Too Big to Fail (2011 TV Movie) User Reviews

Well crafted and well acted but makes a false idol

[AlsExGal · 6/10 · 9 December 2018]

Specifically, Secretary of the Treasury Hank Paulsen is painted as having a great big unselfish S on his chest. I hate to parrot everyone else, but please watch "The Big Short" to see that everybody had blood on their hands.

HBO had to make SOMEBODY a hero in this, a film, not a documentary, so they chose Paulsen. In their version Paulsen is the somewhat naive guy who understands economics but does not understand human greed. The mechanics of what happened are well described. The dangers of what could have happened are well described. And there are several monologues where somebody - as part of conversation in a team meeting - explains how the big banks and investment houses got into this mess and then how AIG, the bank that insures the insurers, got swept up into everything.

The end of the film indicates that the big banks, with all of that fed supplied cash, just parked it and refused to loan it out - they were not required to do so - and the economy went into a downward spiral with hundreds of thousands losing their jobs and mortgage foreclosure becoming an epidemic.

I'd say the film is OK for grasping the basic mechanics of what went on, but understand it is a film and there has to be at least one hero - false or true - even if HBO is the producer and not Disney.

The Scariest Movie I've Ever Seen

[TheEconoclast · 8/10 · 1 June 2011]

I'm not kidding.

This is the scariest movie I've ever seen. But that's just me.

As some who works deep in the world of finance and lost sleep with the rest of Wall Street during that dark and disturbing week, it's possible that I'm a little too close to this story. It hits home. Thankfully, Too Big to Fail opens up a window so that the rest of world can look in from the safety of their living room.

Forget monsters, serial killers, and the nouveau low-budget movement of "two guys in a room with a camera and a ghost."

This is real. This happened. This could happen again.

You'll be terrified to see just how close to the brink we came, how close we were to one of the biggest economic disasters in human history. And you'll be shocked to learn about the types of personalities in which the rest of the planet has invested so much power and authority. Troubling, yes. But it's an important piece of history as well.

In terms of production HBO knocked this one out of the park. That's to be expected, I suppose, when you sign one of the great working American directors in Curtis Hanson and use one of the most highly respected chronicles of the financial crisis as your source material. Andrew Ross Sorkin even has a cameo and gets credit as a consulting producer to make sure they got the facts straight.

So it's no wonder such a brilliant, top shelf cast fell in line. HBO must have had their pick of the litter. The names in this movie are not only eerie facsimiles of their real life counterparts, but these are the actors that can really act.

The ever-dependable William Hurt is admirable in the lead, bring a little humanity to Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, but it's the supporting performances that deserve special praise. Billy Crudup boils with intensity as an anxious, f-bomb dropping Tim Geithner, and Paul Giamatti perfectly captures the essence of Ben Bernanke, that quietly authoritative voice that the biggest egos in the world always shut up and listen to. Viewers at home will get a kick out of Ed Asner as Warren Buffett and, as is always the case with Buffett, his folksy charm serves as a bridge into to the arcane world of high finance. And former Lehman Brothers CEO Dick Fuld is appropriately vilified thanks to James Woods, not for being a greedy fraudster, but for being a sadly out-of- touch executive unable to adjust to a world that changed overnight. Despite Fuld's arrogance and bluster, Woods invests him with a subtle sense of dignity.

Too Big to Fail achieves a rare feat for talky dramas: it sustains acute tension for ninety full minutes, never slowing down and never climaxing prematurely.

Even if you're not a financial insider or policy wonk you'll be on the edge of your seat from start to finish.

Just don't watch it late at night.

Short and Sweet

[tristan-845-36941 · 8/10 · 29 May 2011]

After watching hours of news stories about the bank bailouts, I still never fully grasped what was going on - only the most broad outlines of it.

This movie explained it clearly - and, most shockingly, somebody made a movie about banking regulations that was interesting and engrossing.

Excellent cast at the top of their game - and first rate writing and directing. Check this one out!

(Disclaimer: If you need car chases, boobs-and-butts, terrorist bombings, food fights or sex and drugs to enjoy a film, skip this one! It's not going to be up your alley!)

Good, but giving the elites too much credit.

