Boiler Room

Technorati Tag(s): Movies, Review

The first thing that strike you when the credits roll is just how much better it was than what you were expecting, how much better it was than a complete disaster.

Is it a good movie? Certainly not.

Any movie with Ben Affleck apart from Good Will Hunting automatically gets three points removed out of, say, a total of ten.

Boiler Room uses one of the narration devices I like a lot. If used properly, the first person narrative works wonders, as you will see in Goodfellas--Scorsese's best, bar none. We begin Boiler Room with Giovanni's viewpoint, we view the whole movie from his viewpoint till the director completely screws it up by showing us scenes where Giovanni is not present.

You cannot break such a basic first person viewpoint rule, dumbass! Wannabe sreenplay writers and directors take note. I've seen it happen in film after film after film. Road to Perdition begins with the kid's narration, but shows scene after scene where the kid is not only not present, but scenes he doesn't even hear an account of from his father. And this coming from Sam Mendes is simply unforgivable. Perhaps the only film where breaking that rule is justified is Fight Club--and you'll agree with me upon why.

Boiler Room's soundtrack is unneccessarily hip.

The love angle with the black receptionist is just forced. So is the overblown guilt between father and son.

I don't know how accurate the depiction of a stock broker house is.

The story? Ribisi is the son of a judge, runs an illegal casino business in his house. When ol' Pop finds out about sonny's business he freaks out.

Ribisi, wanting his father's approval back, joins a stock firm, learns the ropes, becomes a broker. Fine and dandy. Daddy's happy his son's legit; son's happy he's gonna make his first million pretty soon, plus he's getting along just fine with the receptionist (who also had a relationship with Ribisi's friend earlier, the friend being the guy who got Ribisi into the firm--can you say triangle?).

Fine and dandy.

Then Ribisi finds out the firm is as illegal as his casino business. And then the FBI selects Ribisi of all people to help stop the crime. And Ribisi being the basically fundamentally good guy, agrees! And he walks free, unlike Liotta in Goodfellas!

Can you say totally expected?

Oh, and big ding: the film begins with the classic flashback device; which I truly abhor. Unless it's done the Carlito's Way way.

What the film lacks in substance, though, it makes up in style. And I don't mean style as in cool and urban et al. I despise those terms. No, the style comes through in the cinematography, the camera angles, the cocksure lighting which mirrors the cocksure attitude of the main players.

The only reason Ribisi is cast in films is to give hopes to basement nerds everywhere that you can look nerdy and still make it big. Which is a damn shame, because he is a pretty good actor. No Liam Neeson or Johnny Depp, this guy, but his performance is mostly believable.

Some of the dialog is pretty good. Some lines are stinkers, though. "I need some chocolate loving," Ribisi tells the receptionist when she asks if he needs anything.

You get the feeling you're not being suckered, though. There's no Shyamalanesque twist in the end. Which is a relief. Just a simple story which gets from point A to point B and leaves you there.

It's a film on stock, and it pays homage to both Wall Street and Ross. It openly admits it's stealing from both. Definitely wise, unlike Tarantino.

There are small things you can pick up: The first time we see Ribisi, he's wearing a Cunning Linguists T-shirt. A lot of sleek cars are on display. The film is a walking advertisment for menswear--pretty much like Fight Club.

One thing I particularly liked was that even after ol' Pop finds out about sonny's casino business, sonny doesn't shut it down. Pretty selfish, pretty 2000 AD, if you ask me. But then, as I said, they ruin it all by forcing the father-son dynamic toward the end: Ribisi tells the FBI he'll go on record and expose everything about the firm if his father walks free. Ribisi tells, "Jail would be worth it for that much."

Ain't that heroic?

So why'd I watch the film anyway, if it sucks so bad?

First, it's a no brainer. And after reading something like House of Leaves, not to mention every single thread about it on the forum, watching a no brainer is a, well, no brainer. You have to wind down, y'know.

Second, the film is laid back.

Third, Ben Affleck has much, much less screen time than even Saving Private Ryan, which is terrific news.

And lastly, any guy likes watching movies about an average joe getting rich.

It's a nice way to laze away a rainy afternoon when you're down with a cold.

(Did you notice how I skipped mentioning Vin Diesel altogether? That's how his presence is in the film.)