
I have had the dubious privilege of living through three epic financial bubbles: the Reagan stock rally of the 1980s (it crashed in 1987); the DotCom boom of the 1990s (crashed in 2002); and the Sub-Prime bubble of the mid-2000s (crashed in 2008). As if we needed more proof that rich people run our country, none of these bubbles resulted in significant financial reform, despite the millions of innocent people who suffered. As one character proclaims in the recent movie The Big Short, all the American electorate did was “blame immigrants and poor people” while the fat cats mostly got off Scot-free.
Perhaps the only good thing to come out of this endless cycle of boom-and-bust is an entirely new category of movie: the so-called financial thriller. This young genre (okay, sub-genre) has its origins as far back as Alan J. Pakula’s Rollover in 1981, and perhaps even earlier (Sidney Lumet’s 1976 masterpiece Network shares many of the same themes and obsessions).
But the genre really took off in 1987 with Oliver Stone’s brilliant Wall Street. Most people still see it as the definitive financial thriller, not only because it’s a great movie but also because it so vividly defines the genre’s basic elements: a young man tempted by the lure of easy money; an evil mentor who shows him how to cheat the suckers; a “good” mentor who warns him of the dangers; a sleek urban landscape of metal and glass; and (most important) a corrupting lifestyle of drugs and sex which tempt him deeper into corruption.
Continue reading “Ten Things I Love About “Margin Call””





