Skip to main content

Let's have two Tom Jones.

Greed
(2019)

(SPOILERS) Michael Winterbottom’s relationship with Steve Coogan extends to nearly two decades and has seen them essay biographical subjects Tony Wilson and Paul Raymond amid semi-regular Trips, although their best collaboration probably remains Tristam Shandy adaptation A Cock and Bull Story. Winterbottom’s nothing if not prolific – I count fifteen dramatic features since 2000 – which guarantees that occasionally he hits a bullseye, but more frequently’ his work is merely reliably, diligently “okay”. He’s also a singularly political filmmaker and the problem with Greed, a satirical biography of Sir Philip Green by another name, is that he just has too many targets he wants to throw a light on. With the result that, as with the lion at the climax, the beast ends up devouring him.

Coogan’s fashion mogul Sir Richard McCreadie is preparing for his sixtieth birthday on Mykonos, part of which involves said lion providing entertainment in a specially built amphitheatre. McCreadie’s got pots of money, most of it earned by incredibly unscrupulous – but legal, as the picture is at pains to point out, sometimes quite smartly, sometimes with the sledgehammer of David Mitchell’s biographer expressing outrage through interviewing those who have been on the receiving end – methods. He also has no taste. Hence his teeth, one of the many areas where the picture ends up reflecting its character, not knowing when to rein it in, when less is more in getting the message across.

Winterbottom’s screenplay (yes, he takes full responsibility) not only takes in McCreadie’s use of sweatshops, his very Coogan, very Iannucci-esque tearing apart of those charged with opening new stores and deal making with those he intends to asset strip, but also his profligate domestic sphere including ex-wife (Isla Fisher) and disgruntled son (Asa Butterfield), as well as variously verbally abused assistants.

All of this is more than enough to be getting on with, but Winterbottom somehow contrives to the conclusion that isn’t enough, throwing in an entirely ungainly refugee crisis plotline (there’s an encampment on McCreadie’s – actually public – beach, spoiling his view). This is Winterbottom at his most didactic and narratively clumsy, with the Green-esque antics grinding to a halt while he sermonises. The same is true of the Dinita Gohil plotline, revolving around her mother working in a sweatshop. Which leads to her eventually unleashing the lion that mauls McCreadie; it’s a silly, entirely over the top ending, and an odd piece of wish-fulfilment, since it means Winterbottom’s constructing a world where the soulless rich do eventually reap just rewards. There’s an additional, entirely extraneous – except maybe, torturously, as an attempt to emphasise how ridiculous the “actual” rich lifestyle is – reality TV show being made in the same location, which contrives to waste Sophie Cookson.

There’s certainly a lot of decent material in here, and a lot of laughs. Coogan’s very funny, if perhaps over-indulged in a role that allows him to have too much of his head of improv (he’s much more impressive in the earlier Winterbottom picture Look of Love; here, he’s rather coasting). Shirley Henderson seems to be making a habit of donning old age makeup (Tale of Tales) and is great as McCreadie’s “Aphrodite Irish granny” mother.

Greed occasionally picks up stimulating threads; McCreadie at an inquiry calling out Bono and the big firms for their tax avoidance while he gets harangued (riffing on BHS) is entirely pertinent, and goes back to my original awareness of the picture from a Guardian piece that made it sound as if the film would be considerably more focussed than it is (“We’re not going to have mention of individual brands” in the call-outs at the end of the picture, Sony decreed; the article is probably more illuminating than the movie itself). There’s a deconstruction of McCreadie’s asset-stripping technique that recalls The Big Short, but there’s too little of it. And ironically, the most consistently engrossing part of the film documents the rise of the young McCreadie, where Jamie Blackley, devoid of Coogan’s baggage, is able to make him a character rather than a caricature.

Perhaps if Winterbottom had stuck to the biopic element, focussing wholly on the Green-ish central character, he’d have made something more cogent and coherent. I suspect he was afraid of pulling a Wolf of Wall Street, and giving us Green in all his “glory” as someone you’re rooting for by being entirely wrong about everything. Whatever his reasoning, by being so greedy for socio-political commentary, Greed becomes too scattershot and only sporadically successful.


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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019)
(SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.

You're not only wrong. You're wrong at the top of your voice.

Bad Day at Black Rock (1955)
I’ve seen comments suggesting that John Sturges’ thriller hasn’t aged well, which I find rather mystifying. Sure, some of the characterisations border on the cardboard, but the director imbues the story with a taut, economical backbone. 

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989)
(SPOILERS) There’s Jaws, there’s Star Wars, and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy, to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “mainly boring”.

Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the system when Burton did it (even…

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

To defeat the darkness out there, you must defeat the darkness inside yourself.

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (2010)
Easily the best of the Narnia films, which is maybe damning it with faint praise. 

Michael Apted does a competent job directing (certainly compared to his Bond film - maybe he talked to his second unit this time), Dante Spinotti's cinematography is stunning and the CGI mostly well-integrated with the action. 

Performance-wise, Will Poulter is a stand-out as a tremendously obnoxious little toff, so charismatic you're almost rooting for him. Simon Pegg replaces Eddie Izzard as the voice of Reepicheep and delivers a touching performance.
***

Once that first bullet goes past your head, politics and all that shit just goes right out the window.

Black Hawk Down (2001)
(SPOILERS) Black Hawk Down completed a trilogy of hits for Ridley Scott, a run of consistency he’d not seen even a glimmer of hitherto. He was now a brazenly commercial filmmaker, one who could boast big box office under his belt where previously such overt forays had seen mixed results (Black Rain, G.I. Jane). It also saw him strip away the last vestiges of artistic leanings from his persona, leaving behind, it seemed, only technical virtuosity. Scott was now given to the increasingly thick-headed soundbite (“every war movie is an anti-war movie”) in justification for whatever his latest carry-on carried in terms of controversial elements, and more than happy to bed down with the Pentagon (long-standing collaborators with producer Jerry Bruckheimer) to make a movie that, while depictinga less than auspicious intervention by the US military (“Based on an Actual Event” is a marvellous catch-all for wanton fabrication), managed to turn it into a parade of heroes pe…

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

How do you like that – Cuddles knew all the time!

The Pleasure Garden (1925)
(SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s first credit as director, and his account of the production difficulties, as related to Francois Truffaut, is by and large more pleasurable than The Pleasure Garden itself. The Italian location shoot in involved the confiscation of undeclared film stock, having to recast a key role and borrowing money from the star when Hitch ran out of the stuff.