Wall Street 2 - what to expect

Ok, so Tiger Woods has a couple of girlfriends on the side. NO shock, so do most men with his kind of fame and wealth. If he were a rockstar or actor no one would be surprised. But this is a family matter for him, so I won't speak on the subject further. Celebrities and enetertainers deserve some degree of privacy too.

Moving on to other news I have no problem speaking about, Wall Street 2 is getting ready to hit theaters in 2010. Oh the joy. The theme of this movie? Greed is legal.

Yes, Oliver Stone has made the sequel to the very good 80's film. It will again star Michael Douglas as the powerful and successful Gordon Gekko. But this time Gekko is not the massive power broker he was in the first time. No the banks are the ultimate bad guys.

This falls directly in line with the views of extremist Stone. It also happens to be right in line with the ultra-liberal tone that Hollywood has been promoting for years now. But the question is if this will make a good movie?

Since about 2000 or so, Hollywood has increasingly made movies that are more political propodanga with filler than movies the public can enjoy. Not that politics has been something foreign to films. Dr. Strangelove is anti-war, anti-nukes, and against the cold war but it was still entertaining. Lions for Lambs, War Inc., and dozens of other recent films that no one watched in theaters of DVD are anything but entertaining.

From the sounds of what Oliver Stone has been saying, Wall Street 2 is more akin to War Inc. than the original Wall Street. It sounds as if it will be yet another film that pushes Stone's political agenda a the cost of the tickets audiences will pay. Which does not motivate me to see the film, which is a shame since I did enjoy the original.

"Wall Street can be the engine of capitalism" and create opportunity, Stone said to one student. "But they increasingly have not done that because there's more money in speculation."

That seems to sum up the view that the new film will be taking. It's a warped and skewed overly simplistic view of finance, capitalism, and Wall Street but that is fine if that is not the movie's theme. I don't want to go to a movie to debate politics, I do that for a living. I want to see a film to be entertained.

Well here is what I understand is the plot of Wall Street 2. Gekko gets out of prison and is a reformed man. He sees an implosion on the horizon and tries to warn the industry, but is ignored since he is a convict. At the same time he is trying to re-establish his relationship with his daughter. His daughter wants nothing to do with him.

His daughter is engaged to upcoming hedge-fund trader Jacob (Shia LeBouf). Jacob's boss gets killed, possibly by the top boss of the fund (Josh Brolin). Jacob wants revenge.

So Gekko decides to help Jacob in exchange for help with his daughter. Cue the laugh track, or whatever.

I'm bored just writing the synopsis. Considering the views of Stone, and Brolin, I don't get a good feeling about the film. Thinking of Gekko as a powerless good guy doesn't work for me. The fact that the simplistic acting skills of Shia LeBouf are the driving force of this movie (to attract younger moviegoers) is another strike against the film. Oh, Charlie Sheen is reported to have a cameo too.

Still the trailers are not yet out. But some stills are available.



If this were a stock, I'd buy the leap put option.

Oliver Stone wants to tell you his story in Secret History

Are you a fan of Oliver Stone? I used to be, for a while. Like most people I loved several of his films. He made a visual impact that allowed the viewer to get a serious sense of the world he portrayed on film. Then he decided to get preachy, and showcased his own political beliefs. Which is when he lost me and many others.

Stone is probably best known for his film, Platoon. It was a serious and mostly honest view of aspects of fighting in Viet Nam. Many vets I know appreciated the feel of the film, something that Stone knows well as a decorated (Purple Heart and Bronze Star) Viet Nam-era Army soldier.

He also made Wall Street, a huge film that hit big. It showcased the 1980’s drive for success at all costs. It also gave us a hint at his own views of Wall Street. In his visual depiction it was a place of greed and corruption, filled with the morally corrupt. A view that I personally found insulting once I became a stockbroker and learned the reality of what that important tool of the economy is really about.

He has also made Natural Born Killers (a film originally written by Quentin Tarrantino – who disliked the film enough to ask his name be removed from it) and Any Given Sunday – which really gave Jamie Foxx a chance to breakout in Hollywood.

But those are his successful films. Each was a good film with an interesting view of life. It’s what’s kept him working and his name high in Hollywood circles (besides Stone’s political views). It is his flops, or less successful films that has lost him the fanbase that he once commanded.

