Movie discovery

Explore stories across every screen

فيلم وثائقيالسنة2010المدة1h 49mIMDb8.2

عمل داخلي

فيلم وثائقيجريمة

يعرض الفيلم تحليلا شاملا للأزمة الاقتصادية العالمية، التي ضربت العالم، والتي تسببت في فقدان ملايين من البشر لوظائفهم ومنازلهم، التي قد وصلت خسائر تلك الأزمة لأكثر من 20 مليار دولار، في أسوأ ركود اقتصادي منذ الأزمة الاقتصادية العظمى في الثلاثينيات وكادت تؤدي إلى انهيار الاقتصاد العالمي بكامله، وخلال الأبحاث المالية واسعة النطاق والمقابلات الحصرية مع المطلعين على المفاتيح الاقتصادية والعديد من السياسيين والصحفيين والأكاديميين، في محاولة للعثور على الأسباب الحقيقية للأزمة، كما يتتبع نشوء صناعة المال والاقتصاد الذي يعد سببا رئيسا في فساد الحياة السياسية وخرق اللوائح وتدمير الأوساط الأكاديمية في جميع أنحاء العالم من الولايات المتحدة وحتى الصين.

شاهد الآن

الإعلان الترويجي

طاقم العمل

Charles Ferguson

Director

Matt Damon

Self - Narrator

Gylfi Zoega

Self - Professor of Economics, University of Iceland

Andri Snær Magnason

Self - Writer & Filmmaker

Sigridur Benediktsdottir

Self - Special Investigative Committee, Icelandic Parliament

Paul Volcker

Self - Former Federal Reserve Chairman

Dominique Strauss-Kahn

Self - Managing Director, International Monetary Fund

George Soros

Self - Chairman, Soros Fund Management

Barney Frank

Self - Chairman, Financial Services Committee

David McCormick

Self - Under Secretary of the Treasury, Bush Administration

Scott Talbott

Self - Chief Lobbyist, Financial Services Roundtable

Andrew Sheng

Self - Chief Adviser, China Banking Regulatory Commission

Lee Hsien Loong

Self - Prime Minister, Singapore

Christine Lagarde

Self - Finance Minister, France

Gillian Tett

Self - U.S. Managing Editor, The Financial Times

Nouriel Roubini

Self - Professor, NYU Business School

R. Glenn Hubbard

Self - Chief Economic Adviser, Bush Administration

Eliot Spitzer

Self - Former Governor, New York

Charles Ferguson

Writer

CB

Chad Beck

Writer

AB

Adam Bolt

Writer

قد يعجبك أيضًا

فيلم وثائقي★ 6.5

الألماس المنهوب: سرقة القرن

فيلم وثائقي★ 5.7

شركة النشوة: قصة وان تايست

فيلم وثائقي★ 7.3

Into the Abyss

فيلم وثائقي★ 6.9

Doctors of the Dark Side

تلفزيون الواقع★ 6.1

Inside Job

كوميديا★ 7.3

Inside Jokes

فيلم وثائقي★ 8.1

المال القذر

فيلم وثائقي★ 7.7

American Manhunt: Osama bin Laden

فيلم وثائقي★ 7.1

جيفري إبستاين: ثراء فاحش

فيلم وثائقي★ 7.3

Worst Ex Ever

فيلم وثائقي★ 7.5

Surviving R. Kelly

فيلم وثائقي★ 6.8

سرقة

فيلم وثائقي★ 8.0

The Keepers

فيلم وثائقي★ 7.2

القبض على القتلة

فيلم وثائقي★ 7.3

مادوف: وحش وول ستريت

فيلم وثائقي★ 7.5

History's Greatest Heists

فيلم وثائقي★ 7.9

Cold Case Files

فيلم وثائقي★ 7.6

أسرار جماعة القبائل الاثنتي عشرة

فيلم وثائقي★ 8.8

Homicide Hunter

فيلم وثائقي★ 8.5

Making a Murderer

فيلم وثائقي★ 5.9

في عداد المفقودين: أحياء أم أموات

فيلم وثائقي★ 7.2

Buried in the Backyard

فيلم وثائقي★ 7.6

علامات المختل

فيلم وثائقي★ 7.5

Night Stalker: The Hunt for a Serial Killer

التعليقات

10 تعليق

Saber ChaibJun 15, 2025

A free market, some argue, has always been the key to the success of the United States. So believed Greenspan and all the main financial chiefs of the last decades. A free market will just regulate itself and allow the economy to flourish in the right directions. This theory never made much sense to me, but I am an engineer, not an economist, so I had to suspend my judgment. After watching this excellent movie, it is now crystal clear to me why the whole system collapsed. It is precisely because the derivatives market was highly unregulated: no feedback mechanism between the credit institutions, rating agencies and the investors who bought all the junk securities; even worse, banks themselves where borrowing ridiculous amounts of money relative to their assets. To make a down to earth comparison, it's like if you were driving on the freeway with your eyes closed, at full speed, and little fuel in the tank. You will crash at some point. Unless someone throws you a giant parachute. (Which is what happened with the bailouts.) The movie also touches on the disturbing role that the academic world played into this. A generation of future leaders was (and probably still is) taught to believe in the unstable financial structure, that has been progressively created since the seventies. This, without full disclosure of the financial conflicts that several faculty members have, being on the board of big financial giants, or their direct consultants. I wish most Americans watched this movie.

