3.5 stars out of 5
January is a weird time at the movies. The studios tend to dump garbage that they didn’t release the previous year. Other selections are “prestige films” left over from the holidays, or snuck in at the end of December for Oscar consideration. From that second batch, at my local theater I had the choice of The Big Short or The Revenant, the two Best Picture nominees I hadn’t seen. I’d avoided The Big Short: finances bore me, and it was written and directed by Will Ferrell’s lapdog Adam McKay? Sure, I loved Anchorman and Talladega Nights and Step Brothers, but The Other Guys and Anchorman 2 were lousy, and besides, isn’t the global financial crisis, like, a pretty serious topic for him to tackle?
So maybe The Revenant? I like Leo a lot, but… snow and beards and it’s three hours long? Uggh. OK, OK, I’d give The Big Short a chance.
And… I didn’t really like it. It’s interesting to me that Steve Carell has a prominent role in this movie, because he is my gold standard (established with Dan in Real Life) for rating a film 3 stars out of 5: Not bad, not good, but watchable enough. And for the great majority of The Big Short, I was thinking, “This is a 3-star movie. Totally 3 stars.”
For the film’s big shortcomings, I’ll blame McKay. He acknowledges early on that financial matters are confusing and not of interest for many of us. So to combat that, McKay utilizes comedic techniques that took me right out of the story, and really felt like a cop-out. And it sets up a bad pattern: Much of the movie seems dumbed-down, with characters over-explaining concepts, while at other times there is too much fiduciary mumbo-jumbo for the layperson to follow.
I’m surprised that McKay received a Best Director nomination. There’s no real artistry or subtlety here; minor characters are absurd stereotypes to quickly make a point: ditzy realtor, slimy mortgage lenders, immoral former SEC staffer, greedy guy in a suit who had something to do with Merrill Lynch, etc. McKay’s strength is keeping things light and entertaining, and he generally accomplishes that, though perhaps at the expense of real people and emotions.
Another problem is the source material. It’s nonfiction, and you basically have three groups of unconnected characters who each bet against the housing market. In a work of fiction, the characters would come together at some point, plots intertwining, and that would appeal to our cohesive story-craving brains. Except it doesn’t happen here. On a few occasions, I thought these events would be better served by a documentary (and McKay uses some of those techniques too). But then many fewer people would’ve see it, and there is important information to dispense (more on that in a bit).
The cast is a mixed bag. Christian Bale turns in a strong performance as a socially awkward doctor turned financial guru. Ryan Gosling holds our attention as a slick, confident huckster. Carell, who was so great in Foxcatcher, is just shout-y Carell here. At one point late in the film I thought, “Oh he’s trying to do a Jewish voice” (which he did pull off in Freeheld) and it just made me sad. Brad Pitt is in this movie but I get the feeling he said, “I’m only available for a couple of days and I’m not shaving my beard.” Marisa Tomei gets even less screen time, and why hire Melissa Leo for just one scene? Otherwise there are just some TV people wandering around, Finn Wittrock and Hamish Linklater (maybe they just liked their names?) and one of the guys from New Girl. Oh, and some zany cameos.
I did find the movie’s ending to be satisfying, and to have some genuine resonance. It raised my overall appreciation. So ultimately I’d recommend this film to anyone who didn’t really follow the 2008 economic meltdown, or hasn’t thought about it too much since. Or anyone who doesn’t want to see Leo wandering around in the snow for three hours.
Jack Silbert, curator