This is an enjoyable, funny, exposing portrayal of the corrupt system of offshore accounts and how some apparently disconnected events share links back to the corruption at work. Maybe it shouldn't be funny because this is an infuriating reality that could be fixed if...well, if legislators were themselves not corrupt. Yes, the telling of the tale is not done in a totally conventional straight-forward linear way. But it is easy to follow and amusing, even as you feel you should be angry. And of course you realise that this film won't change a thing. But it is well made and acted.
395 Reviews
Fun, entertaining and well executed
louis10111 September 2019
Good intentions but all over the place
MegaMaexn18 October 2019
Yes, the message comes across loud and clear about the dilemma of fraudulent insurance scams, tax evasions and shell companies, but the storytelling is haphazard, disjointed and feeble at best. The stellar cast cannot save what the writing is messing up, this is a missed opportunity of telling (what could have been) a much better story about a dark element of today American corporate life (which Mr. Trump clearly play a role in as well...).
Hilarious!!! Not a comedy!
monberger19 October 2019
Throughout the whole movie, I catch my self laughing so hard and here they're genuinely funny moments. Streep is just so good! It is really a pleasure to watch her act. She is amazing! The whole cast is great! What really makes this a good film is not the topic or concept of the story but rather all the elements of the film. The way to tell a story. Soderbergh again is so good at what he does. Smart writing that engages viewers to like and enjoy a story. Money, corruption are elements that sometimes are too familiar in our lives and we do not want to see as for entertainment. It all depends on what you like to see in films. The Laundromat is well-acted and well written. Personally, I loved it!!!
How to scam the world when you're rich.
deloudelouvain18 November 2019
If you are like me absolutely not interested in financial companies, rich people and their dodgy ways of making money, but you still want to know about the Panama Papers scandal than The Laundromat is worth a watch. They try to explain it in a funny way, but even then I'm still not getting all the scams. And that's just because I'm an antisocial person that wants to live as far away as possible from people like that. The movie is worth a watch because of the very good cast. Gary Oldman, Antonio Banderas, Meryl Streep for the bigger roles, Matthias Schoenaerts, Sharon Stone, David Schwimmer and others for the smaller parts. It's well filmed and brought, and even if it's very far away from my way of life, and that I still don't understand half of the possible scams, it's entertaining. The world needs more whistle blowers, but what it needs more are competent judges putting all those leaches in prison for a long time, but that's just utopic as the world isn't fair and never will be.
Disjointed and unfunny despite the noble intentions
dierregi30 January 2020
When Meryl Streep's fictional husband dies in a boating accident, she discovers that the boat insurance is derailed by a series of complicated scams (shell companies managed in Panama) and she probably won't get a dime.
This may seem disconnected from the film opening, with Banderas and Oldman playing two unsavoury characters, but we soon discover they are at the heart of the scandal knows as the Panama Papers, which the movie tries to explain with a series of vignettes, supposed to be sarcastic and - perhaps - even hilarious.
The result is pretty boring, despite the characters (and schemes) being truly despicable and the whole political system supporting it even more so. Unfortunately, the pacing and plotting is convoluted and too many intercontinental characters are involved to care about any of them.
Besides, Oldman's German accent was annoying to the point of distraction. Given the international cast, I wonder why they didn't just hire a real German actor.
A missed opportunity, even if Streep is quite good in it.
This may seem disconnected from the film opening, with Banderas and Oldman playing two unsavoury characters, but we soon discover they are at the heart of the scandal knows as the Panama Papers, which the movie tries to explain with a series of vignettes, supposed to be sarcastic and - perhaps - even hilarious.
The result is pretty boring, despite the characters (and schemes) being truly despicable and the whole political system supporting it even more so. Unfortunately, the pacing and plotting is convoluted and too many intercontinental characters are involved to care about any of them.
Besides, Oldman's German accent was annoying to the point of distraction. Given the international cast, I wonder why they didn't just hire a real German actor.
A missed opportunity, even if Streep is quite good in it.
There is a reason why the attorneys at the center of the scandal this covers, wanted it banned.