oluwaseunayo❤️Jun 15, 2025

I saw Inside Job at the Toronto International Film Festival opening night at Ryerson Theatre to a packed house of 1,000 or so people with director, producer, and Financial Times journalist present, and fielding questions after this eye-opening and thought-provoking movie narrated by Matt Damon who was paid at 'substantially below his commercial rate'. This is a very important movie to watch. I think it's important that we all see how and why this could have happened if we want to prevent it from happening again. Before I get to the good parts, I want to call out what I thought was missing from this documentary: a strong objective on what me, the viewer should do. What's the call to action? Should I be enraged and (were I American) call my house of representative to vent my frustration about the lack of and need for change? Perhaps. But I didn't feel that. That strong emotional reaction was missing. If that's important to you, maybe it won't be a satisfying movie, but regardless, I still say this is on a VERY important topic, and it's done VERY well, that people should see this. What was good about it? 1) It explains the events and potential complex Financial concepts in a concise, easy-to-understand manner. The director has a PHD from MIT, and it shows. The writing is intelligent, the story tells with an economy of language and is well structured. 2) It is logical, comes across as factual, paints various people in often uncompromising light, to reveal a picture of Financial greed, excess, and lack of honesty in the US financial system. It shows why this picture is believable, and makes a convincing argument that this greed, excess, and lack of honesty in the system will NOT change. 3) Is it horrifying? No. Some people might paint a picture of the movie like that, but for me, it was reasonable in its claims. Sure, it was hard on people and things. And it feels like a very complete and real world view to me, pulling together all the tidbits I've read/heard of into one conclusive thesis....which I LOVED. 4) It did make me think, what if I became employed in the industry in the early 2000s...would that have been a good thing or a bad thing? Interestingly, it showed how doing so would and could have been very good for someone to do so (become exceedingly and perhaps unfairly wealthy), with very little accountability if things failed. Yes -- we should ALL have done so if we could. Because so many people got away with it. Greed. Excess. The immoral crap doesn't exist. The system is flawed. So take advantage until the government does something. BUt they do not. Or did not, and may not. The ugliness may not clean itself up. That's part of the message. And if you 5) So -- what to do now? Take money out of the markets. Don't support these US institutions (Investment banks/large US financial institutions). That was the subtle message for me. AND --> tell everyone about this movie. To watch it. To be warned that all is not well. And perhaps someone will do something, say something, or perhaps act a little more honestly to try to right the wrongs of this world. This movie was courageous. It gets my support.

VioletJun 15, 2025

Ferguson has used the ambush interview popularized by CBS' 60 Minutes to grill both the guilty and the extremely guilty in a way that commercial television will never do for fear of offending its sponsors. The Keiser Report on Russia Today is the only exception. The film starts with the collapse of the Icelandic banks, although the banking crisis began with Public Service Announcements on talk radio pushing loans for minorities. The banks -- many of them local -- feared congressional investigation coupled with potential charges of dreaded racism, so they arranged loan packages that enabled the marginally qualified to purchase houses. The local banks unloaded the mortgages as has become the norm in the industry. You can forget about such quaint notions as the Bailey Building and Loan anymore. This bubble began in 2006, but the Iceland saga was later in 2008. YouTube has been showing a satire on the subprime crisis by John Bird and John Fortune that has aired since January 2008 which summarizes this film in 8 minutes. But, this film gets to the root of the problem by mercilessly grilling the shysters. Elliot Spitzer got air time, but even he caught the stinging end of the lash from the producer. Apparently, the vanity of of the players left most of them unprepared. The only drawback to Inside Job is the extensive face-time given to the smarmy George Soros -- the mastermind behind global financial speculation.

Abess NehmeJun 15, 2025

In my opinion, the movie has a bright side and a dark side. I enjoyed to see known people talk about the economical crisis and giving their side of the story. I enjoyed to see witnesses given in Washington by bankers accused of their shameful practices. I think the movie put my attention on the deep problem of lobbying, which results in inefficient regulation and creates a threat for the whole system. The big problem with the movie, however, is black and white approach it takes. It presents 10% of a complicated picture and makes one to believe that it is 100%. For example, deregulation is widely accepted as one of reasons for the economical crisis. In the movie, it is represented in such a way that it looks ridiculous how a law on deregulation could pass - corrupted officials is a hint. In the book "Turbulent Age" Alan Greenspan talks about regulation. It is a problem with two ends: regulation decays economic growth and results in inefficient use of a capital. Just think about Soviet Union as the extreme case of regulation. It's not a simple answer where the balance should be, unlike the impression one can get from the movie. Too much populism and short vision.

