Tradeuse

Greetings again from the darkness. A film made by women in a male-dominated profession about women in a (different) male-dominated profession becomes the first female-centric Wall Street movie. Director Meera Menon (Farah Goes Bang) and writers Amy Fox, Sarah Megan Thomas and Alysia Reiner have a lot to say … maybe even more than they intended.

Anna Gunn ("Breaking Bad") delivers a strong lead performance as Naomi Bishop, a hard-driving and successful investment banker - a self-described "banker chick". She's coming off a failed client IPO – her biggest career failure. Naomi basically torments and disrespects her first assistant Erin (Sarah Megan Thomas), and she regularly sleeps with a co-worker and hedge fund manager Michael Connor (James Purefoy) for the benefits only. In other words, Naomi is much like the men we have seen in these roles over the years.

While pursuing her next IPO with a hotshot d-bag tech entrepreneur (Samuel Roukin as Ed) who claims to have a revolutionary impenetrable cyberware, Naomi is unwittingly (although it could be argued that she SHOULD have known) being played by multiple parties. One of these is a Justice Department investigator (Alysia Reiner as Samantha) who is trying to use their old college connection as a way to gather intel on Naomi's firm and Michael Connor. Adding complexity and turmoil are Craig Bierko as an egotistical investor who pressures Michael for insider info, Sophie von Hasselberg (Marin) who is a disgruntled programmer for Ed's company, and Tracie Thoms as Samantha's partner and co-parent of their kids.

Fractured relationships abound as all characters are driven by something other than the relationships. We are told "money is not a dirty word", but it sure seems like motivation for these folks is centered on power, ambition, and yes … money. The social issues and moral dilemmas come across as less important than the challenge of competing (rather than collaborating). Seamless backstabbing is a valued skill in this world, and always present are greed, desperation and paranoia. This is post-2008 Wall Street, but it looks pretty darned familiar.

Previous films have taken us inside this world. Wall Street (1987), Margin Call (2011), The Wolf of Wall Street (2013), and The Big Short (2015) each provided some lesson on this corrupt-to-the-core industry and helped us understand the dual meaning of the title, but this is the first to show us the women who fight the same fights. If there is a disappointment here, it's the apparent conclusion that putting women in the same high-stakes game as men means they will compete in much the same way, rather than finding a better, more graceful way. Gordon Gekko may not have been right when he said "greed is good", but it seems pretty clear that greed is prevalent. It's a lesson we evidently must be reminded of on a regular basis … and whatever you do, make sure to count the chocolate chips before giving that cookie to Naomi!

When I saw the trailer, it did peak my interest. It looks like Wall Street or The Big Short, but with a twist, as the woman is playing the main character. It's a little sad that that's enough to make this situation unique, but it is.

The movie does really focus on the main character too. Well, actually there is a big ensemble cast, which all have their very unique story that really drives the story,

But it does focus a lot on the development of those characters, and the story suffers for this. I just found the movie too slow in it's delivery of the story. I feel like I spent too much time waiting for the story to happen in-between getting to know the characters.

It would not be that big of an issue but I don't feel the big pay off of the film. All the character development and I felt nothing for what happens to these people after the dust cleared.

Equity was about business, but it was too much business. Too stiff, Too clean of a strike. Did not hit me like it should, which kinda sucks as it's one of those movies about cooperation that's pretty easy to follow, which is great.

So yeah, a uniquely told story got me hooked but it's too bland for me to care about the outcome.

http://cinemagardens.com/

I'm giving this movie a better review than most because I found myself engaged in the nuanced messaging, the attempt to do something different, and the fact that I felt entertained and went into the rest of my evening talking about what the movie was about. Any movie these days takes a risk when it scratches in new territory and the reviews here seem nit picky and unfair in some cases. For example, if dialogue is "slow moving" then that is a director/scriptwriter choice that in a movie that has thought itself out, like this one, you can see in the overall look and feel.

Look for example,at the early scene where Naomi is speaking at the women's empowerment group. Watch the camera scan and you see more of the lettering in the poster appear behind her. It goes from "men" to "omen" to "women" and her monologue relates to each as it goes by. This doesn't happen by accident, folks, and this is just one instance of nuance in the movie, including the ending which makes you have to reflect a bit and fill in with your own opinion and/or judgment about the state of how we regulate (or don't) the investment banking sector.

I like movies that make me want to pause the stream and talk about what we just saw. But that's just me.

Equity (2016) was directed by Meera Menon. It stars Anna Gunn as Naomi Bishop, a high-powered Wall Street executive whose specialty is taking corporations public with IPO's. (IPO stands for Initial Public Offering.) She has taken nine companies public, but her most recent effort has fallen short. Now, she's working with another company, and she's fighting for the opportunity to take it public.

James Purefoy plays Michael Connor, a hedge funder who is Naomi's lover. Alysia Reiner plays Samantha, Naomi's assistant, who is loyal, but who has ambitions of her own. Sarah Megan Thomas portrays Erin Manning, who works for the federal government. Her job is to discover and punish corporate crime, and she's very good at it. All three of these actors do very well in their roles.

I enjoyed this film, because it gave me a glimpse of a world I don't know, and don't really want to know. The acting was superb, the sets were excellent, and everything looked and felt real. As I noted, I don't know if the plot was realistic, but the sense of wealth, power, and greed felt real to me.

I don't see this as a movie about a woman trying to break through the glass ceiling. I see it as the story of a hard-driven, ambitious person, who is up against some strong, vicious, and crafty competitors. That's the life she's chosen, and that's the life she's living. It's not a happy life, even if you win. There's hardly a happy moment in the movie. Be prepared for a tale of ambition and treachery.

We saw this film at the excellent Little Theatre in Rochester, NY. It will work well on DVD.

Note: Equity has a horrible 5.4 IMDb rating. Normally, we would never go to a movie rated this low. However, when I looked at the ratings, it became clear that women liked the film, and men hated the film. As usual for IMDb, many more men than women vote. So, if men hate a film, that will lower its rating, even if women like it. My suggestion--ignore the rating and see it.

Not sure why this movie was so bad. Perhaps the slow pace and the enforced slow dialogue. Perhaps the bad acting. In either or both cases this movie should be given a wide berth. I loved Anna Gunn in Breaking bad, in fact she was instrumental in it's popularity but I watched a different actress here. Her interpretation in this 'Wall St' type movie was simply awful. Totally unbelievable. I always turn off movies when the leading lady has either Botoxed lips or stupidly unreal white teeth, for some reason I can't take it serious from that point on. So many women in the industry feel the need to wreck their natural looks. Anyhow, back to the movie, I dare anyone to watch Gunn's on-screen divorced husband acting out a serious scene and avoid breaking out into laughter at his facial expressions. Again terrible acting. This movie could have been interesting but the casting director had lost his marbles. The writing was drawn out and laboured with far too many close up 'still life' moments. Take heed, it's valuable time you are wasting if you labour through this stuff.