Her-Excellency20 October 2019
The attorneys at the center of the scandal this covers, filed suit in federal court claiming they were defamed by the film. Upon viewing, you'll realize that there is no way they did not defame themselves.
Above and beyond that, this is a film every single person who is unfamiliar with offshore banking should see. It describes in accurate, albeit humorous terms, how "money" works in some people's hands, vs. how it works in the hands of the normal Joe.
The cast is made up of amazing actors who give amazing performances, yet as most of us know, that isn't always the ingredient for a great movie. This one went a step further, and gifted us with FACTS. (Not even its many detractors can argue with any conclusive proof that the laws it unveils to the layman are not on the books and being used daily).
Basically, it takes the viewer through the inner machinations of a business run by people who know the law and push the law as far as the law will allow in order to serve their own purposes. People who deal in gauging the value of buying and selling trades and commodities, as easy as they gauge the value of .... and trade in ... other people.
Lastly, in going through other reviews here, I can't help but think about how different we all are, and how some people understood and could appreciate such a well presented window into actual business practices and money and how the two affect the average American, and how others seemed to take simple facts, as a personal affront or attack on their political party.
Not WANTING to face facts, does not change fact.
Above and beyond that, this is a film every single person who is unfamiliar with offshore banking should see. It describes in accurate, albeit humorous terms, how "money" works in some people's hands, vs. how it works in the hands of the normal Joe.
The cast is made up of amazing actors who give amazing performances, yet as most of us know, that isn't always the ingredient for a great movie. This one went a step further, and gifted us with FACTS. (Not even its many detractors can argue with any conclusive proof that the laws it unveils to the layman are not on the books and being used daily).
Basically, it takes the viewer through the inner machinations of a business run by people who know the law and push the law as far as the law will allow in order to serve their own purposes. People who deal in gauging the value of buying and selling trades and commodities, as easy as they gauge the value of .... and trade in ... other people.
Lastly, in going through other reviews here, I can't help but think about how different we all are, and how some people understood and could appreciate such a well presented window into actual business practices and money and how the two affect the average American, and how others seemed to take simple facts, as a personal affront or attack on their political party.
Not WANTING to face facts, does not change fact.
Good film, but PLEASE get the Chinese language right
meiliyingfilm19 November 2019
The film itself is great. We definitely need more films like this rather than just popcorn entertainment. It's very educational and has a great point. The bold cinematic forms are inspiring too.
But PLEASE, please get the Chinese language right. It's already the year of 2019, and it's almost absurd for me to see that every Chinese character in every single English language film can't speak Chinese.
I'm not even talking about the accent. Some of these actors are Chinese Americans who grew up without learning Chinese, and their native language is English. Some speak Cantonese, which is completely different from Mandarin. The only actor in this film that can speak Mandarin is 'Bo Xilai.'
When the language is so broken and child-like, it's really hard to believe in their characters, and it kills the scene. So please, please, please. Pay more attention to this. ADR the scene, find an assistant casting director that understands the language, cast uprising Mandarin-speaking actors, hire a language coach...there are a million ways to make it work if you just try a little harder.
But PLEASE, please get the Chinese language right. It's already the year of 2019, and it's almost absurd for me to see that every Chinese character in every single English language film can't speak Chinese.
I'm not even talking about the accent. Some of these actors are Chinese Americans who grew up without learning Chinese, and their native language is English. Some speak Cantonese, which is completely different from Mandarin. The only actor in this film that can speak Mandarin is 'Bo Xilai.'
When the language is so broken and child-like, it's really hard to believe in their characters, and it kills the scene. So please, please, please. Pay more attention to this. ADR the scene, find an assistant casting director that understands the language, cast uprising Mandarin-speaking actors, hire a language coach...there are a million ways to make it work if you just try a little harder.
Too many characters
resireg18 February 2022
This movie tell us an interesting story, but with excessive side plots. A guy sleeping with his daughter's best friend, a bigamist accountant, a Chinese power couple involved in murder, what do they add to the story? They are distractions that prevent us to focus on the money laundering scheme.