[croato87 · 6/10 · 3 January 2012]

This movie is good--one of the best on the financial crisis other than Inside Job. It goes into many of the most interesting details and decisions of the crisis while staying entertaining.

My problem with the film is that it makes it look like the politicians and CEOs involved in the decisions actually cared and got emotional about them. In reality, that is not the case. The decisions which greatly affected the lives of millions of Americans had little, if any, effect on the people who made them--hence the distinguishable apathy in their public appearances. These men and women are among the richest in the world, and they knew they would stay that way regardless of how the crisis played out. They cared about the crisis only to the extent that they needed not be late for their dinner dates.

All animals are equal But some animals are more equal than others.

A distorted account of a critical disaster

[Mac1958 · 7 August 2011]

As a financial adviser, I have two very different thoughts on "Too Big to Fail".

First, I was fascinated by the human element - the relationships between decision-makers, the communication, the uncertainty, the failings and doubts we all possess. We all read the headlines, but rarely are we given even the slightest insight about the decision-making processes that affect us all.

Second, and unfortunately, the story is told with such obvious omissions and distortions that it is clear writer Andrew Ross Sorkin not only carries a partisan grudge, but made little attempt to hide that grudge in the script. Just a few examples of many:

1. One clear "villain" of the meltdown was the American consumer - those who willingly purchased homes they quite well knew they couldn't afford, took advantage of 125% refi's to pay off credit cards so that they could run them up again, tapped into their equity for trips, cars, boats and other goodies, etc. Instead, they were clearly portrayed as victims, and the only time a reference is made to them is when the biggest villain in the film, Dick Fuld, is scoffing at them.

2. Legislators Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, who are documented to have made errors in judgment leading up to the crisis, are portrayed as having absolutely nothing to do with it, completely stunned that this was happening - worse, they come off as passionate defenders of the people. Only someone who knows absolutely nothing of this crisis would fall for this. Come on, Mr. Sorkin.

3. Then-SEC Chairman Christopher Cox, the highest-profile Republican in the story, is portrayed as a bumbling, indecisive, oafish fool. If the rest of the film were not so left-leaning, this portrayal may not have been so obvious. Instead, it falls right in line with the rest of the partisan approach.

4. When assistant Michele Davis asks why regulators failed to notice and act upon the blatant problems in the mortgage industry, Hank Paulson sheepishly responds, "because we were making too much money." What?! The federal government failed to do its job because some people were making a lot of money? Wouldn't an indictment of such magnitude warrant a much larger inspection during this movie? Instead, it's just passed off as "greed". Astonishing.

5. Blame for the entire economic meltdown is placed in one place, and one place only: Those Evil Banks. Not one ounce of blame (outside of the ridiculous statement in #4, above) is placed on the massive failure of regulators to do their job; on the consumers who willingly signed on the dotted line, on the bureaucrats from both parties who pushed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to make bad loans in the interest of "fairness."

I could go on. In short, partisan politics (from BOTH sides) have so polluted our everyday culture that it's now impossible to believe anything you hear, read or see. "Too Big To Fail" is a vivid example.

Here's the problem: This film had a chance to teach us critical lessons about the financial meltdown. An accurate approach could have served as a road map for the future, a warning siren to everyone from politicians to Wall Streeters to regular citizens on the dangers of personal greed, of poor political leadership and of the need for more effective regulation of financial markets.

Instead, it's just another political statement disguised as "fact". What a shame.

.

"Too Big to Fail" Truly Succeeds

[LCRebbe · 8/10 · 6 June 2011]

This HBO produced film gives dialog and a behind-the-scenes feel to the 2008 financial debacle so perfectly exposed in "Inside Job."

The direction by Curtis Hanson is razor-clean cut, and the performances, especially by James Woods, Paul Giamatti and William Hurt underscore the irony that not one of the self-serving "public servants" has "served" one single day of jail time and continue to live their over-the-top, elegant lifestyles.

The effective use of actually news footage from our 24/7 news cycle serve as a percussive soundtrack as we watch the financial worlds of your "off the Street" American citizens self destruct at the hands of the Bush administration.

Thank you HBO for continuing to do what you have done so well for so many years!

