I have read at some websites about the reaction it got. Josh Brolin for best supporting actor nomination!!!!

Not surprised. Michael Douglas returning to his most iconic role? A film sequel to a film very relevant today. This is going to be a serious contender!

Eh. "Very positive" is an overstatement, from what I've read. The general line seems to be closer to "good, not great."

Here's a summary of prominent critics' notices:

Owen Gleiberman, Entertainment Weekly: "Like the original 'Wall Street,' it’s a darkly exciting steel-and-glass vision of piranhas in the water, of ruthlessly wealthy, nattily dressed men doing whatever it takes to make themselves wealthier. Stone, working from a screenplay by Allan Loeb and Stephen Schiff, conjures that same breathless atmosphere of dramatic liquidity, of a plot that hurtles along at the speed of information."

Kirk Honeycutt, The Hollywood Reporter: "...'Money Never Sleeps' is that rare sequel that took its time -- 23 years -- so it not only advances a story but also has something new to say. The film overheats now and then but blame this on filmmaking passion. One senses a fully engaged filmmaker at the helm, driving the movie at a lightning pace as if in a hurry to get to the next scene or next aphorism that further illuminates this dark world."

Michael Phillips, The Chicago Tribune: "Weirdly -- and this may hurt the film’s chances this fall -- 'Wall Street 2' goes soft on its main reason for existing. It would’ve been dull seeing the same old Gekko, to be sure. But his matchmaking duties this time out, however shadowy, defang the man. And wouldn’t this character at least betray a teensy bit of envy for all millions made by the hedge-fund wizards who came up after him? That’s the irony: So many legally sanctioned Wall Street gamblers made their hay after buying, wholesale, the glamorously unscrupulous image put forth by the original “Wall Street.”

Kate Muir, The Times of London: "I wonder how this will play with a generation that has not seen the original, and whether the drama works without all the comic references to the past, when mobile phones were huge white bricks with aerials. But 'Wall Street 2' gets four stars for old time’s sake — and for its music by David Byrne and Brian Eno, an appropriately retro choice."

Peter Bradshaw, The Guardian: "...despite the pious waffle about market craziness being like cancer, no one is ever shown enduring the actual misery of losing money. Everyone gets rich, well, everyone except Jake's (Shia LaBeouf) chuckle-headed estate-agent mom, played by Susan Sarandon, and she gets to go back to her morally pure low-paid job of nursing, the kind of unsexy altruism which is exclusively appropriate for the womenfolk. Money looks like it's dozing a little here: my advice is "sell".

David Gritten, The Daily Telegraph: "The film’s emotional relationships feel awkward and forced. Carey Mulligan does her best in the role of Winnie, who is meant to be pivotal – the battleground between Gekko and Jacob. But she’s essentially a liberal cipher, and somewhat passive. (This is, of course, primarily a film for and about men.) LaBeouf is just about old enough to play a smart young trader, and does so efficiently, if not particularly interestingly. "

Todd McCarthy, IndieWire: "...the new film initially takes good and opportunistic advantage of contemporary financial woes to detail the malfeasance of bankers and traders. But the script feels like a pasted-together hodgepodge of elements that co-exist without credibly blending together, topped by a climax that feels particularly hokey in its effort to leave audiences comfortable rather than disturbed by what they’ve just seen."

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/movies/ ... leeps.html

I still think this is going to bomb at the BO.

I'm eager to see how it does. Its B.O. potential seems so ambiguous to me. On one hand, Fox did cut a sharp trailer and it has a strong, diverse cast. And the media seems in love with the idea of a Wall Street sequel. The Today Show had a big interview with Stone, Douglas, LaBeouf, Brolin, Langella, and Mulligan on Thursday--and this is four months before the film opens in America.

Yet, throughout the interview, they returned to questions relating to the financial crisis and how it relates to/inspired the sequel. Which leads me to wonder if the people-don't-see-Iraq-movies issue ("It's sad! We get enough of it on the news!") will extend to maybe the first MAJOR film to comment directly on the dire state of the economy. And there's always still the fact it's a sequel to a 23-year-old film. Yes, "Greed Is Good" has become super-iconic over the years and still gets repeated, but I'm not sure the mainstream moviegoing population is as excited by the return of Gordon Gekko as Hollywood and the media seems to be.

It's just strange--part of me could see this completely petering out and ending up a flop, another part of me could see it catching fire and sailing past 80, 90, maybe even 100m.

I think you make a good point with the comparison to Iraq. No one saw The International even though it took direct aim at big, evil banks.

This is the potential problem, though, isn't it? At a time when hatred/distrust of the financial industry is at perhaps a record high, how many Americans are going to drop ten-plus dollars on a movie ultimately selling itself as a "cool," fast-paced, sexy stock-market thriller? Both Wall Street films may be intended as critiques of the greed-driven Wall Street culture, but, let's face it, the franchise plays more as an advertisement for Gordon Gekko's big-money, high-style, shady-practices life.

I wish it the best, though, honestly. It seems solid, the original is very entertaining, and it co-stars my beloved Carey Mulligan.

Isn't the Iraq war a good comparison? It's been a hot topic for quite some time and yet all movies about the war in the Middle East disappoint at the box-office...

It is an interesting point, though I s'pose there is one key difference: an Iraq movie is impossible to sell. Because you just can't hide it, from the military and jihadist characters to the desert setting to the germane phrases ("war on terror," "W.M.D."). And the minute people recognize these elements, they seem to have an instant averse reaction.

Yes, a Wall Street sequel (a film with "Wall Street" in the title in general) is going to raise eyebrows in this current socioeconomic climate, but it should be easier to distract people from the economic "message" at hand. Play down the financial-corruption angle, emphasize the action (motorcycle race!) and family/relationship melodrama (Shia dating recently-released-from-prison Douglas' daughter).

Seriously, though, it's going to be fascinating to see how this performs at the box office, at least IMO. It's such a high-profile project, buts its financial prospects still seem fairly ambiguous.

Green Zone did its best to hide it. It was marketed as Bourne 4...

But people still caught on because you just can't hide it. The desert, the fatigues, the "I came here to find weapons" dialogue...