My problem with this movie is that Steven Soderbergh has tried to make a funny movie about a situation that isn't inherently funny. The discovery and dismantling of the Archer-Daniels-Midland price-fixing scandal is a compelling story, but it isn't funny. Nor is ADM executive/whistle-blower Mark Whitacre. He's bizarre, strange, frustrating, and totally (in the immortal words of Ebby Calvin "Nuke" LaLoush) "out there," which makes for some funny moments, but he isn't funny.
Matt Damon does a terrific job as Whitacre, and Melanie Lynskey is believable and sympathetic as his wife, but there are gaps in the portrayal of their relationship, and the movie suffers for it. What, exactly, has he told her that's causing her to urge him to talk to the FBI? And was she always aware of his mental problems? If not, when did she start to realize the extent of his fabrications?
Also, what did the FBI agents really think about him? When did they realize what a loose cannon they had? How did they decide to deal with what they knew about him? The same questions could be asked about the lawyers he eventually hires.
I wish Mr. Soderbergh had given us a straighter and more complete story; I think it would have been a much better movie.
Matt Damon does a terrific job as Whitacre, and Melanie Lynskey is believable and sympathetic as his wife, but there are gaps in the portrayal of their relationship, and the movie suffers for it. What, exactly, has he told her that's causing her to urge him to talk to the FBI? And was she always aware of his mental problems? If not, when did she start to realize the extent of his fabrications?
Also, what did the FBI agents really think about him? When did they realize what a loose cannon they had? How did they decide to deal with what they knew about him? The same questions could be asked about the lawyers he eventually hires.
I wish Mr. Soderbergh had given us a straighter and more complete story; I think it would have been a much better movie.