Solid HBO Original Film

[ayochristian · 6/10 · 2 June 2011]

I want to start off with saying I don't really watch these types of movies where it deals with a lot of politics and such because I find them boring, but this is not the case for "Too Big to Fail." I was highly engrossed and very surprised. Quite a few familiar faces who all do an excellent job. Music score was top-notch; just as thrilling as Dark Knight or Inception's musical score. Cinematography on point. Overall great story based on a major crisis we are still recovering from. I tip my hat to the director and writers.

E D I T: Although this is a good film, it is fiction. The film falsely portrays Henry Paulson as some type of hero when in reality he is not. It's very entertaining for a political thriller but do yourself a favor and watch Inside Job.

simplified but still nauseating story of the big bank bailout

[blanche-2 · 8/10 · 6 December 2013]

"Let's see," says PR person Michele Davis, played by Cynthia Nixon, "we can't put any more restrictions on the way the banks are going to spend the $125 billion we're giving them, because they might not TAKE it?" Yeah, Michele, if you tell them they can't pay big fat bonuses with it and fund golden parachutes, they won't take it.

We all know that the banks were bailed out, and "Too Big To Fail" purports to tell us the real story. It doesn't because in order for it to be a movie, there have to be good guys and bad guys. Since it was all bad guys, it's a little skewered.

The good guy of the piece is that hard-working Secretary of the Treasury, Henry Paulson, beautifully portrayed by William Hurt. In the story, Paulson nearly has a nervous breakdown trying to save the world economy after investment companies start going bankrupt.

It's pointed out that Paulson has no conflict of interest even though he used to run Goldman Sachs because he dumped his stock in the company. That's true. Not mentioned was that for some reason he didn't have to pay any taxes on the sale, something like $50 million.

Then we get to the let's bail out AIG because they're in bed with everybody. Yeah. Their big creditor was Goldman Sachs. Paulson cheated the taxpayers out of $75 billion because, in order for Goldman to get all their money, he didn't negotiate the bailout.

He's the big hero, the one whose wife (Kathy Baker) tells him he's taking on too much. So you can imagine what the rest of this movie was like when we got down to the real bad guys, the banks.

Many people in the film ask, why didn't anyone see this coming? I have some other questions. Why didn't anyone know Bernie Madoff was a crook? Why didn't anyone know banks were lending money to dummy corporations at Enron? Paulson gives us the answer, "They were all making too much money, so nobody asked." The thieves, liars, guys with their heads in the sand, helpers, and pacifiers were played by a wonderful cast: John Hurd, James Wood, Billy Crudupp, Tony Shalhoub, Paul Giamatti, Cynthia Nixon, and Ed Asner. Asner played Warren Buffett, the only one with any money. As Ben Bernanke, Paul Giametti gives another standout performance.

Curtis Hanson did a brilliant job of directing -- one felt the tension and suspense every step of the way.

On a final note, the banks were given money so they could loan it out. Instead, they loaned out less. Their bonuses reached a peak in 2010, the highest amounts ever. Mattresses are looking better and better.

An all right original film of the economic meltdown, and how government bails them out one by one!

[blanbrn · 7/10 · 30 May 2011]

This HBO original film "Too Big to Fail" shows one by one how the major financial companies took a dive one by one all by risky investments with lenders money. And the selling of bad mortgage loans and fake stock lead to the downfall of AIG, Bank of America, Merill Lynch, and Leman Brothers. And sadly as we see in this film as many Americans remember the American tax payer had to bail each out with their tax dollars when the federal government in Washington D.C. decided for it.

Director Curtis Hanson is true to form in this film as it was adapted from Andrew Ross Sorkin's book of the same name. The performances in the film are spot on especially that of William Hurt as treasury secretary Henry Paulson and veteran Paul Giamatti as fed chair Ben Bernanke. Also it was nice seeing James Woods and Cynthia Nixon("Sex and the City")in small roles, plus a delight was Ed Asner as Warren Buffet. This film proved what we all know the big financial companies and government people are tied in together and corrupt and the average Joe foots the bill for their escape as they clearly are "To Big To Fail"

Accurate Portrayal of our Economic Condition

[Richie-67-485852 · 10/10 · 29 May 2011]

As a Real Estate Broker watching this movie, I felt all my beliefs on the subject matter of our current economic failings confirmed. The movie connects the dots and portrays accurately how big money is managed by big people. The little guy actually has no say at all and is just along for the ride. One also sees how fragile everything is if it doesn't work properly. One has thoughts of returning to farming and hunting and living in a nice cabin as a sure thing in these uncertain economic, misrepresented times. Also, our friends the Saudis are no where to be found in this movie which desperately searches for bail-out money. Trillions sit in the middle east frozen for fear of assinations if help is offered to USA is this commentors opinion...Excellent movie but no closure because we are still living in the problem....

