Mad Money (2008)

One of my all time favorites.

best movie i've ever seen.

Tells a fascinating and unsettling true story, and does so well, without pretending to have all the answers.

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

Don Cardigan (Ted Danson) tells his wife Bridget (Diane Keaton) that he's been fired for awhile and are $286k in debt. She can only get a janitor's job at the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. She's amazed at the sight of all the money, and comes up with a scheme to steal the old cash with her fellow workers Jackie Truman (Katie Holmes) and Nina Brewster (Queen Latifah).Katie Holmes could have been in 'The Dark Knight' instead of this. There is just something very simplistic and unrealistic about the scheme. The movie is so light and fluffy. The girls should be much more serious. And the movie starts off at the end so that there is no danger of getting caught until that point. This should be a much more thrilling movie that it actually is, and it isn't funny as a comedy.

I have to say, I wasn't very excited to see this film in the least. I didn't expect very much from it at all. I felt this film was strangely cast. I love all of the actors that were in this movie but I didn't like them all in this together. I didn't like the plot and I couldn't tell if it was supposed to be a comedy or not. So I wasn't all too thrilled to see this movie in the first place.After seeing Mad Money, my assumption that I was going to dislike it was proved correct. I was very bored, not amused in the least, I hated the characters as well as the plot all together. The plot didn't even make sense to me. I don't know if I missed something because I was day dreaming half the time or what but I didn't think it made sense. It seemed too simple for them to steal this money and I didn't understand how they were let off if they pretty much admitted that they stole it. Maybe I missed some major point in the plot but I didn't think much of this movie mad sense. Diane Keaton is one of my favorite actresses. I was sorely disappointed that she took this part. She is a billion times better than this role.

Sometimes you can see the genre engineering. It is better if you do not, but many of these are mass produced chum, and what we have is the Spielberg-supported "high concept." Take the woman who wrote a couple of women's movies with simple appeal and make an Oceans' 11 but for women. That's the pitch. Have lots of squeals of joy, toilet and sex humor (but of the supposed women variety). Well, you can read about these failures from others. The thing that interested my here were the men in the story. When you make, say an Oceans' 11, it is all about the men. They need to be cool, ultracool, some of them. There are mechanics of plot that are essential, but it is all about that feel of natural cool.When you make a woman's film, it also about the men. Look here at these men. You have basically four men, the three partners of the women, plus the head of security at the Fed. In this writer's mind, these are the four cardinal points of male partnership. We shouldn't put too much credit on this, because the movie was a huge flop. But it did pass Hollywood's engineers, and was re-engineered late in the game to suit what some committee thought would work, man-wise.You have the inspector: cocky, intrusive, too proud to admit his own inadequacies. (Remember that this was released at the end of the W Bush era.)The primary husband just wants a job because he feels inadequate. He is "smart" in a women's magazine sense, meaning he knows lots of facts.The secondary husband is a dullard, probably a school dropout who performs manual labor at a meat plant. His wife is the pretty/sexy one in the bunch, and we are supposed to get the picture that his meat is worth it. The third "husband" is the one that fascinates. A huge audience for these movies is black women, and this social engineering seems more mature. We have the Latifah character who is just fine on her own without a man. She manages her sons well enough — we are told multiple times how well they are turning out. The guy in question is introduced as a lout, a dog who hassles women sexually. Watch the careful way that he is transformed and how he becomes both her sexual partner (about which much is made) and one of her sons.Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.

I love it. But I have a question to all those people out there who: 1. Think Diane Keaton is awful and 'should give acting up' 2. Think the whole movie is rubbishWHY?! I mean, OK, it's very unlikely this would happen, but every one thought going to the moon would be stupid right? But it did happen didn't it?It was enjoyable, funny, sexy, serious and a good way to spend 2 hours on a Sunday afternoon when you're bored. Most of Bridget's lines cracked me up, especially 'Do you live in America?' or 'That could be your savings account!' 'I don't think so. It has money in it.' I only watched it because it had Diane Keaton in it, but after about 20-30 minutes, I started to realise this isn't such a bad film after all.