I once worked in a bank in a tax haven
cordenw21 October 2019
Many years ago of course, but as I look back I now realize that this sort of financial treachery has been going on since the Garden of Eden.
As a callow youth back in the early 70's on the Island of Jersey in the Channel Islands I landed a job at one of the "conduit banks" that handled remittances from overseas colonies , countries in Africa, The Middle East, India, Pakistan etc.
Even then it was shrouded in secrecy and I was too young to realize that the stuff that was going on was mainly designed by Accountants and Lawyers to keep money out of the hands of Governments who wanted it so they could steal it themselves.
Local lawyers were given seats on the boards of locally incorporated companies with shares to go along with the appointment but with pre-signed letters of resignation should they get out of line. In those early 70's it was just an infant industry compared to today , the fire was lit by the fall of the Soviet Union, The European Union and the economic rise of China.
So many more crooks materialized with a need to hide their loot.
What was millions before, quickly became hundreds of billions as the aforesaid accountants and lawyers looked for loopholes and paperwork to get around taxation laws.
It wasn't the politicians who deliberately drew up the laws to allow this exploitation, they usually ain't smart enough, but the lawyers and accountants ARE smart enough and that's why we have this debacle. The problem is that everything is just this side of legal so no one can do much about it.
My friend at the time was a senior law draftsman for the Government of Jersey and he told me that they always drew up a law so there was an obscure escape hatch, in case they themselves ever got in a jam.
A tweak or two here and there ruins one haven's advantage (and its economy) and opens up another in a different spot.
In today's world you can move any amount of money from one jurisdiction to another at the click of a key, without a question being asked.
And so this movie examines the spider's web with a touch of humour, a great deal of panache and a fairly good understanding of what goes on when things go south.
Meryl Streep is very good in her role and Gary Oldman and Banderas are perfect as the amoral principals in Mossack/Fonseca.
There's no such thing as "just desserts" in the world of offshore finance because hardly anyone ever loses. By the time the authorities get around to nailing someone, the money's been moved to another jurisdiction and they have to start all over again.
Most people think that you can walk into a bank or law office in one of these places with a court order from the U.S. or Canada (or wherever) and that they will shrink in fear and give you the info you're looking for............. Think again!
They just laugh at these orders, because they have no authority in foreign countries and they serve as an early warning system to their clients to move the money, tout de suite, to one of the other jurisdictions I just mentioned. Think of a cat trying to catch a dot of light on the living room wall and you'll have a good understanding.
A couple of things to remember about these jewels in the Caribbean or the Med or the English Channel;
1) that the locals don't reap much of the benefits (apart from the few who are part of the game).
I myself was paid peanuts for handling vast amounts of money, while the banks as entities made a king's ransom by way of service fees and trust administration charges. Those cheapskate banks still pay miserly wages to the front desk flunkies.
2) Even if Governments DO manage to collect any money, you won't see a dime of reduction in your taxes, because they spend most of that money firstly in expenses collecting it, and secondly on programs trying to stamp it out. It's like painting the Forth Bridge.
So, very little of the fabulous sums actually stay where they are deposited and only a tiny, tiny fraction is spent on local economies, because the rich don't actually live there. The money just bounces on the ground for a second and ends up either in London or New York, where Xanadu type homes are purchased in anonymous company names.
Don't believe the headlines that tell us that it's being cleaned up, it's worse than it ever was.
A very interesting, if depressing, movie, a million tax free times better than "The Big Short" enjoy.
As a callow youth back in the early 70's on the Island of Jersey in the Channel Islands I landed a job at one of the "conduit banks" that handled remittances from overseas colonies , countries in Africa, The Middle East, India, Pakistan etc.
Even then it was shrouded in secrecy and I was too young to realize that the stuff that was going on was mainly designed by Accountants and Lawyers to keep money out of the hands of Governments who wanted it so they could steal it themselves.
Local lawyers were given seats on the boards of locally incorporated companies with shares to go along with the appointment but with pre-signed letters of resignation should they get out of line. In those early 70's it was just an infant industry compared to today , the fire was lit by the fall of the Soviet Union, The European Union and the economic rise of China.
