Skip to main content

I have a cow, but I hate bananas.

The Laundromat
(2019)

(SPOILERS) Steven Soderbergh’s flair for cinematic mediocrity continues with this attempt at The Big Short-style topicality, taking aim at the Panama Papers but ending up with a mostly blunt satire, one eager to show how the offshore system negatively impacts the average – and also the not-so-average – person but at the expense of really digging in to how it facilitates the turning of the broader capitalist world (it is, after all based on Jake Bernstein’s Secrecy World: Inside the Panama Papers Investigation of Illicit Money Networks and the Global Elite).

As per Traffic and Contagion, Soderbergh illustrates his big idea via several “human” stories, centremost being a mannered Meryl Streep trying to get to the bottom of why there isn’t any insurance money after her husband James Cromwell drowns and finding the answer in obfuscating offshore shell companies. Or rather, failing to find it there. Streep’s usually at her best when she has something dramatic and meaty to dig into, but her bumbling Miss Marple pensioner is something of a cypher. She over-compensates for this by hamming it up as one of the little people – not really her scene – in the most irritating fashion (and that’s beside her dual role reveal, courtesy of Latino brownface; but hey, everyone’s doing it, just ask the Canadian Prime Minister). Remember back around the time of She-Devil, when it was suggested Meryl couldn’t do comedy? The intervening thirty years will dissolve before your eyes.

To illustrate the truly international nature of this corruption, there are also suspect Chinese and African parties involved. Businessman Nonso Alonzo attempts to dissuade his daughter from telling her mother about his salacious behaviour towards her best friend by giving her a company worth $20m. Only, when she checks up on its assets, there’s only $37 in there: a cautionary story about the perils of bearer shares! Rosalind Chao makes Matthias Schoenaerts’ unlikely Brit (more through his dialogue than accent; he was very good in Far From the Madding Crowd a few years back) regret attempting to pull a fast one on her organ harvester in a rather shrug-worthy “shock” piece. Neither really justifies the time spent – if this were The Big Short, we’d have Margot Robbie explaining bearer shares in two minutes and have done with it – while in contrast, subjects such as the line between tax avoidance and tax evasion, and multiple directorships get relatively short shrift (one aside notes “She was the director of 25,000 companies”).

Where The Laundromat nearly works, though, is in the Carry On Panama antics of an outrageously accented Gary Oldman and Antonio Banderas as law firm partners Jürgen Mossack and Ramón Fonseca respectively, blithely amoral and unwilling to take any responsibility for their actions as they talk us through their studious lack of client due diligence and numerous dubious practices. This is where we sail closest to The Big Short territory, since arguably the most effective way to tut at immoral and unethical behaviour is having those engaged in it revel in their actions (see also The Wolf of Wall Street). There’s an appealingly cartoonish flippancy to these scenes – fifty years ago, Terry-Thomas might have played one of them – but they don’t go far enough. Indeed, the high point might be the opening spiel, with Banderas giving man the secret of fire while he explains the birth of credit.

Scott Z Burns also wrote the very good The Informant! for Soderbergh (and the decidedly more average Contagion and Side Effects), so there’s no reason to think he can’t reproduce a sharply satirical tone, but The Laundromat appears to have got away from him in much the way offshore affairs have escaped serious movie scrutiny over the years – aside from the tried and tested use of a Cayman or Swiss bank account as a means to secrete the third act loot. He and his director haven’t really found the story in the scandal, nor have they netted a sense of outrage.

There’s perhaps a glimmer of it right at the end, when the finger is pointed closer to home (“So where did these ideas come from? Where most ideas come from: The United States of America”). This is easily the picture’s sharpest “tirade”, as Oldman and Banderas set forth the winners in all this: “The United States. The biggest tax haven in the world. Delaware. Nevada. Wyoming. How much due diligence is happening there?” It could have gone further, though, and should have, if it really had a desire to give the subject more than a passing glance; the billions the largest companies avoid in taxes are duly noted, but without commenting on the de rigueur onshore tax incentives and breaks designed to ensure businesses remain or set up shop in that particular country or region. If you’re going to start your film with the barter system, you oughtn’t to short change your audience at the other end.

Meryl delivers a scripted to-camera clean-up appeal at the conclusion, in a straight-faced manner rather belied by our having already heard how the director and writer have Delaware companies (but it’s okay, their Delaware companies were set up for legit reasons). And one can’t help think she has a bit of a cheek portraying herself as “one of us” (as opposed to occupying the same status as the elites and politicians she “courageously” sets her sights on). Hers is the glibness of hollow words. But then, what did you expect from Soderbergh? Passion? Its absence might be why The Laundromat is a bit of a let-down. 


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Popular posts from this blog

You were this amazing occidental samurai.

