AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

GrimPrecise I'll tell you why so serious

Senteur As somebody who had not heard any of this before, it became a curious phenomenon to sit and watch a film and slowly have the realities begin to click into place.

Jakoba True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

dale-51649 As someone who also went to Harvard, I can tell you that not all experiences are the same. There are the STEM majors, pre meds and med students, who work their asses off or fail. On the other hand there are the MBA and pre biz crowd , and Hank is of the ladder elk. He brags about not having to study hs second year at the B school- must be nice....; so the "masters of the universe" have no clothes or work ethic... Preppy Wendy really "preps out" as she humble brags her way through the piece, "She never had to pay for a dinner and was bored with dating" . Apparently she was so hot guys were all over her, but none of them were good enough for her, until HANK. She never wanted HANK to take the high profile jobs, like those actors who claim they were dragged into entertainment kicking and screaming, so above it all.....If she never wanted it, maybe they should give the money back?Speaking of boring humblebrags, she gives herself goosebumps by describing how Hank was home in time to bathe the kids on the 4:30..... Why? Nanny on furlough? So...Hank didn't even have to work long hours to make the old hundreds of millions of tax shielded dollars? NICEEEE.... Oh yea, real salt of the earth couple here. I guess those of us who worked the 14 hour days in medicine are suckers then? I know I know, IT WAS FOR THE CHILDREN!Why didn't they talk about Goldman Sachs sordid history? Or, the fact that investment bankers didn't make that much when Hank started in it, but by the time he left.....Unless you consider orders of magnitude more than doctors low pay, yea, that changed.

Tommy Hank Paulson, who was named as one of the top 25 people who plunged the world into an "Economic Meltdown" in 2008 by Time magazine, gets a face-lift in this movie produced by his buddy, Michael Bloomberg of Bloomberg Businessweek. Not only have other documentaries shown he was the catalyst that drove the recession in 2008 onward, it was his idea to bail out the banks that proved to be the worst, possible decision ever made. Now that Paulson, Bloomberg, and Thomas Steyer are all on the same page with their global-warming mambo-jumbo, the first thing that needed to be done was repair Paulson's terrible public image by making this movie. For a more accurate view, watch Inside Job or Too Big to Fail for a more critical, truthful portrayal of this windbag. This movie is nothing more than nanny Bloomberg's shallow attempt at giving Paulson a public do-over.It's also no secret that when he became treasury Secretary, he sold nearly $500 million in Goldman Sachs stock without paying a single penny in capital gains taxes (or any taxes for that matter). In July 2006, "Henry Paulson liquidated 3.23 million shares of Goldman, roughly 1% of the entire company, in a one-time public sale." That left Paulson with a tax-free gain of $491 million. Read that again: $491 million free and clear. Without this loophole, Paulson would have been liable for more than "$200 million worth of state and Federal capital gains taxes." Why? In 1989, the government created a "one-time loophole that gives the political candidate the ability to liquidate his or her entire portfolio without paying a dime in capital gains taxes." The loophole only applies to the President, Vice President and cabinet Secretaries. Congress does not qualify. The rich DO get richer, as did Paulson, who is now parlaying his fame (infamy?) by teaming up with nanny Bloomberg Productions and scare-tactics Steyer, the phony triptych of the modern world.

cargo456 A film is a well directed, beautifully edited piece of cinematography. A joy to watch... if you're death, retarded or come from a remote village somewhere on the Ohuahu islands in the Pacific. An absolute one sided view of a one man actions with no opposite opinion being presented. Even though most of the economic community think that the actions of Hank Paulson did more harm to the world's economy than anything else and Mr. Paulson should be convicted of treason, he is portrayed as a larger that life Jesus like figure. Once again I would recommend to watch this movie only for people who do understand what had happened during this period of time in world's economy. Otherwise we will end up with a false perception of the processes happening in the economy now as a result of a reckless use of taxpayer's money to save several banksters from bankruptcy. Bringing the economy back to the dark ages for the slow and painful recovery and a deflation spiral we're experiencing now.

H Gregory Charton Great interview with Hank, and great interview with his wife Wendy. But that's it. No opposing viewpoint. In fact, basically no corroborating viewpoint. It's all Hank all the time. And very curiously, the term credit default swap is not mentioned a single time, even though there was exponentially more money at risk in credit default swaps over mortgages than there were in actual mortgages- and this is the main illiquid asset that caused the investment bank failures. Seems bizarre that Hank doesn't mention this. And it seems bizarre to have a 2 hour documentary without any journalism whatsoever. I give one star for the lighting and pleasant interviews with Wendy. It is a common tactic to use family members to win over an audience, and this part worked on me.