Nothing Is Beyond Money For You Robert, We Both Know That: Arbitrage (2012)

It is quite possible that if it were not for the existence of the wonderfully engaging and brilliantly disconcerting The Grey, that Arbitrage would stand to be the most underrated film of 2012.  In fact, it is no surprise that both films deal with similar philosophical issues, while simultaneously deconstructing the myth of unbridled masculine privilege.  One uses wolves and the cold, while the other uses financial stress and guilt to drive its point across, however, Arbitrage, unlike The Grey, commits to making sure its viewers understand the power and privilege that come with being rich, white and male, so much so that the film manages to almost cause a person to relate to a person who is completely engaged in terrible behavior.  It is a film that manages, to show both the glossy glamour of having such a sway in the daily lives of those below an individual, as to be able to mold and alter the world and those in it to bend at one's illogical and greedy will.  Director, and writer for the film, Nicholas Jarecki has managed to tap into everything that cinema has attempted to reject, while still managing to completely draw attention to its problems.  If the film were not so focused on the "idea" powerful character, I would be inclined to compare it to a Soderbergh film, especially, considering that it has the sort of dreary detachment from the characters, while also possessing an uncanny interest in their most arbitrary engagements.  Narratively speaking it is of the same vein as The Ides of March, a film from a year earlier, or, perhaps Michael Clayton, where, in both instances, George Clooney emerges as a man whose privilege allows him to do pretty much anything he needs in order to assure his safety and continued reign of power.  Arbitrage is much the same sort of film, however, it seems like Jarecki wants to remind viewers that in the case of this film, the privilege can only allow the main character so much access and his moments of having the upper hand will eventually falter, leaving him with nothing but his sense of momentary escape.  The pawns the formulate the other films of this nature are certainly present, however, by the films closing its is they who have come to realize their power in helping the king, if you will, win the game and their demands for providing such aid are more than reflective of knowledge about how much the king can truly provide.

Arbitrage follows the experiences of the incredibly successful financial broker and investment advisor Robert Miller (Richard Gere), as he is lining up to sell his brokerage firm to a buyer for a high profit.  However, slight problems emerge for Roger as he has managed to lose a considerable portion of his company's money to a ill-advised hedge investment in a Russian copper mine.  Fortunately, Robert has tons of friends in high places, therefore, allowing him to navigate through tax audits and various fraud inquiries with ease and lack of concern.  In fact, Roger is so aware of his safety that he openly lies to his daughter Brooke (Brit Marling) when she inquires as to the blatant financial discrepancies in their accounting records.  However, as he has just reached his sixtieth birthday and knows he has a successful retirement he engages in a party with his wife Ellen (Susan Sarandon) and acts completely disconnected from the illegal fraud he is engaged with for his soon to be sold business.  The story, however, also involves another degree of Robert's deception, particularly, when he steps out of his own birthday to engage in another evening with a woman named Julie (Laetita Casta) for whom it is suggested he has had a long standing affair.  It is not until Robert's buyer begins to get cold feet that he begins to worry, even going so far as to blow off an art opening for Julie to attempt to close the deal.  This decision leads to Julie becoming infuriated with him and ignoring him when he does arrive at her exhibit.  Nonetheless, Robert tracks her down later in the evening and apologizes, eventually getting Julie to agree to travel on the road for a few hours.  It is during this drive that Richard falls asleep at the wheel leading to a intense crash and the immediate death of Julie.  Frantic not for Julie's safety, but for the effects such an incident would have on his reputation, and, subsequently, his ability to close the sale, Robert takes advantage of the son of his former chauffeur Jimmy (Nate Parker) reminding the young man that it was he who helped pay for his father's expensive medical bills.  Robert attempts to completely cover up all possibilities of his involvement in the accident, he is met with opposition by Detective Bryer (Tim Roth) whose determination to prove that no man is above the law lead him to maniacally attack every course of option, even attempting to frame Jimmy with the hopes of causing him to snitch on Robert.  However, the film winds down, much as a chess game would, with defensive strategy and stalling, however, in the end the one with more in possession and a willingness to exploit others to his advantage always wins, and Arbitrage reminds viewers that this is no different, although the closing scenes certainly suggest that guilt becomes an intense burden.

Arbitrage is a film that brings to light the age old adage about power corrupting and absolute power corrupting absolutely.  I would love to say that Robert, as a character, comes to realize that he is a greedy and self-serving individual who understands that his terrible actions will eventually catch up with him, however, the film shows that an individual who absolutely ignores any sort of moral high road and throws his money in the right places can certainly get away with anything, including reckless endangerment to the point of involuntary manslaughter.  While the trailer for this movie uses the crash scene unapologetically, it really seems to be the driving force in this movie, prior to his accident, Robert was already walking on a very tight rope and when it breaks he is forced to put everything in front of him to soften the fall.  I mentioned the chess metaphor, because it works nicely to consider the way that "otherness" is a point of exploitation and oppression within this film.  Robert is able to put a person like Jimmy below him, because he clearly believes him to be of a lesser value than him in regards to human life.  Robert is a person of value who is self-assured to the point of hubris (going so far as to act unaware about what exactly as to what an "Applebee's is) whereas, Robert's blackness is often called to attention.  The scene where Robert's girlfriend, a woman of color, supports him, certainly plays into the degrees of intersectionality, which could be read as problematic, but considering the message of the film, it is clearly served up for ironic purposes.  Similarly, Robert seems to have no hesitations throwing his daughter, a woman, thus othered, under the bus in order to assure that he gets what he desires.  The magical moment comes when Ellen and Brooke realize that their two others can unite to attack the "self," Ellen and Brooke obtained their desired gains out of the process, lessening Robert, even if only to the slightest of degrees.  Furthermore, you could read Jimmy's obtaining of the money from Robert as his own victory, although it is absolutely clear that Jimmy's reward comes not from the economic gain, but from forcing Robert to acknowledge that they are now "even," or in a larger context equals.  Of course, these are all spoken affirmations and do nothing for the very real loss of Julie.  nonetheless, Robert is assumedly lesser privileged as a result, yet the film cleverly reminds us that even in that instance, Robert can still move through some pretty high places.