So many more crooks materialized with a need to hide their loot.
What was millions before, quickly became hundreds of billions as the aforesaid accountants and lawyers looked for loopholes and paperwork to get around taxation laws.
It wasn't the politicians who deliberately drew up the laws to allow this exploitation, they usually ain't smart enough, but the lawyers and accountants ARE smart enough and that's why we have this debacle. The problem is that everything is just this side of legal so no one can do much about it.
My friend at the time was a senior law draftsman for the Government of Jersey and he told me that they always drew up a law so there was an obscure escape hatch, in case they themselves ever got in a jam.
A tweak or two here and there ruins one haven's advantage (and its economy) and opens up another in a different spot.
In today's world you can move any amount of money from one jurisdiction to another at the click of a key, without a question being asked.
And so this movie examines the spider's web with a touch of humour, a great deal of panache and a fairly good understanding of what goes on when things go south.
Meryl Streep is very good in her role and Gary Oldman and Banderas are perfect as the amoral principals in Mossack/Fonseca.
There's no such thing as "just desserts" in the world of offshore finance because hardly anyone ever loses. By the time the authorities get around to nailing someone, the money's been moved to another jurisdiction and they have to start all over again.
Most people think that you can walk into a bank or law office in one of these places with a court order from the U.S. or Canada (or wherever) and that they will shrink in fear and give you the info you're looking for............. Think again!
They just laugh at these orders, because they have no authority in foreign countries and they serve as an early warning system to their clients to move the money, tout de suite, to one of the other jurisdictions I just mentioned. Think of a cat trying to catch a dot of light on the living room wall and you'll have a good understanding.
A couple of things to remember about these jewels in the Caribbean or the Med or the English Channel;
1) that the locals don't reap much of the benefits (apart from the few who are part of the game).
I myself was paid peanuts for handling vast amounts of money, while the banks as entities made a king's ransom by way of service fees and trust administration charges. Those cheapskate banks still pay miserly wages to the front desk flunkies.
2) Even if Governments DO manage to collect any money, you won't see a dime of reduction in your taxes, because they spend most of that money firstly in expenses collecting it, and secondly on programs trying to stamp it out. It's like painting the Forth Bridge.
So, very little of the fabulous sums actually stay where they are deposited and only a tiny, tiny fraction is spent on local economies, because the rich don't actually live there. The money just bounces on the ground for a second and ends up either in London or New York, where Xanadu type homes are purchased in anonymous company names.
Don't believe the headlines that tell us that it's being cleaned up, it's worse than it ever was.
A very interesting, if depressing, movie, a million tax free times better than "The Big Short" enjoy.
It literally is banned in China lolol
eternaldfl27 March 2020
Not to say the Asian actors' Chinese dialogue was anything other than plain awkward.
This is the very first movie I found to be entirely deleted from Douban. I didn't use to think there might be that much truth to it. Now I do.
Money Money Money
kosmasp23 March 2020
Money might not talk, but it rules (pun intended). Having it makes you being able to do things, get stuff and just overall have advantages over others. This takes many cases of things that actually happen and has quite a lot of star power behind it (or in front of it/camera). Soderbergh does have that pull, so not really surprising.
The quality varies, but overall this is quite decent. There is a message here (or multiple ones I guess), but it still is able to be entertaining. Characters and likeability vary and some will like or hate it for this. But just enjoy an ensemble and some interesting stories - if you can
The quality varies, but overall this is quite decent. There is a message here (or multiple ones I guess), but it still is able to be entertaining. Characters and likeability vary and some will like or hate it for this. But just enjoy an ensemble and some interesting stories - if you can
I Feel Bad for Meryl
donaldnwolfe-843-38356514 November 2019
As others have noted, this movie is in the vein of The Big Short, which did a great job of explaining, in a comedic way, certain complex financial machinations. By comparison, The Laundrymat falls completely flat, and each of its disjointed, meandering and muddled vignettes does as much to confuse (and in some cases misinform) laymen as it does to enlighten them about the nature of financial shenanigans revealed in the Panama Papers. Although I agree with the fundamental message of the movie, which in the end is delivered in the most heavy-handed manner I've ever witnessed in cinema (poor Meryl Streep), both the story-telling and the technical explanations are simply sophomoric. I almost never write a negative review. I love movies, I admire the actors in this movie, and I'm easy to please. But wow, this was bad. I had to speak out.
