on the boat, and then later felt sick because of it- DeNiro mentions the idea of drugging her and laying her down for a nap. And goes on to say, “ Can we drug her with some cough syrup? It’s completely natural.. “ In other words, the other characters had great lines—but their performances seemed to be jutting out at weird angles and not in harmony with Jennifer Lawrence’s performance. The way this movie was written, perhaps gave Jennifer a little too much weight. But it’s not entirely clear if that is the full reason as to why this biopic didn’t have that classic movie- I could see over-and-over feel that Ray and Walk the Line had.
I will say what my beef what the movie is- I did not like a few of the story changes they made, compared to Joy’s real life. First of all, Joy had three children and not two children as portrayed in the movie. Joy apparently had no duplicitous half-sister that was portrayed in the movie. And probably most unforgivable to me was that, they showed Joy struggling to make it WITHOUT A COLLEGE DEGREE. In the movie she said something to the effect of, she was valedictorian, got into a good school, but stayed to help out her parents after their divorce. The truth of the matter is that she DID go to college, and did not forgo her own plans because of her parents’ divorce. She actually graduated her college and later tried her hand at wait-ressing ( not shown in the movie), being an airline ticket attendant/agent, and other jobs. I wish this was shown because it inspires many people ( especially people graduating from college) that even if you are struggling to find your place, eventually you too can find it- as long as you hold onto your dreams, your passions, and know yourself. Many people need to see this. Alas..
That said, it is still a good movie. A movie about rags-to-riches, and holding onto dreams- no matter what life throws at you. And if you are looking for something magical.. well, that is offered at the end. The poster for this movie showing a woman wearing sunglasses, and a leather jacket with the snow falling on her face, showcases that magical end of this movie. Go see it.

4 out of 5 stars

Many people on U of M campus might wonder, “Why the hell should I see the movie Joy?” Let us not forget that this is a school where some might say the activist student life was born (although some might give this title to Berkley, but let us not forget about the teach-ins regarding Vietnam); and those in the more activist liberal mindset who live in the halls of RC or protest around The Diag might see the channel QVC, a channel devoted for shopping, and a woman who basically lives there and sells a product symptomatic of our bourgeoisie capitalistic society- a mop- something they would never see!
Even those who don’t find these elements annoyingly capitalistic might think who cares about a mop? Others might think, what the hell is a miracle mop? QVC? My mom watches that channel! A lot of this is so foreign to our world on campus. So, I was thinking, how can you possibly right a review/preview which will appeal to others?
Don’t get wrong, I wanted to see this movie! I want to see it because it deals with a woman dealing with a lot, including the weight of family problems, which at times hinder her dreams. Plus, I wanted to see Jennifer Lawrence a bit more. I haven’t seen Silver Linings Playbook fully, so I am not a Jennifer Lawrence groupie yet. But, I hear that she is a dedicated actress – so why not see her work? But most importantly for me, this is ultimately a rags to riches story- and you cannot go wrong with that!
But, I can assure you after watching this film- that this story has a lot to do with college students. So, David O Russell slightly changed the story of this movie. He made it seem that Joy does not go to college, because life got in her way. When in reality Joy, did go to college. But with 3 young children, family troubles, and crappy jobs, she struggled post- college. And the film shows this. It shows her as a airline ticket attendant. In real life, Joy was even a waitress post college.
The struggle post college. Being underemployed; The struggle with our families. Dealing with perhaps, struggles in the houses we came from. We might get lost. All of this is something that we sooner or later might deal with. But we have to remember to not lose our way. Joy clearly does not.
For those reluctant to see this movie on U of M campus, keeping this mind might be the most appealing motivation.

(Spoiler Alert)-In the Peanuts movie, the entire Peanuts Gang is back to showcase how the poor-fated Charlie Brown is as we have always known him- adorably tentative and missing the mark: The omnipresent Schimel and shemozzle. Thus making him the butt of pokes and insults from the always meanie Lucy, at times his sister Sally, or the whole class when they yell in disbelief -unison, “Charlie Brown!” He is at times buoyed by his sometimes mischievous dog Snoopy, who at times is more human-like than canine, and is thus more able than his master! Charlie Brown’s mishaps and shortcomings in this movie focus on elusive object of his affection throughout the comics: The red-headed girl!
In this movie she happens to move across the street from Charlie Brown. He attempts to ring the doorbell, with Snoopy’s support, but cops out. As the movie rolls on, he goes to the dance, hoping to successfully show off his dance moves. So he practices endlessly (with Snoopy teaching him the ropes of course) to perfect his strut! Finally, the night of the dance comes and Charlie Brown dances like a champ! But he accidentally slips and sets off the sprinkler system! Later, it is revealed that he was the top scorer on the standardized test! And he gains a lot of acclaim among his classmates, who for once are eager to be around him! But at the classroom assembly praising him as the highest-scoring student on the standardized tets, Charlie Brown realizes that the copy of the test that scored a 100- is not his, and admits to this. This is not the last good honest action taken by Charlie Brown- and coincidently not the last deed to go unnoticed by the Red-headed girl. Who, at the end… well just say, likes all of these of things in Mr. Brown?