Ricochet (1991) (SPOILERS) You have to wonder at Denzel Washington’s agent at this point in the actor’s career. He’d recently won his first Oscar for Glory , yet followed it with less-than-glorious heart-transplant ghost comedy Heart Condition (Bob Hoskins’ racist cop receives Washington’s dead lawyer’s ticker; a recipe for hijinks!) Not long after, he dipped his tentative toe in the action arena with this Joel Silver production; Denzel has made his share of action fare since, of course, most of it serviceable if unremarkable, but none of it comes near to delivering the schlocky excesses of Ricochet , a movie at once ingenious and risible in its plot permutations, performances and production profligacy.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Well, something’s broke on your daddy’s spaceship.

Apollo 13 (1995) (SPOILERS) The NASA propaganda movie to end all NASA propaganda movies. Their original conception of the perilous Apollo 13 mission deserves due credit in itself; what better way to bolster waning interest in slightly naff perambulations around a TV studio than to manufacture a crisis event, one emphasising the absurd fragility of the alleged non-terrestrial excursions and the indomitable force that is “science” in achieving them? Apollo 13 the lunar mission was tailor made for Apollo 13 the movie version – make believe the make-believe – and who could have been better to lead this fantasy ride than Guantanamo Hanks at his all-American popularity peak?

I can’t be the worst. What about that hotdog one?

Everything Everywhere All at Once (2022) (SPOILERS) It would have been a merciful release, had the title card “ The End ”, flashing on screen a little before the ninety-minute mark, not been a false dawn. True, I would still have been unable to swab the bloody dildoes fight from my mind, but at least Everything Everywhere All at Once would have been short. Indeed, by the actual end I was put in mind of a line spoken by co-star James Wong in one of his most indelible roles: “ Now this really pisses me off to no end ”. Or to put it another way, Everything Everywhere All at Once rubbed me up the wrong which way quite a lot of most of the time.

We’ve got the best ball and chain in the world. Your ass.

Wedlock (1991) (SPOILERS) The futuristic prison movie seemed possessed of a particular cachet around this time, quite possibly sparked by the grisly possibilities of hi-tech disincentives to escape. On that front, HBO TV movie Wedlock more than delivers its FX money shot. Elsewhere, it’s less sure of itself, rather fumbling when it exchanges prison tropes for fugitives-on-the-run ones.

Drank the red. Good for you.

Morbius (2022) (SPOILERS) Generic isn’t necessarily a slur. Not if, by implication, it’s suggestive of the kind of movie made twenty years ago, when the alternative is the kind of super-woke content Disney currently prioritises. Unfortunately, after a reasonable first hour, Morbius descends so resignedly into such unmoderated formula that you’re left with a too-clear image of Sony’s Spider-Verse when it lacks a larger-than-life performer (Tom Hardy, for example) at the centre of any given vehicle.

So, you’re telling me that NASA is going to kill the President of the United States with an earthquake?

Conspiracy Theory (1997) (SPOILERS) Mel Gibson’s official rehabilitation occurred with the announcement of 2016’s Oscar nominations, when Hacksaw Ridge garnered six nods, including Mel as director. Obviously, many refuse to be persuaded that there’s any legitimate atonement for the things someone says. They probably weren’t even convinced by Mel’s appearance in Daddy’s Home 2 , an act of abject obeisance if ever there was one. In other circles, though, Gibbo, or Mad Mel, is venerated as a saviour unsullied by the depraved Hollywood machine, one of the brave few who would not allow them to take his freedom. Or at least, his values. Of course, that’s frequently based on alleged comments he made, ones it’s highly likely he didn’t. But doesn’t that rather appeal to the premise of his 23-year-old star vehicle Conspiracy Theory , in which “ A good conspiracy theory is an unproveable one ”?

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

He’ll regret it to his dying day, if ever he lives that long.

The Quiet Man (1952) (SPOILERS) The John Wayne & John Ford film for those who don’t like John Wayne & John Ford films? The Quiet Man takes its cues from Ford’s earlier How Green Was My Valley in terms of, well less Anglophile and Hibernophile and Cambrophile nostalgia respectively for past times, climes and heritage, as Wayne’s pugilist returns to his family seat and stirs up a hot bed of emotions, not least with Maureen O’Hara’s red-headed hothead. The result is a very likeable movie, for all its inculcated Oirishness and studied eccentricity.

He doesn’t want to lead you. He just wants you to follow.

Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore (2022) (SPOILERS) The general failing of the prequel concept is a fairly self-evident one; it’s spurred by the desire to cash in, rather than to tell a story. This is why so few prequels, in any form, are worth the viewer/reader/listener’s time, in and of themselves. At best, they tend to be something of a well-rehearsed fait accompli. In the movie medium, even when there is material that withstands closer inspection (the Star Wars prequels; The Hobbit , if you like), the execution ends up botched. With Fantastic Beasts , there was never a whiff of such lofty purpose, and each subsequent sequel to the first prequel has succeeded only in drawing attention to its prosaic function: keeping franchise flag flying, even at half-mast. Hence Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore , belatedly arriving after twice the envisaged gap between instalments and course-correcting none of the problems present in The Crimes of Grindelwald .