99 Homes

This film tells the story of a hard working builder who gets unemployed, and hence cannot keep up with the mortgage payments and is subsequently evicted. Stars align themselves and his fortune is reversed when he is offered a job by the man who evicted him from his home.

"99 Homes" has an intense beginning that absorbs me into the story. The circumstances it portrays is very real and relevant to people in lower income brackets, and their pain of losing their homes is piercingly recreated. I feel so sorry for Dennis because he appears to be such a hard-working, honest and amicable guy. As the story progresses, he is faced with various moral dilemmas. The story is captivating, and it's helped by the intensity of the marvellous performances of Michael Shannon and Andrew Garfield. It is a very good and thought provoking film, that leaves me wondering about the rights and wrongs of Rick and Dennis.

In 99 Homes, there is a point in the film where our villain states that people get too emotional about houses, at the end of the day it is a rectangular box.

This is an important point, buy your house, pay the mortgage off and the house is yours. Re-mortgage it, extend the loan for that extension you do not need, or go for that bigger house and you put that house at risk.

Dennis Nash (Andrew Garfield) is a single father working in construction but the post 2008 recession means hard times for him and he loses his house and has to quickly move with his mother to a motel.

Rick Carver (Michael Shannon) is the real estate agent who forecloses the properties on behalf of the bank. He runs a slick operation, he has the police on the payroll, he cares little about the financial situation of those fallen behind and he is greedy enough to make as much money as possible from the banks by alleging that the former occupants damaged the property and appliances when in reality he has taken it away and then puts it back but bills the bank for it.

By a strange quirk, Dennis volunteers to work for Carver in a house his usual builders refuse to enter and starts a strange relationship where Dennis ruthlessly does Carver's dirty work and earn enough money to get a better house for his son.

However like Wall Street, the film is a morality play, Carver says in the course of the film along the lines that he tried to play by the book but it did not work out, you have to cheat the system. Dennis goes along with it but you know that he will soon realise that he has gone too far.

Parts of the film is moving and also infuriating as both Dennis and Carver ruthlessly evict people with the help of the compliant police. They stand no chance in court as the judges are against those in arrears and Carver is always one step ahead making sure any embarrassing paperwork disappears.

The film is a polemic, not very subtle even though it tries in places to make Carver appear human. The final showdown is maybe low key but it works, the film does not need a big contrived ending.

One big issue I had though was that part of the American foreclosure process was difficult to follow if you were outside of the USA, you get a gist of it but maybe the film needed to explain it more.

The movie could have been a bit more joyful I think towards the end and I didn't care for the mother's enmeshed relationship with her son. I didn't see much wrong with the house that was purchased for his mother and son. I realize the message is about be nice to those who are being evicted. Although the reality is there are some pretty s***** people who are irresponsible and who are bad tenants and there are squatters. The movie doesn't tell the whole picture of what really goes on. It's not black and white. In other words being a successful realtor or wealthy person does not mean you are the bad guy necessarily. The other side of the coin is that not all people who are being evicted are good people.

The movie starts out well, and the first eviction scene will leave you shaking in your boots imagining your family and belongings getting foreclosed and tossed into the street. I can't think of another film that focuses on the eviction process so intensely.

You're better skipping the end of the movie (after the scene with the old man). The last forty minutes of the film are not satisfying at all, and just gets dumb with characters acting more and more ridiculously. In the beginning of the movie, many of the characters act over the top for the sake of dramatic tension, but it it gets to be too much towards the end.

For most of the running time, 99 HOMES is an exemplary thriller. It's always a delight when you find a film detailing a subject matter that's not been covered very much in film before and the financial crash of 2008 is the topic here, in particularly the glut of ill-conceived sub-prime mortgages in America that led to the worldwide recession. The film follows the fortunes of a real estate broker who makes a living from evicting people from their homes.

It's an electrifying premise and one that's superbly directed by Ramin Bahrani who brings a documentary-style realism to his work. Certainly the camera-work is fantastic, often hand held and getting into the faces of the actors so that you feel close up and involved with the situations. However, the real ace up the sleeve is the casting of Michael Shannon as the criminal broker; he gives a performance of reptilian magnitude as an amoral money-hunter and he's simply magnificent. I loved this guy in BOARDWALK EMPIRE and he continues to go from strength to strength here.

The eyes and ears of the viewer is played by Andrew Garfield, less impressive in a more subtle part. Garfield isn't bad when he gets the opportunity - he was fine in THE SOCIAL NETWORK - and he's more than believable as the desperate young man in this. Laura Dern and Clancy Brown flesh out the rest of the cast. The film is by turns intense, awkward, moving, and exciting, but always engrossing and not to mention gripping. The only misstep is a rather silly sub-plot in which Garfield tries to hide his work from his family, which feels rather irrelevant (if he's putting food on the table, what does it matter?). The other problem is the trite Hollywood ending; for a film that's exemplified gritty realism throughout, to cop out in this way is a real joke. Other than those problems, it's fine.