Wall Street II is a Disaster

Went to see it with the wife on this rainy Saturday afternoon. She thought it was nice, which should tell you something. If you like movies about retribution, reconciliation and forgiveness, you'll love it.
I thought it mildly entertaining, but wouldn't go to see it again other than watch it on cable during another rainy day with nothing else to do.
 
was looking forward to bike scenes..movie was predictable..but still okay.

my own babies winterized..

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/312d0GD0S2c?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/312d0GD0S2c?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

anyone else into superbikes?
 
I just saw Wall Street Money Never Sleep last night, and I think it is good in a unique sense.

I really enjoyed how the film echo the events in the financial industry. As well, the characters are well put together, which made them believable. Also, a lot of cliche from the financial world were used, which made it feels like Oliver Stone took the whole ET forum and put it into the movie.

There are some aspects of the film that could be improved on. The mentor relationship between Jack and Lou could have been developed better to create more emotions for the audience. The feud between Jack and Bretton could be made a little more intensely. The dialogue between Gekko and Bretton in the fundraising event could have been an "epic" scene that define Gekko in the 21st century. I also have to question the choice of actress for the female lead character, because Carey Mulligan seems just a little bit too old to match with Shia LaBeouf.

Overall, it was a good movie. It's different from the original Wall Street in a sense that it is less "sexy", which is also different from many of the Hollywood movies. However, I am comfortable to say that it would be a classic film and will be shown in the History Channel a lot in the coming years.

PA
 
Quote from peilthetraveler:

Actually thats a good sign to know you are old. :D Once you reach a certain age, you stop liking the current popular music and you get "stuck" in the 70s or 80s or whatever year you grew up listening to music. Chances are your parents didnt like the music you grew up listening to and neither did their parents before them. They all said the same thing that there was zero music talent during that time.

Sorry to break the bad news to you. :p :p
More...

True, but rap and metal? More to do with their psychological problems then music.
 
Did you notice that this guy is in the movie?

attachment.php
 

Attachments

Quote from Maverick74:

Do you honestly think Oliver Stone cares what "you" are interested in seeing? Do you honestly think he cared what conservatives thought of the movie "W"? He makes a movie to tell the story "he" wants to tell. That is why his films have never really been huge commercial successes. As much as I disagree with his politics, I respect him for telling the story "he" wants to tell.

The fact of the matter is, 99% of the public could give two shits about finance anyway and are not interested in seeing a movie that is basically CNBC replayed. There are outstanding documentaries out there on the financial crisis if that is your thing. I highly suggest you watch one of those if you want to see the so called action.

Most people go to movies to see something more, something they can relate to and more importantly something that creates an emotional response. That is what art is for now isn't it? Whether it be music, paintings, live theater or film.
More...

Art can also be realistic portrayal of the real world, rather than sugar-coated committee and focus-group marketing BS. Marketing men never made a great film anyway. Most of the great films are not predictable formulaic drivel for the popcorn drive-in crowd.

Oliver Stone doesn't care what I think but the feeling is mutual, all I care about is whether the film is interesting. This is a trader website not IMDB or amazon.com DVD section, so what traders think of Wall Street and the sequel is the point at hand, not whether Joe Sixpack's wife liked it.

Films that realistically depict a subculture are often long-lived cult classics that are still talked about long after they are made. Rounders, Glengarry Glen Ross, Wall Street, The Hustler etc. 20+ years later we still talk about Wall Street. 20 years later no one will talk about Wall Street 2. And you can bet your bottom dollar Oliver Stone cares about that.
 
Quote from Ghost of Cutten:

Art can also be realistic portrayal of the real world, rather than sugar-coated committee and focus-group marketing BS. Marketing men never made a great film anyway. Most of the great films are not predictable formulaic drivel for the popcorn drive-in crowd.

Oliver Stone doesn't care what I think but the feeling is mutual, all I care about is whether the film is interesting. This is a trader website not IMDB or amazon.com DVD section, so what traders think of Wall Street and the sequel is the point at hand, not whether Joe Sixpack's wife liked it.

