It's been 23 years since the original Wall Street introduced us to the now legendary character of Gordon Gekko (Michael Douglas). It was the role of a lifetime for Douglas and led to him receiving the best actor Oscar in 1987. There's no doubt it was well deserved, as Gekko is one of the best screen villains of all time. So why, after more than two decades, has the original director, Oliver Stone, decided to do a sequel? Whatever the reason, he's one of the world's greatest directors and as this is his first sequel, I had very high hopes for this film.
I should start by saying that I enjoyed this film, I just didn't love it. It was great to see Gordon Gekko back, and it was clear that Michael Douglas was loving every second of it. He easily stole every scene he was in and when he wasn't on screen, you're impatiently waiting for him to come back. This film would not have been half as good without him. Fact. The problem is, he's mellowed out too much for my liking. I wanted to see the tough no nonsense Gekko, the "greed is good" Gekko, the "when I get a hold of the son of a bitch who leaked this, I'm gonna tear his eyeballs out and I'm gonna suck his fucking skull" Gekko. Sadly, he only ever shows flashes of his former self and the film suffers as a result.
It's left to Josh Brolin (Bretton James) to take the role of the villain, which he does well, he's just no Gekko and that's all I kept thinking throughout. That being said, he still delivers one of the standout performances of the film. The same can be said for Shia LaBoeuf (Jacob Moore), who had the difficult task of portraying a character that was tough and direct, as well as vunerable and emotional. His love interest is Gekko's estranged daughter (Winnie Gekko), played by British 'actress-of-the-moment' Carey Mulligan. This relationship is the main driving force of the film, but only acts to weaken it, as it changes from being a gritty economic thriller into a light romantic drama. Some people may prefer this, but that's not what I'd been expecting to see.
If you've seen the original film, you'll know that you need an Economics degree to truly understand what's going on, and this one is no different. It's not the plot that's tricky, it's all the financial jargon. There were several points when I didn't have a clue what the hell was happening. In fact, the only way I could work it out, was by seeing how the other character's were reacting. This could have just been my own financial ignorance, so don't let it worry you. It didn't ruin the film for me, it just meant there were the occasional moments of confusion. That's why I don't 'dabble' with the stock markets!
Oliver Stone is a legend in the film world, having produced and directed some incredible films over the years, but this one will not be up there with the best. There were some fantastic sweeping views of Manhattan and the whole film had a real 'quality' feel about it, but it's not without its faults. There's one scene that had Jake (LaBoeuf) and Bretton (Brolin) race against one another of motorbikes as a test of their masculinity. It was so dull that I found myself wondering where they'd filmed it, rather than on the edge of my seat with excitement. Look out, there's a branch in the road and only one bike can get through! Who cares?
Also, I'm sure there's a message within the film about how the greedy bankers have manipulated the economy to their own personal gain, only to be bailed out by the tax payer when it all collapses. The truth is though, this wasn't dealt with in any real depth, so I didn't feel like I'd learned anymore than I would have done from an episode of Newsround.
This isn't a bad film by any means and there are some great moments (nearly all involving Michael Douglas), it just could have been so much better.
Michael's Movie Mark 6/10
