Wall Street 2

Speculator

Wall Street 2 :Money Never Sleeps
Slightly off topic, but it has some relevance to this forum: Mod please move if not suitable.

Wall Street has to be one of my favourite movies of all time, there is a lot of hype about Wall Street 2 at the moment.

Looking forward to seeing it tomorrow, anybody out there with good or bad reviews?

RoadKillTs

Just watched the original last night. Some movie!

Have only heard bad reviews about the new one but going to go see it soon anyways.

Ever wonder why fund managers can't beat the S&P 500? 'Cause they're sheep, and sheep get slaughtered.

Trader1991

yeah I saw it last wednesday and tbh it was a bit of a let down. Its an ok movie i suppose but I was expecting better.

Jesus Wept

Heard that it is awful.

dunkamania

Its really really terrible

at one point there is usual suspects kaiser soze montage, which is just silly, cos it just shows you what happened 5 minutes previous. so was shia a prop trader, an investment banker, ventre capitalist...... also bonus points for anyone that saw gekko was running a 130/30 fund at the end

pirelli

Speculator wrote: »

Wall Street 2 :Money Never Sleeps
Slightly off topic, but it has some relevance to this forum: Mod please move if not suitable.

Wall Street has to be one of my favourite movies of all time, there is a lot of hype about Wall Street 2 at the moment.

Looking forward to seeing it tomorrow, anybody out there with good or bad reviews?

Wall street was my idea!

mono627

Seen it tonight and I really expected better...at least Charlie Sheen played a cameo.

pocketdooz

Saw it last night.

Total crap.

.

Idu

mono627 wrote: »

Seen it tonight and I really expected better...at least Charlie Sheen played a cameo.

Yeah but he cameod as Charlie from Two and a Half Men not Bud Fox.

Awful movie

mono627

Idu wrote: »

Yeah but he cameod as Charlie from Two and a Half Men not Bud Fox.

Awful movie

It's about 20-30 minutes longer than it should have been as well.

displaced dub

id say the reviews of Empire magazine are sh1ting themselves with the dept of reviews above:D:D:D

seven-iron

I thought it was good. I knew it wasnt going to be a great movie but worth a watch.

so was shia a prop trader, an investment banker, ventre capitalist

he worked in a hedge fund in the company

dunkamania

He said he was on the prop desk. Prop desk traders dont raise vc funding for experimental fusion reactors.

Absolutely loved the movie. Loved the camera-work, loved the characters, loved the realism. Couldnt stop smiling from start to finish.

Most of Stones films get slated when they are released especially the best ones - Platoon, original Wall Street, and JFK. Nothing new with this one getting slated too....

dunkamania

Deleted User wrote: »

loved the realism.

Seriously?????

D-Generate

dunkamania wrote: »

He said he was on the prop desk. Prop desk traders dont raise vc funding for experimental fusion reactors.

Prop desk traders would also have the common sense not to sink their entire bonus in to the company that they worked for. Talk about exposure!

He was a composite of positions in Lehmen's who so happened to have traders screen's but seemed to have the position as a banker.
In Goldmans he seemed to be a VC.

Either way it was a mess of a film with a meandering plot.

I mean realism in terms of what happened in the system to create such a mess for the economy.
I believe what stone was trying to portray was what just happened in wall street, a film for the moment. Whether shia lebouef is ruthless enough or wall street enough wasnt really the point for me. Or whether fusion was realistic to save the worlds power or whatever. All of that for me was dramatic license.

You need to remember the audience of this film. Its not made for financial people who can pick apart intricacies of financial dealing. Its a film for the people to understand what the guys in for example goldman sachs did. Betting against the very things they were selling. Scandalous shi* which should have seen them all in prison, forget about inconsequential fines.

A friend of mine who knows nothing about finance or what happened came out that movie and said to me "now i understand what happened". I reckon 95% of the people don't really know what happened to cause the massive recession. But Stone in his own way has helped the average joe get the picture of what the greedy guys at the top did.

Joe Schmo

Deleted User wrote: »

I believe what stone was trying to portray was what just happened in wall street, a film for the moment. Betting against the very things they were selling. Scandalous shi* which should have seen them all in prison, forget about inconsequential fines.

A friend of mine who knows nothing about finance or what happened came out that movie and said to me "now i understand what happened".

The film dealt with the subprime crisis in USA. The crisis' actual genesis was shoddy lending practices through securitisation. 'Too much borrowing' is an indicator of bad practice: not a cause of fiscal meltdown.

Regarding quote above: 'Betting against' the **** they sell is what broker dealers do and have done since the time of 'Liar's Poker' (and before).

The film is populist but simplistic. I did like how it predicted how hedge funds would be as powerful as banks like JPM.

eire2009

Downloded and watched it there this week. Thought it was good except for the ending.