Films that realistically depict a subculture are often long-lived cult classics that are still talked about long after they are made. Rounders, Glengarry Glen Ross, Wall Street, The Hustler etc. 20+ years later we still talk about Wall Street. 20 years later no one will talk about Wall Street 2. And you can bet your bottom dollar Oliver Stone cares about that.
More...

Cutten, if you think the original Wall Street was at all any way accurate you obviously never spent a day on the street. The reason the original had such a cult following was because Gekko became a larger then life figure for every wannabe trader in the world. If you had any idea about this business you would know that 90% of the money made in the 80's was not trading stock but trading bonds. Whether it be Merriwether at Solly or the building of the junk bond empire at Drexel with Milken. Only at home traders fantasize about a guy in a corner office selling NASA stock short 3 minutes after the Challenger blew up and making billions. Of course that was fictional but it makes my point completely. The money made in this business is not in flipping stock but the original movie created that idea. This is why guys get such a hard on for the original.

Now this sequel was not terribly accurate either but at least it fit the times. The fact is Cutten, there is nothing this movie could have done to please anybody which is why sequels in general are a very bad idea. Stone should have made the movie separately and called it something else rather then bring in all the cameos and pay homage to the original. I have seen probably every movie hollywood has put out that has anything remotely to do with the industry and the fact of the matter is, none of them deliver. The reason primarily is because left wing hollywood is just not terribly interested in making a movie about trading. If they do, it only serves as a backdrop for some other storyline.

Even the film Rogue Trader that was based on a real person and real events was terribly inaccurate. But it's probably the closest thing you are going to get which is pretty sad being that it went straight to DVD.
 
Watched it on Saturday. I really have to make an effort to remind it. Not that bad but I won't watch it a second time.

Turn off the romance on Wall Street. Women need to be instrumental in these type of movies. There was a time when all that mattered for them was the importance of your bank account, I miss that...LOL. If women look like Carey Mulligan in NYC, I really don't want to live there. They should have chosen an intermediate between beauty and independance like Anne Hathaway or so.

However, there was some nice stuff: Lou's suicide and Shia 's desire of revenge, pretty much every dialog between Gekko and former "friends", Gekko's comeback, Gekko talking about Rudy... Just Gekko in fact.
 
Quote from Maverick74:

Cutten, if you think the original Wall Street was at all any way accurate you obviously never spent a day on the street. The reason the original had such a cult following was because Gekko became a larger then life figure for every wannabe trader in the world. If you had any idea about this business you would know that 90% of the money made in the 80's was not trading stock but trading bonds. Whether it be Merriwether at Solly or the building of the junk bond empire at Drexel with Milken. Only at home traders fantasize about a guy in a corner office selling NASA stock short 3 minutes after the Challenger blew up and making billions. Of course that was fictional but it makes my point completely. The money made in this business is not in flipping stock but the original movie created that idea. This is why guys get such a hard on for the original.

Now this sequel was not terribly accurate either but at least it fit the times. The fact is Cutten, there is nothing this movie could have done to please anybody which is why sequels in general are a very bad idea. Stone should have made the movie separately and called it something else rather then bring in all the cameos and pay homage to the original. I have seen probably every movie hollywood has put out that has anything remotely to do with the industry and the fact of the matter is, none of them deliver. The reason primarily is because left wing hollywood is just not terribly interested in making a movie about trading. If they do, it only serves as a backdrop for some other storyline.

Even the film Rogue Trader that was based on a real person and real events was terribly inaccurate. But it's probably the closest thing you are going to get which is pretty sad being that it went straight to DVD.
More...

Gekko was based on Boesky, the guy who was jailed for insider trading on corporate raiding tipoffs, and inspired the "Greed is good" catchphrase. That looks pretty much like basing something on reality to me. Still sure that it wasn't "at all any way accurate"?

All the rest of your post has nothing to do with what I said - I didn't say anything about stocks making the most money in the 80s, I didn't say Wall Street focused on the bond market, I didn't say insider-trading guys like Boesky were the big fish on Wall Street in the 80s. Anyone rereading my post and yours will be able to see that you just pulled that stuff out of your ass.

How about you just accept that not everyone has the same taste in movies as you, and learn to understand that this doesn't necessarily mean they are a clueless or inferior person. And if you are going to toss out insults, at least get your facts right and respond to what the person actually said, rather than making things up out of thin air.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top