User reviews

It's a woman oriented financial film drama directed by a woman filmmaker. That makes it empowered by women. On the perspective it was my first experience, so I think it could be the only of its kind. It is not as bad as it looks, those who liked financial related films like 'Margin Call', 'The Big Short', 'Glengarry Glen Ross' et cetera would enjoy it as well. This film stayed true to its title, so that's what you are going to expect, but nothing a bit more than that.

There are unexpected turns in the narration. Particularly the characters, that too the females. It is about the commitment and trust in the colleagues. No matter what you do, the company always judges you by your result. The pace might look slow, but it gets better in the latter half. The film turned into kind of thriller and ended with a little drag, though satisfying.

Anna Gunn was so good and looks like we have here another talented woman director Meera Menon. This film did not get as popular as its counterpart on the same theme, I mean men's Wall Street thriller. But somewhat I liked it and seems a sequel is not a bad idea, after how this story had ended. Finally, this is for the selected viewers, so those who are from the outside of its bandwidth won't end watching it happy, hence the film will lose its rating, but not the quality.

6/10

I really enjoyed this movie, although I'll recognize it may not please everyone. Didn't feel as much as a hollywood commercial film as other Wall Street productions. Not many catch phrases. Indeed what I liked the most in this movie is how realistic it is. People would be surprised about how easily conversations like that happen. How easily people actually slide into ridiculous behaviour when under extreme pressure. Overall, good acting, nice pace, realistic scenarios and story.

Not sure why this movie was so bad. Perhaps the slow pace and the enforced slow dialogue. Perhaps the bad acting. In either or both cases this movie should be given a wide berth. I loved Anna Gunn in Breaking bad, in fact she was instrumental in it's popularity but I watched a different actress here. Her interpretation in this 'Wall St' type movie was simply awful. Totally unbelievable. I always turn off movies when the leading lady has either Botoxed lips or stupidly unreal white teeth, for some reason I can't take it serious from that point on. So many women in the industry feel the need to wreck their natural looks. Anyhow, back to the movie, I dare anyone to watch Gunn's on-screen divorced husband acting out a serious scene and avoid breaking out into laughter at his facial expressions. Again terrible acting. This movie could have been interesting but the casting director had lost his marbles. The writing was drawn out and laboured with far too many close up 'still life' moments. Take heed, it's valuable time you are wasting if you labour through this stuff.

Greetings again from the darkness. A film made by women in a male-dominated profession about women in a (different) male-dominated profession becomes the first female-centric Wall Street movie. Director Meera Menon (Farah Goes Bang) and writers Amy Fox, Sarah Megan Thomas and Alysia Reiner have a lot to say … maybe even more than they intended.

Anna Gunn ("Breaking Bad") delivers a strong lead performance as Naomi Bishop, a hard-driving and successful investment banker - a self-described "banker chick". She's coming off a failed client IPO – her biggest career failure. Naomi basically torments and disrespects her first assistant Erin (Sarah Megan Thomas), and she regularly sleeps with a co-worker and hedge fund manager Michael Connor (James Purefoy) for the benefits only. In other words, Naomi is much like the men we have seen in these roles over the years.

While pursuing her next IPO with a hotshot d-bag tech entrepreneur (Samuel Roukin as Ed) who claims to have a revolutionary impenetrable cyberware, Naomi is unwittingly (although it could be argued that she SHOULD have known) being played by multiple parties. One of these is a Justice Department investigator (Alysia Reiner as Samantha) who is trying to use their old college connection as a way to gather intel on Naomi's firm and Michael Connor. Adding complexity and turmoil are Craig Bierko as an egotistical investor who pressures Michael for insider info, Sophie von Hasselberg (Marin) who is a disgruntled programmer for Ed's company, and Tracie Thoms as Samantha's partner and co-parent of their kids.