Oliver Stone is a Liberal. There is no question or shame in that. It’s just that he has emphasized that in his growing body of work. And he has basked in the Hollywood liberal mentality while audiences have generally shunned him.

His film JFK was a slanted and biased depiction that fed the conspiracy theorists in the nation. His film Nixon insulted the memory of a controversial President under the guise as a search for the truth. His film World Trade Center, while honoring the efforts of many on 9/11, was factually incorrect to the point of changing a major real life hero from Black to White. That film did ok, but was no great success. I won’t mention his Comandante – a documentary about Fidel Castro. And with the film W., Stone completely disgraced the Office of the Presidency, the sitting President, and America in my opinion.

At the time I stated

“What I care about is the power and prestige of the American Presidency and thus America. America is the President on an international level, whether we love or hate any particular President. And Oliver Stone is so obsessed with his personal hate that he doesn’t seem to care what damage he does. He seems willing to do anything to place a(nother) blemish on President Bush, even if it means hurting every American and every American President to come.

… Could I be wrong about the film? … sure, and it is mathematically probable that I can fly, piss on the sun and put it out, and/or suddenly have a stroke and thus believe that Code Pink and San Francisco know what they are doing. But back in the real world, Oliver Stone is doing a wretched thing.”

Obviously, Stone is not the only one to have strong views about America.

But I say all this because Oliver Stone will be providing America with what he calls “Oliver Stone's Secret History of America”.

In this televised series America will be provided the truth, according to Stone, about actions behind the scenes in American History. Considering the flawed, biased, political views that Stone provides in his movies it is likely to be about as accurate as my describing the benefits of Socialism. Or perhaps the fun of hammering a nail through your own genitals.

Can Oliver Stone be a great director? When he gets out of the way of his ego and personal political views, sure. But as time moves on, it seems that Stone is more interested in highlighting his own political agenda on the big screen for Moveon.org and Code Pink than caring what an audience might find entertaining.

So I advise avoiding Stone’s “History” because I believe it will be his-story. Rather I suggest reading a good fiction novel if that’s what you want to be entertained by.

Video games, a good buy or good bye America? - 7.3.2007.2

It’s interesting how video games are acknowledged as one of the fastest growing forms of entertainment and yet slapped down as being the leading cause of the downfall of civilization. The AMA wanted to say it causes addiction, various politicians have jumped on bandwagons from time to time to say games are too violent. Meanwhile Hollywood finds it to be a source of quality movie fodder and Wall Street has rewarded shrewd investors that have seen the potential.

It’s like one hand can’t see what the other is doing. I don’t understand how Wall Street analysts can say that companies like Electronic Arts deserve an overweight rating, and then also says

While we believe the current video-game cycle is likely to see accelerating industry growth over the next 24-months, we view the risk-reward for the sector as neutral in the near-term and look instead toward 2008 as the key inflection year for the industry.

I mean, it’s the summer. Of courser the near term is weak. The Christmas holiday season is the big push for virtually all software companies. Yet the outlook matches estimates that interactive gaming will out perform all music sales and will approach movie ticket sales soon.

But for an industry that makes so many, so much money it’s downplayed as something for kids. They ignore any of us who have grown up with video games and play them now in our 40’s. The games are constantly assaulted, but a movie based on the game is fine. The movies target the 21-35 year olds, contain violence on par with a Terminator meets Leatherface scale, and no one blinks an eye.

Where are the protests about Bloodrayne, or Hitman (movie will be out this fall - looks good too), or Resident Evil (the final story, Apocalypse, will ber out towards the end of this summer. Alice kicks butt.). Actually I’m glad there aren’t (well except for Bloodrayne which was pretty bad). But the point is I’m tired of being told, as a grown consumer of video games, that I can’t play XYZ because it is too violent to be made. I’m tired of being told that the government needs to stick their hands into what can and cannot be made. [Like anyone can name one thing the government regulates well] All the while Wall Street and politicians make money while being the monkey on my back.

Maybe it’s just me. But some need to back up, plug in, and blast a few zombies. I’m sure they will feel better. Thanks for listening to me rant. Now I’m off to find a few orcs to crush.