Movie Review: Boiler Room
Have you ever watched one of those movies that should've been so much better, but there were a few holes that hurt the movie?
Also, have you ever watched one of those movies that should've sucked worse than it did, but it had its moments that make it a bit memorable?
Boiler Room is the best(and worst) of both worlds, if you will. It has some serious pros and cons that would even be evident at a Helen Keller famiy reunion, and when both good and bad clash so heavily, you are left to wonder "what if". That's not a good thing because it can leave you bored fast.
Here's the pros and cons of the movie. Apologies for writing out spoilers if you haven't seen it yet.
Pro: The story - A small time hustler wants to do right by a father who doesn't respect him. He takes what he thinks is an honest job, only it's an even bigger con than he's ever seen before. The writer, Ben Younger, had a real good premise, and had a real good chance to make something memorable, but one big problem to start......
Con: The lead is Giovanni Ribisi - This isn't saying that Ribisi is the worst actor on earth, which he's not. In fact, he's actually a good actor. Problem is that he's really not right for the Seth Davis role at all. Seth Davis needed to be naturally cocky going right into the company. He came from owning his own underground casino, and making some bank already, so he should've gone in with a bigger sense of worth. Instead, he looks as lost as the goobers in the room with him. That brings me to the next point.
Pro: Casting was pretty realistic - Not necessarily on the primary characters, although that wasn't terrible, but with the extras and secondary characters. Think of this for a second. You are stepping into a "chop shop"(less than reputable brokerage firms that cheat investors by offering stock at their prices, and leave the investors with no place to trade when the business is bogus), and watching someone extoll the virtues of his millions of dollars at under 30 years old. The sort of people you will NOT see in there are people with their Series 7 license, because they would probably learn about "chop shops" going for their license(There's a part in the beginning where a guy with his license is going for a job there, and he's kicked out. Not realistic). The people around the table look like losers, dress like losers, and are losers, which is pro quo around those places anyway. Those type of guys never had direction in life, and they think they are doing something "cool", without realizing that the guys with the cars and the money probably helped start the company, and were the cool kids in school.
Con: ONE of the best acting jobs in the movie came from Vin Diesel - Mind you, the best actor in the movie was Ron Rifkin, the guy that played Seth's Dad. He's a respected stage and film actor that was obviously going to carry this movie(When your co-stars are Nicky Katt and Vin Diesel, that's not going to be tough). But surprisingly, one of the best actors in the movie was Vin Diesel. He was believable as Chris Varick, someone who is invariably a good guy, but is magnetized into the world of easy money, and doesn't want to get out of that world. He was one of the few actors that didn't phone it in halfway through the movie.
Pro: Ron Rifkin - Bringing him up again, he absolutely saves the movie at points. Playing a conflicted, tough guy father, he wants to see his son do well, but being a judge, he is ashamed of his son, and covers up an old wound between the two also. Ribisi was lucky to have this guy, or his role would've been lost. His best acting in this movie was around Ron Rifkin, without a shadow of a doubt. It was like Rifkin completely refused to accept garbage, and he'd stay all night to make sure the scene was right. I don't know that, but that's how it felt.
Con: The worst man-woman chemistry in the history of film between Ribisi and Nia Long - This was nothing more than an attempt to make an interracial relationship work, and it didn't. ZERO chemistry whatsoever, and it wasn't even necessary in the first place. One thing you notice about screenwriters is that they can add way too much at points, and paint themselves into a corner. This was an example. Watch and you'll see my point. The only good thing of that relationship was the very end of it.
Finally:
Con: They put the wrong ending in the movie - The end the movie by having the FBI raid the offices and Seth leaving as they are showing up. The original ending was an investor who was cheated showing up to get revenge on the people that cheated him. That would've added far more to the ending, and brought things full circle. Instead, it leaves you with this unnecessary "what do you think happened" scenario that had no business being in the film.
Overall, it's about a 6 out of 10, but it missed its mark. You had the perfect thing going with young alpha males with a lot of money carrying the bulk of the film, but there were too many things that weren't necessary, and a lot of actors phoned it in halfway through. This is one movie I'd like to see a remake of, just to see it done right.