If you have a brain it's a good movie.
jonoau18 October 2019
Copied a line from a previous review but the writer is spot on. If you are from the darkness and bother to read past that sentence then you won't like this movie.
The humour is dark and intelligent but the message is clear and probably shows us exactly what is happening in the world today, specially the US. And the darkness.
The humour is dark and intelligent but the message is clear and probably shows us exactly what is happening in the world today, specially the US. And the darkness.
The Laundromat takes capitalism to the cleaners...
serranoeric4 January 2020
The Laundromat's true weight in gold is in how the absurdity of our financial system can be written about in such simple terms, and how simple ane priceless dialogue can be performed better your our highest paid actors. Whereas Netflix previously broke the bank on A-Listers, big idea films with little depth, and heavy marketing, they really cash in with movies like The Laundromat. Meryl Streep herself is worth the price of admission.
Although a little moralistic, I liked it
LucyBonette22 October 2019
Yes, The Big Short is better. But I liked this movie. I thought Meryl, Antonio and Gary were good. And just like in The Big Short, I didn't understand half the financial transactions that were explained to us. Regardless, I did understand what they were trying to tell us and I enjoyed watching this.
Side note, it's interesting how you always instantly recognise Meryl Streep, regardless of how many wigs and sunglasses she puts on.
Side note, it's interesting how you always instantly recognise Meryl Streep, regardless of how many wigs and sunglasses she puts on.
Interesting story, could have been told more interestingly.
madserd29 March 2020
Definitely worth a watch! Fantastic cast and a brilliant plot; wish it was less of a docu-drama style narrative and instead a more engaging narrative. A kind of a dummy for shell corporations and the Panama papers leak which had explosive effects in the financial markets and political circles around the globe.
Tries to be fun but falls flat with its boring direction.
cruise0118 October 2019
Warning: Spoilers
2 out of 5 stars.
The Laundromat is a similar take like The Big Short movie which focuses on real drama and events about insurance fraud by Mossack Fonseca scandal. Showing the underground of the corrupt financial system. However, the film tries to be fun with a serious matter. The Big Short worked with taking a serious matter and explaining the situation to the audience. The Laundromat fails completely with the insurance fraud scheme. Narrated by Gary Oldman and Antonio Banderas which they explain about the underground world of insurance and their way of fixing the system for them to be rich. While people who are trying to file a claim does not see a cent.
The plot is boring, convoluted, and dull. Following several characters. Meryl Streep plays a character who is trying to file an insurance claim after an accident on a tour boat leaves her a widow. The film follows other who are stuck in a world of bribery, corruption, and adjusters who are trying to get rich. The film is not funny. It is more boring and a drag for its short running time.
The script and direction tries to be fun with the characters breaking the fourth wall but fails with a topic that is not interesting at all. The cast is great. They are stuck in a film that does not have any developing story or characterization.
Overall, The Laundromat is a bad film. It is boring. It is slow. It lacks its fun energy which it is trying so hard to be with such a serious topic. This film is definitely a miss.
The Laundromat is a similar take like The Big Short movie which focuses on real drama and events about insurance fraud by Mossack Fonseca scandal. Showing the underground of the corrupt financial system. However, the film tries to be fun with a serious matter. The Big Short worked with taking a serious matter and explaining the situation to the audience. The Laundromat fails completely with the insurance fraud scheme. Narrated by Gary Oldman and Antonio Banderas which they explain about the underground world of insurance and their way of fixing the system for them to be rich. While people who are trying to file a claim does not see a cent.