Fractured relationships abound as all characters are driven by something other than the relationships. We are told "money is not a dirty word", but it sure seems like motivation for these folks is centered on power, ambition, and yes … money. The social issues and moral dilemmas come across as less important than the challenge of competing (rather than collaborating). Seamless backstabbing is a valued skill in this world, and always present are greed, desperation and paranoia. This is post-2008 Wall Street, but it looks pretty darned familiar.

Previous films have taken us inside this world. Wall Street (1987), Margin Call (2011), The Wolf of Wall Street (2013), and The Big Short (2015) each provided some lesson on this corrupt-to-the-core industry and helped us understand the dual meaning of the title, but this is the first to show us the women who fight the same fights. If there is a disappointment here, it's the apparent conclusion that putting women in the same high-stakes game as men means they will compete in much the same way, rather than finding a better, more graceful way. Gordon Gekko may not have been right when he said "greed is good", but it seems pretty clear that greed is prevalent. It's a lesson we evidently must be reminded of on a regular basis … and whatever you do, make sure to count the chocolate chips before giving that cookie to Naomi!

"Don't let money be a dirty word. We can like that too." Naomi Bishop (Gunn) is an investment banker who is bucking for a promotion. All she has to do is prove herself with her newest project and its hers. She promises the team she is working with nothing but success and everything is lining up her way, until she begins to hear rumors about the company. The more she digs the more worried she becomes. Investigator Samantha (Reiner) is trying to uncover the same thing and both want to do the right thing, but for different reasons. This is a movie that I was looking forward to. I really love movies like Wall Street and was hoping for something like that. On one hand the movie was tense and exciting. A movie that makes you feel anger and wonder who to root for. On the other hand, there was just something missing to make it as good as I wanted. I'm not sure what it was but it just felt like it needed a little extra to put it over the top. Overall, a very good movie that tried to break through to greatness but never quite made it. This is still worth watching though. I give this a B.

I cannot understand how a movie like this gets a 81% score on Rotten Tomatoes. The characters are under-developed, the movie is slow paced even though it's meant to be a thriller. To top all of this the director while trying to create strong female characters has included all the society stereotypes women face (just for the sake of it) ex.The lesbian relationship between the two characters. This movie is feminist to the core. If the director really wanted to show strong female leads then she should've learned it from Katherine Bigelow. The only good things about this movie is a powerful performance by Anna Gunn and an above average performance by Alysia Reiner. A star for this. 2nd star for the story (not the execution) And 3rd for the effort it took to make this movie.

As though intended to fulfill a quota this film comes out and delivers a reasonable facsimile of a financial drama, yet the reason it falters so obviously is it lacks any sense of purpose, other than to offer women in the roles.

The product is a dull walk-through of corporate and financial egomaniacs who bluster without menace. It's all been seen before. Financial films are an oddity; like sports movies, they are all much more boring than the real thing. Read the financial media and the daily news is more exciting and riskier than anything served up on the screen.

The real fault of this film is that it conveys a sense of worthiness: to address a deficit in female portraits in finance and the result is a stewed bland boiled pudding. If the intention was polemical, a monograph might have been better. The story-line of the cop who uses a honey-trap to gain information is risible and quite terrible screen writing. The attempts at ruthless wit are limp and even if the overall story is stale, a rewrite by a writer who wrote attacking, sharp dialog would have covered up the other terrible blemishes in the script.

The editing and directing doesn't hand this any favors either: clunk, clunk it goes, until the very end.

It was not bad, Gunn was great, supporting cast was good, if you're into the financial market you will enjoy this, the only thing I did not like was the ending, leaves you wanting more, other than that it's a good watch.

There were strong female characters in this retread of so many Wall Street dramas. Sadly, not one of them was someone that I'd want one of my nieces to emulate. There are so many issues to address in the male dominated US investment banking industry. None of them were addressed in a thoughtful manner.

After the tech bubble burst and then again following the crash of the US housing market, the news was littered with stories about investment banks and bankers who committed criminal offenses. How high paid professionals approach and ultimately cross into the realm of the illegal could provide fascinating fodder for filmmakers and audiences alike. Equity missed the mark again.

