Easy money is bound to be followed by great difficulties. Big Money is a 2009 Steven Anderson film. More attention to the film takes a few names almost unknown director, and especially not a decent budget of $ 7 million, and the presence of talented actors like Sean Bean and Chris Hemsworth, who became one of the idols of youth thanks to Marvel’s “Thor”. About why the film doesn't live up to expectations and what pulls it out of the swamp of failed movies - right now.
What would you do if a suitcase with a lot of money fell from the sky? This is exactly the situation with the ordinary hard worker Sam, whose financial affairs are extremely deplorable. As always, driving around the same place every day, Sam has no hope until a mysterious suitcase falls from the sky. Inside are 625,000 and $731. With money, the lives of Sam and his wife, Leslie, get much better – they not only close all financial problems, but also buy a new car, go to a restaurant, buy a lot of furniture from only the most famous stores. The problem comes a few days later in the form of a strange and at first seemingly respectable man, who turns out to be a bandit intent on fully recovering the amount. Since the couple does not have the opportunity to return the money, they will have to seriously sweat, because the mysterious man will not be so patient.
For director Stephen Anderson, the work on Big Money is the first in 12 years. The previous project, the drama “Spetsnaz” he put in 1997 – om, and then completely disappeared from the radar of the film business. In this work, the director worked poorly. Of the advantages, you can note the combined shooting during the first meeting of the brothers. The only thing that Stephen’s work as a director did not impress was the right choice of genre. Of course, there are elements of crime and thriller, but since the arrival of the bandit in the lives of the characters, the film becomes a kind of sitcom like “I, my wife, and the killer living under us and trying to get his money back.” Because of such an unexpected decision, an experienced bandit loses his toughness, becoming a weapon of jokes and sarcastic attacks, calmly mocking feminism, other main problems of the then society, and the film itself becomes slightly monotonous, soft, short of the brand of a thriller or criminal drama, losing its drive and to some extent of interest (at least I wanted to expect a completely different turn of events from the tape). Most of the screen time will be spent on conversations, sometimes the script written by that single Anderson will try to dilute the monotonous road with potholes in the form of solutions of a mysterious person, which will not be easy. Yes, he wants his money back, his position is quite understandable, so the hitman doesn't need to kill Sam and Lasley, much better if all 625,000 get back together and everyone goes to peace. The screenwriter confidently emphasizes morality - nothing is free, for "easy" money can be followed by great difficulties. In the end, tastelessness begins at all, the “poor, unhappy” heroes get used to their deeds, committing them so easily and even almost naturally, as if Anderson had to make a signature in the final: “Try to plunge into a similar situation and you.” That's so great! Disappointing and the final “trick”, turning the film upside down, and about the presence of shortcomings, and nothing to say – why the characters in addition to the new car did not sell the old? Where were the police in the whole movie? For all the "business" of the family and the bandit, no car drove past. The feeling is that the police have died out or are working in it at all idiots who do not know how to plan strategies to catch criminals (not to mention the surveillance cameras that filmed the violators every time there is nothing to say at all). In general, despite the presence of a very good morality, the script lacks rigidity, it is not enough to be a thriller, and not seem to them in two or three moments, when most of the script is occupied by an inappropriate semblance of a crime drama and a sitcom. Very rarely there is a system where two people are responsible for operator work. Here, the cameramen were Robert Primes and John R. Leonetti, who, as many people know, himself sometimes became a director (though not quite successful, given the sequels of “The Butterfly Effect” and “Deathly Battle”). If Leonetti is not lucky with the production of films, then according to the camera work, he turns out to be in his element, and working with Primes, a good, pleasant picture created on nature, without adding a green screen. The music of Jesse Woskia does not add dynamism, atmosphere, the viewer will remain deprived of emotions. The compositions just don’t elicit emotion, the music just sounds at a certain point, without intending to please the viewer or make a certain moment of the film more vivid, memorable. The music is just written, the composer just got his fee, nothing more.
Who can save a movie from a complete failure is, of course, a star cast. The first in line is Sean Bean, whose game was not limited to one character: in addition to Pike Kubik, who is the antagonist of the story, the British actor briefly entered the image of the on-screen brother - Reese's twin (and, accordingly, played him himself). The image of Bean perfectly fits the British style - Pike, being a veteran bandit, tries to adhere to manners, be cultured, kill only if necessary. Perhaps that’s why the hero does not kill the family, choosing a much better idea to take the case. Sean’s character definitely knows how to follow the money, so he will constantly recalculate the total amount and the amount that the couple has left to pay up to the last penny. How the poor return the money is not his concern. Playing pair Chris Hemsworth and Victoria Profeta stand behind Sean Bean, trying to pull the project. Partly, the project is amenable, both play well, thoughtfully (still stupid antics - script error), convincingly shown the state of shock of both. Of course, as mentioned above, in the end, all fears dissipate, the devil knows what comes to the stage, but this is the writer’s mistake, the actors just play, say lines. The cast inspires confidence.
Total:
“Big Money” is a picture in which morals are clearly read and attempts to tell everyone that free cheese only happens in a mousetrap, but director Stephen Anderson lacks experience in making the film tough and extremely intelligible, atmospheric, make it gray, fill it with cruelty. Instead of such a result, there is a monotonous narrative, an almost complete lack of dynamics, a stupid second half and a very bad ending. Of the worthy features, we can note the good work of both operators, the play of the cast, albeit sometimes, "thanks" to the script acting stupidly. For respecting the acting skills of Sean Bean and Chris Hamsworth, the film can forgive some of the flaws. Just part of it. You can recommend only to loyal fans of the cast, everyone else - at your own great desire.
Thank you for listening!