'Money Monster' Delivers Solid—If Uneven—Thrills

There’s not a whole lot of originality to be found in actress-turned-director Jodie Foster’s “Money Monster.” The Wall Street-themed hostage thriller follows the genre playbook to a tee, reveling in well-trodden conventions and largely familiar plot devices. In light of all of this, the end product is an entertaining and—for the most part—gripping affair. “Money Monster” is a largely unambitious film that does little new. What it does do, however, it does reasonably well.

George Clooney, in a mild departure from his usually dignified (if not always morally scrupulous) roles, plays Lee Gates, a gaudy, high-energy television personality and the host of a show that gives financial advice: the titular “Money Monster.” Gates is, for all intents and purposes, a charlatan. His show, replete with vulgar dance sequences and dangerously sensational language, takes “style over substance” to new extremes.

One day, a dissatisfied viewer (Jack O’Connell) shows up on set. He brandishes a pistol and proceeds to outfit Gates with a suicide vest—one that will detonate as soon as he takes his hand off the dead man’s switch. The man in question, a working-class truck driver named Kyle Budwell, lost everything when he invested in one of Gates’ much-hyped stock picks and is demanding an explanation for why Gates was so wrong. The ensuing action is timely and topical, plunging viewers into a disturbing financial conspiracy and exploring the tenuous line between legality and morality.

O’Connell, best known for his well-received turn in 2014’s “Unbroken,” plays the role of the hostage-taker well. His character isn’t totally compelling, but perhaps that’s the point. Unlike villains of comparable films, Budwell isn’t a criminal mastermind; he’s merely angry and desperate. Clooney is similarly steady in his portrayal of Gates, a man who gradually realizes the folly of his ways and begins to redeem himself accordingly. Last but not least, Julia Roberts lends a commendable performance as Gates’ producer and the prototypical “negotiator” of this particular hostage flick. Her character is hopelessly

static and not particularly insightful, but once again, this flatness is likely intentional—addressing a hostage situation is simply not in her daily job description.

Unfortunately, “Money Monster” falters when it attempts to extend itself further. One particularly ill-advised venture into pathos occurs halfway through the film, when the police locate and patch in Budwell’s pregnant girlfriend, Molly. Furious at her boyfriend for blowing their savings, she unleashes an obscenity-laden tirade on live television, thoroughly humiliating an already distraught Budwell. Unfortunately, what was intended to generate sympathy succeeded only in being comical—a trend that persisted throughout most of the film. Also lacking in finesse was the film’s somewhat pedantic ending, an intensely moralistic climax that valiantly highlighted real problems facing society today but did so in a painfully forced manner.

Thankfully, such brief lapses fail to derail the entire film. Most of the way through, “Money Monster” succeeds in being an effective and well-oiled white-knuckle ride, well worth the audience’s attention and time.

—Staff writer Steven S.K. Hao can be reached at steven.hao@thecrimson.com.