Once Upon a Time In a Country Very, Very Close

[mike3386 · 6/10 · 7 January 2016]

The kind of movie I want to like, but the facts kept getting in the way.

So, it's fiction? No, not really, every real person is precisely identified, right down to using actual names and screen labels.

So, it's a docudrama? No, not really, otherwise Hank Paulson would not have been the central character, played by the fine actor William Hurt, nor cast in any role even faintly resembling the financial savior of our Country.

Don't believe me? Then watch the real Senate hearings with the real Paulson, and his constantly changing ready-fire-aim approach while still posturing for Wall Street after arriving late for his sworn job of bank regulator.

If the real facts interest you, watch "Inside Job", which tries to shine some light on this massive corruption at the highest levels and the looting of the American Treasury.

But if you want to see good actors re-enact just how close we came to rending forever the financial fabric of this Country, while playing high stakes "Let's Make a Deal", this movie will git er done.

Matter of fact, with real, official Washington openly throwing around terms at the time like "financial meltdown", one can only wonder what kept it from happening. Wait! I know! John Q. Taxpayer stepped up with $700 billion, later reduced to $475 billion, so that the Wall Street Wizards could continue funding golden parachutes and outrageous salaries. -------------------------------------------------------------------- From the movie, and in reality very close to what happened: "Michele Davis: They almost bring down the US economy as we know it but we can't put restrictions on how they spend the $125 billion we're giving them because... they might not take it!"

The Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Public Affairs upon hearing that the nine bank CEOs may refuse to take free money from the federal government if they had to be held accountable for how they spent it". ------------------------------------------------------------------ BTW, the real Ms. Davis is now Global Head of Corporate Affairs for Morgan Stanley . . . you really can't make up stuff like this.

Too Big to Fail and Too Big to Trivialize

[clydedesper · 8/10 · 29 May 2011]

"Too Big to Fail" addresses the subject of modern-day mega corporations whose failure, however deserving, might be of such catastrophic dimensions that it must be avoided, if at all possible, whatever the cost. The subject matter, the US financial crisis of 2008, is profound and enormous, in terms of its shock at the time and continuing consequences, to trivialize. The main characters – William Hurt, Paul Giamatti, for instance – become aware of the distinct possibility of spiraling into a 21st century version of The Great Depression. We are awestruck by such a possibility. The plot forces at work are both economic and political, both having profound influences. Politics? As usual, it is the Art of the Possible. Economics? A very difficult-to-comprehend arena, neither art nor science. The story leads us, step by step, as numerous characters play their role on this stage. The message: How could they have been so stupid? The filmmakers have hit the nail on the head.

Isn't the real story

[nijat00 · 6/10 · 30 March 2019]

I almost believed, if I hadn't watched "Inside Job". These guys, especially Hank Paulson, were the main "architectures" of financial crisis. Hank Paulson loaded the huge amount of toxic assets and sold them. They made a huge profit. Afterwards, he sold his shares and became SEC secretary.

But all this movie does is showing him as a hero. Maybe he did something to fix the economy, but it doesn't change the fact that he personally and SEC are as culprit as those banks. If SEC had done its job, we wouldn't have been talking about any crisis.

Paulson was no altruistic hero

[kelly-ann-mchale · 5/10 · 18 August 2011]

Unfortunately the filmmakers felt the need to create a "hero" of the piece -- unlike the source book, which simply tells what happened. They chose Henry Paulson (William Hurt), ex-Goldman Sachs CEO turned Treasury Secretary. But the real-life Paulson is no hero.

The film makes a point that Paulson sold all his Goldman stock before becoming Treasury Sec, but fails to point out that he was excused from all taxes on the sale, which saved him upwards of $50 million.