The plot is boring, convoluted, and dull. Following several characters. Meryl Streep plays a character who is trying to file an insurance claim after an accident on a tour boat leaves her a widow. The film follows other who are stuck in a world of bribery, corruption, and adjusters who are trying to get rich. The film is not funny. It is more boring and a drag for its short running time.
The script and direction tries to be fun with the characters breaking the fourth wall but fails with a topic that is not interesting at all. The cast is great. They are stuck in a film that does not have any developing story or characterization.
Overall, The Laundromat is a bad film. It is boring. It is slow. It lacks its fun energy which it is trying so hard to be with such a serious topic. This film is definitely a miss.
You Can't Handle The Truth
MissCzarChasm28 November 2019
I would say that The Laundromat is a no-holds-barred look into the very REAL Panama Papers scandal, but that would be a lie, as it actually does hold back A LOT and does not delve deeply enough into detailing much of the corruption which ensued then, and which still exists today.
For those unfamiliar with the "Panama Papers" scandal, in 2016, a whistle-blower released over 11 MILLION documents from the law firm Mossack & Fonseca (just ONE of the law firms involved in this kind of business), which detailed almost every aspect regarding the structure and practices of the shell companies which are used by some of the world's richest people in order to avoid paying taxes. This film, while presenting much of the story, fails to present all of it. One of the things the film did NOT cover, was what happened to journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia, who first broke the story.
I believe that one of the reasons Soderbergh chose to not cover that part, and other equally disturbing aspects of the scandal, was that he wanted to present a film which would speak in almost lighthearted (if such a thing can even be done on this topic) and simplistic terms that most anyone could understand. As such, the film is presented as mostly comedy, which to me, is both unfortunate and genius. I mean, how best to swallow a bitter, but necessary pill, than to camouflage it with chocolate? While the chocolate in no way makes the pill less effective, it does help it go down easier. In the same manner, what was presented, although not complete, is in no way false. The only falsehoods, come from those who choose to lie to themselves, and to others, by thinking and propagating the thought that presenting these truths is somehow meant to demean them or their political party. These individuals should ask themselves: if your political party needs to be defended from simple truth, facts, data and documentation, how believable, honorable or strong is it to begin with?
Lastly, I am not a "shill", I do not work for the film or anyone associated with it; I gain nothing from this or any other review; nor do I really care if anyone believes me. What I do care about is that due to emotional cry-baby attitudes and just plain ignorance, the truth is being silenced more and more, not just on IMDB, but across several platforms. I care that it is truly a tragedy, travesty and sin when ill-informed people CHOOSE to STAY ill-informed. I care about the absurdity of ill-informed people doubling-down and trying to manipulate ratings (such as is the case here) in order to try and sway other such people to also remain ill-informed. WHO in their right minds would choose misinformation for themselves when a vast plethora of information is readily available to us (now more than at any other time in the history of the world). When you think about it, choosing to remain uninformed seems almost unnatural in today's world. The term: "educate yourselves" should not be seen as an insult. This film does that, whether the viewer wants it or not.
For those unfamiliar with the "Panama Papers" scandal, in 2016, a whistle-blower released over 11 MILLION documents from the law firm Mossack & Fonseca (just ONE of the law firms involved in this kind of business), which detailed almost every aspect regarding the structure and practices of the shell companies which are used by some of the world's richest people in order to avoid paying taxes. This film, while presenting much of the story, fails to present all of it. One of the things the film did NOT cover, was what happened to journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia, who first broke the story.
I believe that one of the reasons Soderbergh chose to not cover that part, and other equally disturbing aspects of the scandal, was that he wanted to present a film which would speak in almost lighthearted (if such a thing can even be done on this topic) and simplistic terms that most anyone could understand. As such, the film is presented as mostly comedy, which to me, is both unfortunate and genius. I mean, how best to swallow a bitter, but necessary pill, than to camouflage it with chocolate? While the chocolate in no way makes the pill less effective, it does help it go down easier. In the same manner, what was presented, although not complete, is in no way false. The only falsehoods, come from those who choose to lie to themselves, and to others, by thinking and propagating the thought that presenting these truths is somehow meant to demean them or their political party. These individuals should ask themselves: if your political party needs to be defended from simple truth, facts, data and documentation, how believable, honorable or strong is it to begin with?