Key Scene:  The car crash is intense, even if you know it is coming, the degree with which the mood is heightened is filmmaking perfected.

This is a great film, I thoroughly enjoyed it, however, it is still a bit on the pricey side to purchase.  I would strongly urge renting it for the time being.

We're Not Criminals, We Don't Know How To Steal: Tower Heist (2011)

Tower Heist upon its theatrical release was a film that had everything going against it, from Brett Ratner making an ass of himself when hired to produce the Oscars, to having a cast of actors who are no longer top level talent.  With that being said, Tower Heist is an incredibly enjoyable movie and often has the viewer surprised by the genius, innovation and sheer fun that exists in the relatively short movie.  It is not a brilliant movie deserving of large amounts of praise, nor is it a film that marks an advancement in heist films, but it is quite watchable and balanced in its comedic delivery.  It is precisely what a person would want out of a streamline Hollywood comedy, and to expect anything more out of this film going in would be foolish and illogical.  It offers nothing new to the film palate, but sometimes regular is exactly what a person needs, and Tower Heist is exceptional at being middle of the road. 

Tower Heist primarily focuses on Josh Kovac (Ben Stiller) a manager at an illustrious high-rise apartment known as The Tower.  Josh is a man who takes great pride in his job and concerns himself with the safety and comforts of his apartment’s residents which include the recently unemployed Mr. Fitzhugh (Matthew Broderick) and the profusely rich owner of the apartment’s penthouse Arthur Shaw (Alan Alda).  While Josh is greatly concerned with the respectability of his job, his fellow employees display a less than zealous fervor for customer service.  These employees include Josh’s own mumbling and inept brother Charlie (Casey Affleck), the loud-mouthed West Indian apartment cleaner Odessa (Gabourey Sidibe) and a recently hired elevator repairman named Enrique (Michael Pena).  Despite their dysfunctions, the group works nicely together and please the residents, and all appears to be normal until Arthur Shaw is arrested in his penthouse.  Confused and uncertain of the reasoning Josh approaches the arresting FBI agent Claire (Tea Leoni) only to discover that Shaw has been arrested for large scale money laundering, which includes his and the rest of The Tower employees money.  At first skeptical, but quickly enraged by the act, Josh sets out to exact revenge upon Shaw by robbing him of the money, he believes to be kept somewhere in the penthouse apartment.  Unfortunately, before Josh can do so he is fired for damaging Shaw’s rather expensive replica of a car driven by Steve McQueen in a film.  This dismissal from his job leads to Josh recruiting the help of his brother Charlie and the unemployed Mr. Fitzhugh in the robbery, as well as the help of Slide (Eddie Murphy) and convict who is an expert in all things thievery.   Despite having differences of opinions, Slide agrees to help and the group sets out on a zany and slapstick heavy attempt at obtaining the money that is rightfully theirs.  I would go into detail about the robbery, but to do so would involve a severe amount of spoilers.  It is better to experience the twists in this movie, as they are indeed one of its biggest selling factors.

What I will do instead is focus on why I think this film has fared so well critically.  What separates Tower Heist from simply being a run of the mill heist movie, is the inherent racial and class issues present.  Often robbery movies involve wealthy thieves becoming wealthier, it is a rare occurrence in contemporary cinema that we get a revisioning of the classic Robin Hood narrative, in which wealth is stolen from the rich and given to the poor.  Yet even Tower Heist is different in that the film is about the rich stealing from the poor, and the poor deciding that they are fed up with the thief.  This film comes on the tail of some of the most expansive and outrageous bank frauds in American history as well as the fizzling of the much followed and discussed Occupy Wall Street movement, which shared the same condolences as the characters in this film.  Furthermore, this film also portrays a rather vast array of persons involved in the robbery.  Josh Kovacs is perhaps the most normal of the group, yet his privilege as a white male also means he possesses the most to lose if the robbery fails.  In contrast, characters like the poor uneducated Charlie or the silenced Hispanic Enrique gain the most from a successful robbery, an image that is often overlooked in heist movies.  Similarly, it is made quite evident that characters like Slide and Odessa are constantly at threat of white oppression, whether it be the ridiculous rules barring Odessa from becoming an American citizen or the heavy hand of the law the prevents Slide from acting in a civilized manner, as opposed to relying on theft.  Even the relatively well to do Mr. Fitzhugh is troubled by greed, as we are led to believe that he is one of the few bankers who was working without devious intentions.  I would simply like to contrast this film with The Town, which was about a group of white males engaging in robberies and simply posit that its popularity and critical praise is due most likely to its statement that the oppressed no longer care to take oppression sitting down.

I am wary about recommending this movie as anything but a theater movie.  I am uncertain how its enjoyability with transfer to home video, so if you get a chance your best bet is to see this film in theaters.