The film also whitewashes Paulson's $150 billion AIG bailout, claiming that AIG owed money to almost everybody in the world. In fact, AIG's largest creditor was, that's right, Goldman Sachs. Paulson failed to negotiate a hard-nosed payout of AIG's obligations, such as offering creditors 50c on the dollar, which the creditors would have had no choice but to accept. This would have saved US taxpayers a cool $75 billion. But it would have hurt Paulson's pals at Goldman.

My point being, Paulson was thoroughly compromised, and managed to feather his own nest and that of his old pals. What next? A stirring depiction of Dick Cheney's altruistic hiring of Halliburton in Iraq? This shortcoming aside, the film clips along nicely, and it's fun to see so many name actors portraying the Wall Street titans. James Woods is a perfect Dick Fuld.

Scary all over again, for those of us who wondered if all our investments would vaporize in 2008.

[TxMike · 10 March 2013]

The year 2008 is a distant memory for many things, but for the financial crisis of 2008 it seems just so very recent. This movie, "Too Big To Fail", uses all the real people involved, and likely all the real dialog the filmmakers could dig up. The result is a very realistic, very chilling snapshot of how financial institutions can make or break our economy and our lives.

I am retired, in late 2007 and into 2008 I had a pretty big chunk of my savings in stock market related investments. When the financial markets started falling, then falling more, then almost dropping off a cliff, it was very worrying to think every thing I had spent 30+ years saving up might be worth almost nothing. Seeing this movie gives great insight into what all went on to create the crisis, then to help it level out and eventually start to recover.

Many characters are played by excellent, experienced actors, but the prime focus is William Hurt who does a super job as Henry Paulson , US Secretary of the Treasury. While he had no direct authority to make the large banks take actions that he and his team of specialists thought best, he had a tremendously persuasive position.

After a number of attempts to get a solution, the last desperate act was to get Congress to approve a $700Billion package that would be used as a stimulus, to selected banks, to encourage them to begin lending again. For without lending the economy could not hope to recover.

The news of that caused the stock markets to stabilize, with renewed investor confidence, and set the stage for a recovery. Ironically, the banks did NOT resume lending right away, but it was the news, the promise of better days that sparked the improvement.

The great news is that now 4 1/2 years down the road, the stock markets have reached new historical highs and unemployment continues to drop. There is no guarantee it will continue for long, but at least the indications are that the crisis is behind us.

Scary and True

[mchl88 · 7/10 · 27 November 2023]

This was kinda like the Big Short but without the funny parts.

Admittedly what I know about banking could fit on the head of a pin but the overall message that the banks caused the problem and then we bailed them out with nary a restriction on how they used the money was very believable for me because, why not? As my mom always used to say, the rich get richer

This is the quote from the movie that boggles my mind: "There is not a bank in the world that has enough money in its vault to pay its depositors. It's all built on trust."

I read this in a book recently about money and how it's all built on trust. Someone hands you a twenty dollar bill, what is it really worth? The paper and ink mean nothing. It's the belief that someone else will accept it for $20 worth of goods or services that makes it valuable. Our whole system is based on that faith and it's scary when you really stop to think about it. Movies like this make you do just that.

Yes, Goldman's role glossed over; but Rep. Barney Frank & Sen. Chris Dodd's roles were IGNORED!

[kmm111313 · 8/10 · 5 June 2011]

I agree with many about the ease of understanding, especially when TOPHER GRACE w/ Hurt & Crudup simplify it for Cynthia Nixon (a proxy for us, the American people). Though very strong almost throughout the film, the acting and dialog/banter in this scene is well worth the film's viewing!

There is one more glaring omission/defect in the film, besides Goldman-Sachs larger role; writer Andrew Sorkin and director Chris Hansen leave out the (can't call it criminal, can we?) banking oversight roles of Sen. Chris Dodd & Rep. Barney Frank have in the disaster? The film almost depicts them (w/ Spkr Pelosi) as naive heroes! What were Sorkin and Hansen thinking? Hello - CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS and SWEETHEART DEALS to look the other way? Oh sorry, there was no quid-pro-quo...

Anyone else want that beach-front property in Utah?