How can a film written by women, directed by a woman, and with so many female roles give us so many caricatures of women?

The only thing that looked or felt real was the trading floor and it was way to small for the trading floor of the world's largest investment bank.

I laughed when reading the sponsor credit for Bloomberg.

Equity (2016) was directed by Meera Menon. It stars Anna Gunn as Naomi Bishop, a high-powered Wall Street executive whose specialty is taking corporations public with IPO's. (IPO stands for Initial Public Offering.) She has taken nine companies public, but her most recent effort has fallen short. Now, she's working with another company, and she's fighting for the opportunity to take it public.

James Purefoy plays Michael Connor, a hedge funder who is Naomi's lover. Alysia Reiner plays Samantha, Naomi's assistant, who is loyal, but who has ambitions of her own. Sarah Megan Thomas portrays Erin Manning, who works for the federal government. Her job is to discover and punish corporate crime, and she's very good at it. All three of these actors do very well in their roles.

I enjoyed this film, because it gave me a glimpse of a world I don't know, and don't really want to know. The acting was superb, the sets were excellent, and everything looked and felt real. As I noted, I don't know if the plot was realistic, but the sense of wealth, power, and greed felt real to me.

I don't see this as a movie about a woman trying to break through the glass ceiling. I see it as the story of a hard-driven, ambitious person, who is up against some strong, vicious, and crafty competitors. That's the life she's chosen, and that's the life she's living. It's not a happy life, even if you win. There's hardly a happy moment in the movie. Be prepared for a tale of ambition and treachery.

We saw this film at the excellent Little Theatre in Rochester, NY. It will work well on DVD.

Note: Equity has a horrible 5.4 IMDb rating. Normally, we would never go to a movie rated this low. However, when I looked at the ratings, it became clear that women liked the film, and men hated the film. As usual for IMDb, many more men than women vote. So, if men hate a film, that will lower its rating, even if women like it. My suggestion--ignore the rating and see it.

Awful movie. From the point of view of someone who wants to sit down and watch a good movie, this was a very dull 90 minutes. Poorly put together, lazy writing, littered the unnecessary f-words

I didn't know that Anna Gunn was the woman who also starred in Breaking Bad series, the one who became Walter White's wife. She looks so different in this movie. I think she doesn't look as feminine as she does in Breaking Bad.

The movie started very slow for my taste. I didn't know what kind of business and troubles she gets herself into. But it got clearer in the half time of the movie (I guess). I imagined the guy with a tad messy look as Mark Zuckerberg who's offering his product to the market and Naomi's there to be his agent/mediator. Something like that: stock/share. While trying her ass off to be successful with her project, some people close to her try to sabotage her. Stabbers all around.

What I hate from this movie is the voice of Anna Gunn. It's like she's whispering while her face has a strong look. It's just not okay. Her expression's mostly hard to understand. Is it just her trying to never let her emotion out? Is it what the script wanted her to do? I don't know. This made the conflict fall flat. Although it's not quite satisfying, I got some knowledge from this movie: the world of stock market.

When I saw the trailer, it did peak my interest. It looks like Wall Street or The Big Short, but with a twist, as the woman is playing the main character. It's a little sad that that's enough to make this situation unique, but it is.

The movie does really focus on the main character too. Well, actually there is a big ensemble cast, which all have their very unique story that really drives the story,

But it does focus a lot on the development of those characters, and the story suffers for this. I just found the movie too slow in it's delivery of the story. I feel like I spent too much time waiting for the story to happen in-between getting to know the characters.

It would not be that big of an issue but I don't feel the big pay off of the film. All the character development and I felt nothing for what happens to these people after the dust cleared.

Equity was about business, but it was too much business. Too stiff, Too clean of a strike. Did not hit me like it should, which kinda sucks as it's one of those movies about cooperation that's pretty easy to follow, which is great.

