The Laundromat

makes me glad Soderbergh dropped out of Moneyball. the patronizing approach to non-fiction is tiresome; The Big Short works because it was confined to one story that directly affected the audience. telling a far more confusing story through a convoluted series of vignettes does the film no favors, even if the end of the movie is just Meryl Streep explaining that to you. she's the worst part of the movie, too. stop hamming up everything, you old fraud!!

Breezy illumination of the shell game of the rich and powerful exposed in the Panama Papers. Cinematic attempts to portray the diffuse nature of global power and networks tend to be overpraised when they have a deadly serious tone (e.g., SYRIANA): Soderbergh has learned since TRAFFIC and CONTAGION that an ironic approach is preferable, but is then criticised for lacking a "coherent narrative" (Lowry, CNN): so what? End reveal is a little weak, perhaps, but the use of the manifesto packs a punch.

Soderbergh does a Schoolhouse Rock special on the Panama Papers. Surprisingly funny and looks great, Streep is fantastic (her fourth-wall breaking rant is like a woke acceptance speech for an award she earned earlier in the movie, it's hilarious). I'm just shell, yes I'm only a shell...

Not necessarily a collection of short stories around the theme of off-shore money laundering, but also not not. In the very smarter-than-you, know-it-all, in-on-the-joke fashion of contemporary political filmmaking, Soderbergh soderberghs his way through character sketches that are as breezy as the white suits of Oldman and Banderas. But I don't know what the film wants (from me). To rise up and end corruption, probably.

It was all going great until Meryl Streep started preaching about campaign finance laws. The whole point is how everyone watching is powerless to enact any change! Ah well, all the other 94 minutes are good. "We should have invested more in cybersecurity"

Basically a poor man's "Big Short", this is a lecture disguised as a movie. Oldman and Banderas are narrating with accents instead of acting; the script's fragmentary, its characters weightless; the story's technical side is fuzzy, boring, confusing. Nice frames aren't absent and Streep is such a natural that she's a joy to watch even in this undemanding part yet the final "reveal" underlines in its pointlessness just how much more this film could have achieved if it talked less and showed more.

The film doesn't feel like it conveys the gravity of the situation. Which is very disappointing given the talent involved and the chance to really bring this subject back into the public eye. While I have to give the filmmakers credit with trying to make the complex money laundering scheme in the Panama Papers digestible to a general audience and keeping this visible, ultimately it feels like it's too little too late.

Adapting the Panama Papers story into an interesting film always seemed an uphill challenge, and The Laundromat proves how true that is. Soderbergh's direction is a pale imitation of The Big Short in that it imitates the multiple story arcs and quippy interludes, but comes across as less satisfying in every aspect. The 95 min film is badly paced, feeling much longer, and just feels miscast. Ultimately the film attempts an emotional appeal, acknowledging its own hypocrisy but providing no reason.

Soderbergh tries to do a Big Short for the off-shore banking industry but fails. The humor feels forced to make the heavy content easily digestible, The different plotlines make it very episodic and fail to really capture the real human costs, especially since the most important one starring MS is just abandoned. Above all I didn't feel like I have a very better understanding of the workings or tax-evasions after watching this. Oldman accent is outrageous. At least it never is boring.

I certainly felt like I got taken to the cleaners...

Basically an Adam Mckay political drama, but turned up to 11. Its good for what it is, but I sometimes get the feeling the writers think the framing is more effective than it actually is. The results ends up being very educational like a documentary, but instead of pictures and talking heads everything is acted out. That said, the casting is spot on, and everyone is clearly giving it their all regardless of how uneven the screenplay is.

This is really the answer to the question of how to make bad movie with amazing cast.. When viewed from this aspect it can be called successful lol

We are shown through a bunch to skits how the rich avoid taxes the rest of us have to pay. Maybe some day one of these films will motivate people to riot in the streets and force some change.

soderbergh'in en iyi başardığı janrlardan birisi kesinlikle komedi ama burada konuyu bilgilendirici şekilde öncelemek isterken iki arada bir derede kalıyor. alaycı tavrı, konusuna uygun düşen estetik tercihleri, karakterlerle oynayışı kesinlikle başarılı fakat aradığı vuruşu yapamıyor çünkü sağlam bir hikaye arkına dayanmıyor. ufak hikayelerin bir araya gelişini daha sıkı bağlamak bile çözebilirmiş gibi sorunu -çünkü eleştirisi sıradanlaşıyor böyle.

That was about as unsubtle as a PowerPoint presentation.

Viewed January 17, 2020. To quote Greil Marcus, what is this shit?

Not quite Big Short, but I'd say it's much more successful than it gets credit for.

Kind of hard to follow at times, it is almost like an anthology style. All about the Panama Papers

(+)

The writers saw what Adam McKay has been doing and their only takeaway was to have central characters address the audience in humorous fourth-wall breaks. The result is deflated and preachy rather than elucidating and eyebrow-raising. I don't get much of the decisions made here. And overall, it doesn't even feel like a film. Streep's story arch is effectively abandoned until she literally removes her makeup and addresses us as Meryl Streep herself, which... doesn't move me? I don't get it, man.

Would have been better had the story been more fictionalized and centered around Streep's character arc.

All in all, the filmmakers were more concerned with the message than with the story or the characters.

Strung together very strangely, but with a very important question begging to be answered. I thought it pretty cool even if it wasn't my preferred movie format.

I could go for more of the fourth-wall-breaking, shiny-suit-wearing Antonio Banderas and German Gary Oldman duo.

eng; [the laundromat]; eine Frau verliert ihren Mann und versucht zu verstehen wie sie um die versucherungssumme gebracht wurde - verursacht durch briefkastenfirmen.; (witzig ohne lustig zu sein);

Unbearably didactic. Barely a story. The two short tales work, but Streep's story should have also been done as a vignette instead of peppering it throughout the film. Just doesn't work.

Soderberg's cynical, episodic take on the Panama Papers' scandal manages to lure some interest as a satirical piece on money -- and its many abstract contemporary forms that only lawyers understand. Narrated by Mossack Fonseca's Oldman and Banderas, the film seems uninteresting everytime it tries to tackle the big picture -- the world's rigged financial system. Also, the theater-like walks and scenarios look just like a silly way to communicate directly with the public.

This is a well put together film, as to be expected from Soderbergh, not as good as the old ones but still an engaging, dynamic and good watch.

Entertainment: 4/4. Spirit: 1/3. Society: 1.5/3. Family: 0/1.

Everything Netflix touches turns to shit. I call it "The Midas Touch" syndrome.

I liked the part with Chris Parnell and Will Forte. Everything else was insufferable sermonizing and lazy exposition.

farklı bir anlatımı ile, aslında herkesin bildiği bir konu

Failed where 'The Big Short' succeeded.

Panama papers provided an interesting topic, there was a great cast and I'm always rooting for Soderbergh to deliver, but I thought this was pretty forgettable. Splitting the movie into different stories made it too fragmented and I didn't really care about any of the characters. The comedic tone didn't work; it just wasn't that funny nor was it as energetic as e.g. McKay's Big Short or Vice which this film reminded me of. Worth a watch but nothing special.

It would take too long a review to say everything that's wrong with this movie. But: it pictures greed as basic human nature, all the 'bad' characters are not from the US (Panama, Germany, Nevis, China, Africa), only victims are. BTW, are all black men cheaters? It mostly individualizes what is a structural issue, it reduces all issues to money, when capitalism (a word never mentioned) is way more than that: capital is a social relation. The final speech is way narrower than the movie warrants.

the final dialogue, which is very good, doesn't change the fact that this film is a mess, not really portraying the subject matter as it should.