À quel prix?

It is a film that shows American culture in all its expression, Values vs Economy, Reason vs Economy, Humanitarian Act vs Economy.

A film by a director who was unknown to me, Sara Colangelo, for me it is a pleasant surprise to discover this young director. I also loved the performance of Amy Ryan as Camille Biros, she managed to play a mature woman, very professional of these times.

It's set from 2001 to 2003 in Washington, D. C. and New York City and tells the story of the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund through the eyes of its Special Master, Kenneth Feinberg. The movie is "based on" Feinberg's book, "What is Life worth"?

The movie opens by setting up Kenneth Feinberg's (Michael Keaton) bona fides as an expert on compensation for loss of life from a sudden loss of life by accident or violence. After 9/11, Feinberg, a longtime Democrat who had worked for Ted Kennedy, is asked by Attorney General John Ashcroft (Victor Slezak) to be the Special Master for the compensation fund. Feinberg welcomes the invitation, and with the help of his assistant, Camille Biros (Amy Ryan), and staffers Priya Khundi (Shunori Ramanathan) and Darryl Barnes (Ato Blankson-Wood), begins the process of meeting the claimants.

Initially, Feinberg is an insensitive number-cruncher who alienates the relatives of those who lost family members. We hear snippets of many stories of victims and follow a few more extended stories. These include the gay partner of a victim who does not fit the "formula" because Virginia, where they lived, did not recognize civil unions. Another involved the widow and children of a firefighter who had other children the widow presumably did not know about. Other characters are critics of the Fund's rules, Charles Wolf (Stanley Tucci), and a lawyer representing only the highest-income families, Lee Quinn (Tate Donovan).

The storyline follows Feinberg's transition to greater empathy and the challenge to get at least 80% of the claimants to sign on to the Fund by the deadline.

At some levels, this is a heartwarming story of growing empathy. However, I wondered what the real Kenneth Feinberg thought of his depiction. In the beginning, he's a tone-deaf bureaucrat, which seems odd for someone reputed to be an expert in compensation cases that requires meetings with survivors. This rattled my believability gauge, which is always crucial for me in biopics. In addition, I found Keaton's "Boston" accent more distracting than reinforcing. And the ending surge to the finish line seemed a bit pat.

But I found the story engaging and a good reminder of the chaos and myriad stories that emerged from 9/11.

Worth is an incredibly human story that shows just how complicated the world can get when you ask one simple question; what is the value of a life?

I'm sure that everyone associated with this project felt a great pressure to do the subject matter justice and I genuinely feel they did that. Worth is a superbly constructed movie with excellent pacing which allows you the time to experience the weight of the situation and the emotions of the people involved without ever feeling too slow or getting bogged down. This is a genuine achievement, as it's essentially a film about people talking in rooms and those are notoriously difficult films to make. The editor and all those involved in the final cut certainly deserve a lot of credit for that.

The acting is as good as you would expect it to be. This is certainly Keaton's movie, as his character is the focal point that the story returns to on a regular basis, and he carries that with his usual brilliance, but it must be said that there isn't a single bad performance in this movie. Everyone is fantastic and I feel this is the kind of film where if one person had been bad, it would have taken you out of the whole thing ... I was in it from start to finish.

Whatever your political views, I think this is an interesting look into a world that will be foreign to most of us, but we all need to understand.

8/10.

This movie is frustrating because its has so many of the ingredients needed for a great movie but it's not a great movie and I don't know what the missing ingredient is. But it plods along without impetus. It needs a jolt from a director who would see a great story thats told in a boring way is not story to be retold.

The good: excellent acting performance by Michael Keaton. Photography and direction are great as well.

What's missing? Anything bad? Well, this movie turns into a feel good movie, wherein all the 9/11 vicitm's families suddenly start treating the government as a friend, while in real life there was no such thing. In fact there is still a lot of resentment towards the government because of the fact that a lot of volunteer aid workers did not get a penny. Not even for their severe disabilities.

Still not a bad movie, but a movie which feels like someone is whitewashing the mistreatment of many aid workers by painting a rosy picture of a terrible mistreatment of volunteer aid workers.