So yeah, a uniquely told story got me hooked but it's too bland for me to care about the outcome.

http://cinemagardens.com/

Of course the writers of those two movies would sue for slander. Given the amount of money spent on production the amateurishness and downright incompetence of everyone associated with this movie is mind boggling. The idea seems to be that women can be as greedy, power driven and corrupt as men ... a shocking proposition. The end.

So, I'm not sure why, but I didn't have very high expectations. To say it's got a line up of quasi B-list actors would not be fair. But to be honest it ran through my mind. But I took a shot and was completely surprised. I was engaged from the beginning. Everyone is on point and drives an intriguing plot that kept my interest from start to finish!

Equity is like a female version of Wall Street with a touch of All about Eve thrown in. It is nice to see a film about the male dominated world of finance and business through a female angle, the film has female writers and director (Meera Menon) and the leads are women as well. I think the conclusion is that women are as just as sharklike as the men in the corporate world or feel they need to be if they are to get ahead.

Naomi Bishop (Anna Gunn) is a ball busting investment banker who torments her underlings (there is a chocolate chip cookie counting scene where Naomi lets rip) and sleeps with an hedge fund manager Michael Connor (James Purefoy) for mutual benefits. As she states in a Gordon Gekko type of way, Money is not a dirty word for Naomi.

She is under pressure of the next IPO offering she is leading that involves a hi tech cyber-security company going public. The pressure is made worse as people with ulterior motives are circling around such as an old acquaintance, Justice Department investigator Samantha (Alysia Reiner) investigating her firm and Michael who might also be giving insider information to an investor.

The characters are all driven by money, greed or power as well as getting one-upmanship or shall we say one-upwomanship. People are used, abused and back stabbed. The women still think there's a glass ceiling where nothing they can do is ever good enough.

This is a low budget independent film, it is not a feminist version of 'Wall Street' but it did arouse the interest of my wife who rather liked the novelty of watching this type of film that is not as male orientated.

The writing is a bit flat, it lacked energy and sparkle which is more to do with the inexperience of the director (only her second full length feature) as well as the screenplay. Ultimately there was little in the story here that was a surprise unlike The Big Short where I immediately jumped up and realised I was watching something special.

No spoiler alert here, no plot or story line exists to spoil Watching Gunn is painful, it was in breaking bad bad still is. Equity has the thinnest if plots, the worst acting, and the worst continuity. Each segment is brief, the connection between each is choppy, the external references they use to pull a plot out of thin air fail. It's as if they are reading a series of news clips.

And the home if the suspect hedge fund guy? It seems a bit cheap for even a guy trying to hide his wealth. What gives?

The most engaging part is the quest to get the goods on mister hedge fund. There is some moments of actual acting.

No doubt the outcome is the results of a poorly crafted plot and dialog. The bit if charm that tries to show through is suppressed by terrible dialog.

Skip this movie. It's painful to watching

Casting of the women was wrong, the plot took forever to develop and the dialogue was waffly and cliched. Anna Gunn is an awful actress for this role, much better suited to suburban housewife roles than a slick, sleek professional woman. The assistant seems more like a bank teller than an aspiring master of the universe. Had the casting of the female roles been better and the script tighter, it could have been salvaged.

I'm giving this movie a better review than most because I found myself engaged in the nuanced messaging, the attempt to do something different, and the fact that I felt entertained and went into the rest of my evening talking about what the movie was about. Any movie these days takes a risk when it scratches in new territory and the reviews here seem nit picky and unfair in some cases. For example, if dialogue is "slow moving" then that is a director/scriptwriter choice that in a movie that has thought itself out, like this one, you can see in the overall look and feel.

Look for example,at the early scene where Naomi is speaking at the women's empowerment group. Watch the camera scan and you see more of the lettering in the poster appear behind her. It goes from "men" to "omen" to "women" and her monologue relates to each as it goes by. This doesn't happen by accident, folks, and this is just one instance of nuance in the movie, including the ending which makes you have to reflect a bit and fill in with your own opinion and/or judgment about the state of how we regulate (or don't) the investment banking sector.

I like movies that make me want to pause the stream and talk about what we just saw. But that's just me.