Lastly, I am not a "shill", I do not work for the film or anyone associated with it; I gain nothing from this or any other review; nor do I really care if anyone believes me. What I do care about is that due to emotional cry-baby attitudes and just plain ignorance, the truth is being silenced more and more, not just on IMDB, but across several platforms. I care that it is truly a tragedy, travesty and sin when ill-informed people CHOOSE to STAY ill-informed. I care about the absurdity of ill-informed people doubling-down and trying to manipulate ratings (such as is the case here) in order to try and sway other such people to also remain ill-informed. WHO in their right minds would choose misinformation for themselves when a vast plethora of information is readily available to us (now more than at any other time in the history of the world). When you think about it, choosing to remain uninformed seems almost unnatural in today's world. The term: "educate yourselves" should not be seen as an insult. This film does that, whether the viewer wants it or not.
Great cast, bad guys are too charismatic
nes_group3_reviewer17 September 2020
Warning: Spoilers
I have been planning to watch "The Laundromat" since spring when Netflix first recommended it to me. Thanks to my English homework I watched it yesterday! What I loved most about this movie? Definitely Meryl Streep's part. She is fascinating even being awfully dressed (I hope intentionally, compared to "The Devil Wears Prada"). Actually I enjoyed the all-star cast. Gary Oldman and Antonio Banderas looked charming and wonderful despite their unscrupulous manoeuvres. David Schwimmer and Melissa Rauch left an impression of an ostensible crazy crossover. (Yes, I am the person who knows them only due to "Friends" and "The Big Bang Theory" and these associations are very strong.)
The second thing which impressed me (after all the famous actors involved in one movie) was visualization. Cameramen and designers' work was a great success. The majority of images were thoughtfully constructed and sufficient amount of attention to detail was paid. Every scenery (even those which looked more like artificial stage backgrounds) persuasively reflected the characters' emotions, take for instance the beach scene where relaxed Mossack tells us his life story sitting on a bench with a white-blue tent and some sophisticated elements or the final one where Meryl Streep turns from the employee from Mossack Fonseca into the main character and then into herself resembling the Statue of Liberty with a hairbrush instead of a torch.
Speaking about the purpose of the movie I have to say that I was a bit disappointed. Definitely it was not a documentary but even as a feature film it had an avenue for being more informative and specific. It didn't provide us an insight into the process of revealing sensitive information. The whistleblower wasn't shown neither as a confident and brave person nor as a person trying to shy away from the necessity to expose wrongdoing. (Actually the whistleblower was not shown explicitly and the viewer can only make assumptions.) The main character wanted to sound the alarm but the whole story didn't seem to support her endeavour. Negative characters were romanticized: Mossack and Fonseca were being too charismatic. The numerous stories about dark sizes of Mossack Fonseca's clients overrode the idea of global unfairness and injustice provided both by legislation and those companies similar to Mossack Fonseca.
Tedious
crumpytv13 February 2022
As an entertainment this was just plain boring.
The two protagonist were intensely irritating and the whole presentation was too fragmented and there was no flow to what should have been a serious storyline.
I think the aim was to be humorous, but it missed the mark. There is nothing funny about fraud and embezzlement.
I am rather surprised that Merle Streep associated herself with this.
The two protagonist were intensely irritating and the whole presentation was too fragmented and there was no flow to what should have been a serious storyline.
I think the aim was to be humorous, but it missed the mark. There is nothing funny about fraud and embezzlement.
I am rather surprised that Merle Streep associated herself with this.
The Panama Papers for Dummies
annaferagamo21 October 2019
Listen carefully
elaf_al19 October 2019
Poorly done, simplistic examination of an interesting topic
samoanui10 November 2019
The topic of offshore finance is fascinating, but unfortunately this poorly written and poorly acted film will leave you not learning anything new. Your time is better spent watching a 5 minute Youtube video on the topic.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