I thought that all of the stories in the movie were connected and cohesive. I feel like Peanuts lovers will come and whack me for saying this, but as much as I love the Peanuts specials and TV episodes growing up- at times I thought that some of the storylines were a bit random. Sometimes it seemed like that Peppermint Patty and Marcie would do their own thing, and Lucy would do her thing with Schroeder. But, I don’t know if in the TV series- they ended each show with say 3 subplots and one main plot. Which is something the specials did manage to do well over the years, and this one does really well!

One other thing I think that this movie seems to do better is the parallel fantasy in the story about Snoopy and him being the Flying Ace and saving Fifi. I liked when how Lucy or the other characters would describe chapter 3 or chapter 4 about the next section of Snoopy’s adventure. This may seem like a small gesture- but thanks to this- I am realizing (and I am sure that people will think I am super dumb for admitting this) that Snoopy’s Flying Ace was his alter ego. All these years I thought that this wasn’t fantasy- but that he actually did that! In the TV series especially, he would do every day things with Charlie Brown and then go on to be the Flying Ace—so I never realized that it was a fantasy.
I also felt that in this movie, Snoopy had a much more supportive relationship with Charlie Brown. Don’t get me wrong, he is still sneaky with Charlie Brown- like when he accompanies Charlie Brown to the dance, and eats all of the cupcakes while carrying them! But, earlier in the movie he accompanies Charlie Brown to the Little Red-Headed girl’s door to give Charlie Brown some chutzpah, when Charlie Brown is filled with the utmost eagerness to learn how to dance Snoopy shows him all the dance steps, and perhaps my most favorite of all- when the Charlie Brown’s paper is torn into shreds by that stupid toy plane red baron and he is rightfully devastated – Snoopy lovingly and tenderly touches Charlie Brown’s shoulder. That scene just gets me. And truthfully, I don’t know if I saw Snoopy serving as Charlie Brown’s rock and guiding light in the TV series, comics, or even the TV movie specials.
Overall the movie stayed true to its roots in the way the characters looked, their characteristics and their one liners. Schroeder is the musical one, and he reigns in the Peanuts movie by playing the classic 20th Century Fox soundtrack. Peppermint Patty says her iconic line, “You touched my hand Chuck, you sly dog,” when she accidentally brushes hands with Charlie Brown. Because the main things stayed the same I felt that Charles Schulz lived on. At first I was nervous when I heard that Charles Schulz’s son and grandson were at the helms of this project. I knew that they would do their best to preserve their iconic relative’s legacy- but would they be able to preserve the Peanuts that we have come to love and know? My answer to do this is a resounding, “Yes!”

But in a few ways the film does remind us that we are in the 21st century. In the scene when Charlie Brown realizes that the little Red-head girl is moving, he happens to be taking out his recycling. Recycling? Yup! I don’t remember this in the specials from the 60’s! The kids also have to take standardized tests and are annoyed by them! This is something that 21st century children have to deal with—so another reminder that we aren’t in the 60s anymore! But the biggest way that this movie shows us that we are indeed in the 21st century is: CGI! This movie was able to successfully carry itself in the CGI format; me personally, I like 2-d animation any day over CGI, so I personally would have preferred the 2-d classic animation style. But, Peanuts joined the 21st century thanks to CGI- and since I care about the longevity of Peanuts for future generations- I am glad that followed this route.

Grade: 5 out of 5 stars

Oh one more than thing. I saw this movie in both 3-d and regular CGI. Yeah, I am a Peanuts nerd spending $20 on tickets for the same movie. This movie does do a good job on the 3-d version as well. In my opinion (and I am not a 3-d fanatic), I think you don’t need to see the 3-d version. Both versions aesthetically do a good job and both honor the story line well. The one way 3-d does have an edge over regular CGI is when the Snoopy Flying Ace plane scenes happen. Those scenes in 3-d are epic. I am just sayin’.

Do you have a fond remembrance of flipping through Sunday’s comics, and seeing the Peanuts comics? Do you remember trying to duplicate Snoopy’s iconic face during doodles? Well, I do. And that is the tip of the iceberg when it comes to my lifelong obsession with Snoopy. Whether it was dragging around my stuffed Belle (Snoopy’s sister) everywhere as a 3 year-old, to spending 25 Euros on a Snoopy in a store window in Rome while studying abroad, I have always been obsessed with this dog. Needless, to say in 2013 when I heard that the Peanuts movie was going to come out in 2015- I was counting down the days. If you are like me, a member of Snoopy Addicts Anonymous or even just remotely curious as to how they got Peanuts- a 50 year classic into CGI, then please check out the Peanuts movie ( I gotta be honest, I was a little nervous about this new look). After seeing it twice on the big screen (once in 3-d), I have to tell you that you will not be disappointed.