Maybe I'll write it, who knows.
Also, have you ever watched one of those movies that should've sucked worse than it did, but it had its moments that make it a bit memorable?
Boiler Room is the best(and worst) of both worlds, if you will. It has some serious pros and cons that would even be evident at a Helen Keller famiy reunion, and when both good and bad clash so heavily, you are left to wonder "what if". That's not a good thing because it can leave you bored fast.
Here's the pros and cons of the movie. Apologies for writing out spoilers if you haven't seen it yet.
Pro: The story - A small time hustler wants to do right by a father who doesn't respect him. He takes what he thinks is an honest job, only it's an even bigger con than he's ever seen before. The writer, Ben Younger, had a real good premise, and had a real good chance to make something memorable, but one big problem to start......
Con: The lead is Giovanni Ribisi - This isn't saying that Ribisi is the worst actor on earth, which he's not. In fact, he's actually a good actor. Problem is that he's really not right for the Seth Davis role at all. Seth Davis needed to be naturally cocky going right into the company. He came from owning his own underground casino, and making some bank already, so he should've gone in with a bigger sense of worth. Instead, he looks as lost as the goobers in the room with him. That brings me to the next point.
Pro: Casting was pretty realistic - Not necessarily on the primary characters, although that wasn't terrible, but with the extras and secondary characters. Think of this for a second. You are stepping into a "chop shop"(less than reputable brokerage firms that cheat investors by offering stock at their prices, and leave the investors with no place to trade when the business is bogus), and watching someone extoll the virtues of his millions of dollars at under 30 years old. The sort of people you will NOT see in there are people with their Series 7 license, because they would probably learn about "chop shops" going for their license(There's a part in the beginning where a guy with his license is going for a job there, and he's kicked out. Not realistic). The people around the table look like losers, dress like losers, and are losers, which is pro quo around those places anyway. Those type of guys never had direction in life, and they think they are doing something "cool", without realizing that the guys with the cars and the money probably helped start the company, and were the cool kids in school.
Con: ONE of the best acting jobs in the movie came from Vin Diesel - Mind you, the best actor in the movie was Ron Rifkin, the guy that played Seth's Dad. He's a respected stage and film actor that was obviously going to carry this movie(When your co-stars are Nicky Katt and Vin Diesel, that's not going to be tough). But surprisingly, one of the best actors in the movie was Vin Diesel. He was believable as Chris Varick, someone who is invariably a good guy, but is magnetized into the world of easy money, and doesn't want to get out of that world. He was one of the few actors that didn't phone it in halfway through the movie.
Pro: Ron Rifkin - Bringing him up again, he absolutely saves the movie at points. Playing a conflicted, tough guy father, he wants to see his son do well, but being a judge, he is ashamed of his son, and covers up an old wound between the two also. Ribisi was lucky to have this guy, or his role would've been lost. His best acting in this movie was around Ron Rifkin, without a shadow of a doubt. It was like Rifkin completely refused to accept garbage, and he'd stay all night to make sure the scene was right. I don't know that, but that's how it felt.
Con: The worst man-woman chemistry in the history of film between Ribisi and Nia Long - This was nothing more than an attempt to make an interracial relationship work, and it didn't. ZERO chemistry whatsoever, and it wasn't even necessary in the first place. One thing you notice about screenwriters is that they can add way too much at points, and paint themselves into a corner. This was an example. Watch and you'll see my point. The only good thing of that relationship was the very end of it.
Finally:
Con: They put the wrong ending in the movie - The end the movie by having the FBI raid the offices and Seth leaving as they are showing up. The original ending was an investor who was cheated showing up to get revenge on the people that cheated him. That would've added far more to the ending, and brought things full circle. Instead, it leaves you with this unnecessary "what do you think happened" scenario that had no business being in the film.
Overall, it's about a 6 out of 10, but it missed its mark. You had the perfect thing going with young alpha males with a lot of money carrying the bulk of the film, but there were too many things that weren't necessary, and a lot of actors phoned it in halfway through. This is one movie I'd like to see a remake of, just to see it done right.
Maybe I'll write it, who knows.