I THOUGHT I saw this movie before.

[demetrios999 · 7/10 · 8 June 2011]

This movie feels like the financial version of the 2003 Showtime movie 9/11 DC Time of Crisis, a retelling of history designed to make the participants look better than they deserved.

Anyone who watched the news channels saw Bush in 2001 and Paulson in 2008 with "deer in headlights" expressions and responses that made it clear that they were just overwhelmed and really did not have a clue, not the calm, cool and collected versions shown in these respective films.

"Too Big to Fail" is well acted and casted and is an interesting two hours, but should not be taken as history.

Greed

[jotix100 · 8/10 · 23 July 2011]

As we start watching this film, that plays like a documentary, we are given an introduction as to what caused the debacle in the United States economy system prior to the demise of the powerhouse Lehman Brothers. The US economy almost collapse because of the same people that became obscenely rich while the party was going on, were reluctant in fixing the main problem, as well as their responsibility in creating what led to its almost collapse.

Unfortunately, after all was said and done, things remained the same because even though the government, led by then Treasury secretary Henry Paulson, decided to inject cash for the banks to continue lending money to the industries and businesses that depended on it, the little people that did not have the power of the more powerful elite to continue operating were the ones that suffered the most.

On a positive note, the figure of Warren Buffet, the oracle of Omaha, comes out as the most level headed individual of all. He is a humble man when it comes to show off his wealth. In fact, the film shows him as the simple, unassuming person that he is. It is humbling for someone like Hank Paulson to seek advice from this great man that had a clear picture about the excesses the men at the center of the story had committed.

Curtis Hanson directed the HBO film, based on a novel of Andrew Ross Sorkin, with a screenplay by Peter Gould. The high financing world is examined by the filmmakers, trying to make sense about the fateful year of 2008. The best thing they achieved was the almost perfect match in the casting to play on the screen the principals involved in the story. The film requires a certain knowledge to follow the intricacies of that world, something that is not easily grasped by the general public.

William Hurt shines as Hank Paulson, the man at the center of the storm. We watch him walking up Seventh Avenue in Manhattan looking at what was Lehman Brothers' headquarters. Others in the film are Billy Crudup as Timothy Geithner. Paul Giamatti playing the bearded, and somber, Ben Bernanke. As Paulson's Treasury team there are wonderful performances by Cinthia Nixon, Joey Slotnick, Topher Grace and Ayan Akhtar. Almost all the other actors have only limited time in front of the camera, but their collective effort is notable.

*** Spoiler Alert **** The Economy Stays In Trouble

[mabbott10 · 6/10 · 12 June 2011]

Finally watched this and I have to say - not overly impressed. While the actual story of the Crash of 2008 (and when are we going to start calling it that?) is too long for a two hour movie but, this film drops some major turning points that contributed to the meltdown. The writing tries to make the issues understandable, sometimes at the expense of characters (like when the Treasury Secretary's staff explain to their communications director how the mortgage meltdown happened . . . really? An senior employee of the Treasury Department has to have this explained to her after working through the crisis for months?). However, the film does not try to hide some colossal and often tragic mistakes by the main characters. Hurt is good as Paulson but, the best performance has to be Paul Giamatti as Ben Bernanke. I also enjoyed how the film showed the top CEOs for the spoiled divas that they are. This is a good starter if you want to get a grasp on what happened but, there are much better source materials such as "Inside Job" and Matt Taibbi's book - Griftopia.

AIG IS A BIG COMPANY

[nogodnomasters · 10/10 · 5 December 2018]

The financial crisis has made a splash in the film industry, ironically capitalizing on the failure of unregulated capitalism. There is also "Margin Call" and Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps." I couldn't help think about the LIBOR scandal that is on the horizon as this film mentions the major players and Barclays.

This film goes behind the scenes to show the phone calls and board rooms as the drama unfolds. The all-star cast gave us a credible performance. The characters are introduced by displaying their name and company affiliation on the screen. I wish they had used some flashier fonts and maybe some grindhouse swagger music as they walked in to talk to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson (William Hurt) who is sometimes seen having breakfast with Fed Chair Ben Bernake played by Paul Giamatti.

