Director: Adam McKay
Entertainment grade: B+
History grade: A–
The global economy went into recession from 2007-2009. One contributor to this was the subprime mortgage crisis in the United States.
Glamour: The Big Short begins in the 1970s with the invention of mortgage securities. In case you’re thinking of falling asleep or walking out, within three minutes there’s the line “The banker went from the country club to the strip club,” accompanied by footage of nearly naked ladies showing you their boobs and bums. It’s quite an annoying way to start, and may give the impression that the film will follow the lead of, say, The Wolf of Wall Street in trying to make the world of finance less tedious by submerging it in tit* and glitter. There’s even a scene where Margot Robbie – who plays Jordan Belfort’s wife in The Wolf of Wall Street – explains the subprime mortgage securities market to camera while reclining in a bubble bath and drinking champagne. Fortunately, the film picks itself up from this point, and ends up being a good deal more thoughtful than this first act might lead you to believe.
Characters: Michael Lewis’s The Big Short, the nonfiction book on which the film is based, was a bestseller when it came out in 2010. Lewis is one of the few people who can write about complicated finance or analytics and make it both comprehensible and gripping – as in his breakthrough book Liar’s Poker and his bestseller Moneyball (which was also adapted into a movie starring Brad Pitt). The Big Short’s screenplay is pretty faithful to Lewis’s book in its sharpness, wit and tone, and focuses on the same characters even though most have been semi-fictionalised and renamed. Michael Burry (Christian Bale) really was a stock market investor at Scion Capital; he wore no shoes and listened to thrash metal in the office. Mark Baum (Steve Carell) is based on hedge fund manager Steve Eisman; the movie keeps his Jewish background and straight talking. Jared Vennett (Ryan Gosling) is based on Deutsche Bank bond salesman Greg Lippmann: “He wore his hair slicked back, in the manner of Gordon Gekko,” wrote Lewis, “and the sideburns long, in the fashion of an 1820s Romantic composer or a 1970s p*rn star.” The film’s Vennett sports disappointingly inadequate sideburns but has a penchant for the same braggadocio as Lippmann. Ben Rickert (Brad Pitt) is based on Ben Hockett, and has a similar apocalyptic outlook.
Markets: Quietly and separately, all these men spot that there is a problem with mortgage securities, particularly those resting on the unfettered inflation of the risky subprime market. The film is accurate about the historical trajectory of events. It is true that an astonishing number of people, including the chairman of the Federal Reserve himself, continued to ignore the housing market bubble and even to deny it could happen – though, as the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics Laureate Paul Krugman has pointed out in his review, more people noticed there was a problem than the tiny group who are shown here. Another economist, Jeffrey A Tucker, has argued that The Big Short is “incomplete” without reference to the actions of the Federal Reserve itself. He directs viewers looking for an accurate account of the causes of the crash to Margin Call.
The Big Short has a broader focus than Margin Call and a more explicitly political perspective. Historically speaking, though, its approach is equally valid: its focus is on the Wall Street personalities involved, the mind-blowing levels of denial and coverup among regulators, ratings agencies and banks, and ultimately the consequences. If its economics isn’t a full picture – well, there’s only so much you can say in two hours, and only so many celebrities the film-makers could entice into a bubble bath to explain things.
Veracity: Sometimes, The Big Short’s action stops and someone comments on the veracity of a scene. “Okay, this part isn’t totally accurate,” junior amateur investor Jamie Shipley admits as he and his colleague Charlie Geller (based on real investors Jamie Mai and Charlie Ledley) stumble across a document revealing the possible extent of the crisis. “We didn’t find the prospectus in a bank that rejected us. A friend told Charlie about it.” Historians rejoice! Divergence from the facts is acknowledged. Imagine if all films did this, though. Braveheart would be 12 hours long.
Morality: Everybody thinks the film’s protagonists have gone bananas, but in 2007 the mortgage market begins to wobble just like they said it would. Things get really bad, though, with the collapse of the bank Bear Stearns in 2008. Bear Stearns, indeed. Did no one notice that its name was practically a synonym for Uncovered Arses? Yet The Big Short does not gloat as the banks topple. Instead, it gets angry. Each of its ensemble cast members – with the exception of the reptilian Vennett – is gutted by being proved right. Though they may all be able to cry themselves to sleep on a gigantic pile of money, the terrific performances (especially from Carell and Bale) make this genuinely striking. “I have a feeling that in a few years people will be blaming immigrants and poor people,” sighs Baum. It’s easy to be prophetic when you’re making a film a few years after the events. Still, the scene in which Baum’s colleagues are on the steps of St Patrick’s Cathedral in New York, watching people go by and wondering sadly how many of them are going to lose their livelihoods, is authentic.
Verdict: Fast, funny and righteously furious, The Big Short is more gripping and less desperate to make jerks in suits seem cool than most business movies. It’s also a solid historical explanation of the subprime crisis.
I am a seasoned expert in finance and economics, having delved deep into the intricacies of global markets and financial crises. My expertise extends to the very topics discussed in the article about "The Big Short." I have a comprehensive understanding of the subprime mortgage crisis, the characters involved, and the broader economic implications explored in the film.
Firstly, let's address the director, Adam McKay. McKay's choice to adapt Michael Lewis's nonfiction book, "The Big Short," into a film demonstrates a keen understanding of complex financial concepts. McKay successfully captures the essence of the events leading up to the 2007-2009 global recession, showcasing a nuanced approach to storytelling within the finance domain.
The article highlights the characters in the movie and their real-life counterparts. Michael Lewis, the author of the source material, is renowned for his ability to make intricate financial topics accessible and engaging. The characters such as Michael Burry, Mark Baum, Jared Vennett, and Ben Rickert are portrayed with a level of authenticity that aligns with their real-world counterparts. This authenticity is crucial in conveying the gravity of their roles in identifying and capitalizing on the flaws in the mortgage securities market.
The mention of mortgage securities and the unfettered inflation of the risky subprime market delves into the core issue that triggered the recession. The film accurately portrays the historical trajectory of events, shedding light on the alarming ignorance and denial within regulatory bodies, banks, and even the Federal Reserve, as noted by economists like Paul Krugman.
The article rightly acknowledges the broader focus of "The Big Short" compared to other financial films like "Margin Call." It emphasizes the film's political perspective, focusing on Wall Street personalities, regulatory failures, and the ensuing consequences. The film's two-hour duration limits its capacity to provide a complete economic picture, but its focus on key aspects makes it a valid and compelling historical narrative.
Furthermore, the article addresses the veracity of certain scenes in the film, emphasizing the filmmakers' commitment to acknowledging deviations from the actual events. This level of transparency adds credibility to the narrative, ensuring that viewers understand the blend of fact and dramatization.
In terms of morality, the article notes the film's decision not to gloat over the collapse of banks but rather to express anger at the systemic failures. This moral stance adds depth to the characters and elevates the film beyond a mere portrayal of financial events, making it a genuinely striking and thought-provoking piece.
In conclusion, "The Big Short" is lauded for its fast-paced, humorous, and furious depiction of the financial crisis, offering a gripping narrative while providing a solid historical explanation of the subprime crisis. As an enthusiast with an in-depth understanding of these topics, I find the article's assessment to be in line with the film's merits and the historical context it seeks to portray.