Michele Davis (Cynthia Nixon) has to give a press conference and asks how to explain why AIG failed. At this point the movie comes together in one scene which explains the whole crisis in layman's terms and why mommies and kitties will die if AIG goes under...okay maybe not the last part, Ben Bernake does that later.

Billy Crudup plays Timothy Geithner the head of the NY Federal Reserve. His ideas and influence were instrumental in buying time for congress to act.

In looking toward Europe, they is a newer and scarier phrase: "Too big to save." This is a great film. I would also recommend the CNBC documentary "House of Cards."

PARENTAL GUIDE: No sex, no nudity, many F-bombs

first rate actors

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 27 January 2017]

It's early 2008 and Lehman Brothers is falling. CEO Dick Fuld (James Woods) is stand-fast as he rejects an offer from Warren Buffett. He's not willing to sell low as he expects to weather the storm. A few months later, Lehman Brothers is collapsing. Secretary of the Treasury Hank Paulson (William Hurt), Chairman of the Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke, and President of the New York Fed Tim Geithner among others are struggling to gather private interests to bail out the failing investment bank as the contagion spreads.

The actors are first rate. I assume the writing is well-researched. It's a relatively clear telling of the events. As a narrative, it does lack the tension of an unknown story and the clarity of one lead character. This is a good companion piece to other docs about the subject.

Delivers the Nuts and Bolts

[view_and_review · 9/10 · 16 December 2021]

"Too Big To Fail" was an incredible production. With the help of some big Hollywood names HBO Films took a massively complex catastrophe and framed it where financially and politically illiterate people like myself could understand. While the documentary "Inside Job" approached the '08 housing and financial collapse more comprehensively, and "Margin Call" approaches it from the moments before, "Too Big To Fail" looks at the bustling hours and days of the collapse and the moves made to stave off a full scale disaster. The movie is go go go. There's no time for exposition, no time for character development, no time for violins; they barely notched out any time to explain what happened. With a lesser movie, or a movie of lesser significance, these could be looked at as negatives. With this movie I think the audience was glad to eschew dramatic build up, character development, Chekov's gun, and all the other theatrical devices. Get to the nitty gritty. Who did what and why, and how did the Congress come to the decision it made? "Too Big To Fail" delivers the nuts and bolts promptly, succinctly, and effectively.

Good review of the financial mess

[bryanmillsfist · 7/10 · 12 June 2011]

This story is subject to partisan prejudices as evidenced by another reviewer's assertion that the highly biased "Inside Job" is the "truth".

To HBO's credit they resisted the temptation to use this sordid affair as a platform for opinion like Charles Ferguson did in "Inside Job". Instead they took a bare bones approach to the story. They give the viewer a summation of the events leading up to the government bailouts.This also hurts the story as character development is fairly shallow and the plot itself requires foreknowledge of the economic environment surrounding these events.

Considering that these events occurred so recently any expectation that you will receive the complete story is unrealistic. Any person who thinks that the truth will be so quickly revealed is kidding themselves. There are facts that are still unknown that in time will be revealed. However, this movie does a good job of presenting the facts we do know in lay terms with resorting to the histrionics of propaganda films like "Inside Job".

The actors do a solid job of portraying the individuals involved. There is no unnecessary depictions of personal foibles that do not in some way relate to the story. The acting is sober and fair,which is appropriate for this film's aim of presenting a factual narrative of the controversial events.

Overall, I believe this movie to be a solid, objective, presentation of the financial mess of 2008. That some ideologues on IMDb object to that should not deter you. This movie is a good intro to what is a complex subject that requires far more then reading articles on the Internet to truly understand.

Sympathy? No

[happel317 · 5/10 · 22 March 2012]

The movie itself was put together very well following the chronicles of the fiasco that unfolded during the credit crunch. Where it went horribly wrong is by humanizing Hank Paulson. Making him seem vulnerable and genuine and sincere. It has recently been published that Saint Paulson tipped off 20 or so hedge funds about the coming collapse so they could unload their positions. And this film is attempting to portray him as the victim and the hero and laud him with applause for working so diligently on this problem. His colleagues at Goldman cleaned up on the CDS contracts betting on the inevitable crisis they knew was coming. James Woods did a very good job at making Dick Fuld's loathsome character believable, though.