Ayoub DaouJun 15, 2025

I work. I have worked since I was 16. I worked when going to college. I worked between college. I worked after college. I worked while raising a family. I worked, sometimes 3 or 4 jobs at a time. I'm still working. And after retirement, I don't think I would be able to quit doing something, even if it meant being a greeter at Wells Fargo. I put in my overtime. I put in my dues. I will not really have enough money to live on when I retire, but that is all relative to my lifestyle at that time. I certainly will not be able to afford the house, but I will have some foreseeable comforts. I may not have worked as hard as others, but I have worked dependably and consistently. My conscience is fairly clean. I have never been in a position to make vast amounts of money. Most of my life I have lived from paycheck to paycheck. I am not a financial planner. I can be an impulsive buyer at times but when I get that craving I make sure that whatever I get will last me. I'm probably the perfect Joe Schmoe. I watched this film. I don't know why. Maybe I was curious about it winning an Oscar. Maybe I'm just into masochistic tendencies, but I did watch it all the way through. I sat their like the wedding guests in the Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner as he spun his story wondering how all this stuff could have happened over such a long period of time and realizing how gullible and uninformed I am. When it comes to Government, I am like an ostrich with its head in the ground: Just let me do my job, I don't want to worry about you doing yours. I don't think I am the only one with this sentiment. However, when one of us Joe Schmoes handed over billions of dollars to the people that engineered the collapse of so many financial institutions; to realize this has already happened; to realize there is nothing to be done just increases resentment. The documentary was skillfully done. The preface to this movie followed the decline of Iceland during their deregulation period. Within 5 short years they went from picture perfect to poverty, the only success stories probably laughed about over drinks and cigars. The movie then proceeds to tactfully follow the events from the Regan era deregulation to the panic of the collapse of insurance, banks and brokerage houses. It then moves on to the signing of the bailout then to the wake of their carnage in the world financial structure. The appalling fact of this is no one went to jail. To the contrary, they all walked off with billions. Matt Daemon does an excellent job of narrating the facts in a flat unsympathetic tone. The directors are quick to point out those individuals that did not let an interview happen, casting a higher level of doubt to their credibility. All in all, much was exposed and even if 30% of it is true, it is disappointing it ever got to this point. Unlike Moore, seeing this was a serious piece I appreciated the fact the production wasn't degraded by any comic relief. There was much to love and hate about this film. The production of it was crisp, clean and too the point following a well thought out introduction and ending, but you sure do end up hating capitalism by the time the ending credits start to roll.

Catty MurrayJun 15, 2025

This film portrayed a horrific set of circumstances in a measured and brilliantly illustrated manner. The economic issues were explained by clear, understandable graphs. Many major players appeared on camera to their detriment. The few that didn't appear were shown through press clips. The most awful scene to me was the footage of the tent city with unemployed, lost and bewildered American workers, their jobs lost directly because of the antics of the Wall Street monsters. It could easily happen here in Godzone. Highly recommended.

PoshdelJun 15, 2025

About 30 people at the 7PM show in the Music Box theater in Chicago last nite, and I was one of them. I am always looking for two things on this economic disaster: 1) A better understanding, and 2) a means of explaining it better to others. This film delivers in both counts. For me the key sequence came when the graphics, under solid narration, illustrated how 3rd tier investors were placing bets on bets. I.e., that's what derivatives are. I always knew this was happening, but the film made it very clear. That was the break point (in my analysis of the problem). The film was nearly void of political leanings, which made it an important contribution. The only part that bothered me is that Congressman Barney Frank was framed as an expert looking back with wisdom on the ill-conceived passage of the "Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000", and, behold! Barney Frank *voted* for it. It would be better to interview all 4 Congressmen who voted against it: Ron Paul, Nick Smith, Gene Taylor and Peter DeFazio. [2 from each Party! How's that for Bipartism opposition? It took me 10 minutes to confirm these names, and I'm not even making a movie.] It is significant that a continuum of hoodlums are seen on the podium with a continuum of Prsidents: Regan through Obama. The infestation of their ilk into the Political World is there for all to see. Please see this film any way you can, and lock it in!

Dinosaur 🦖Mar 23, 2025

user5578044939555Mar 23, 2025

Name Reveal 🔜❗️Mar 23, 2025

اختيارات مميزة

هل تريد المزيد من الترفيه؟ استكشف منصة الألعاب المقترحة ووجهة الدراما القصيرة التي نوصي بها.

ألعاب فورية

Gamixo

العب ألعاب المتصفح الخفيفة مثل الألغاز والورق والرياضة والتحديات السريعة خلال ثوانٍ.

دراما قصيرة

VSKIT Drama

شاهد المسلسلات القصيرة الرائجة وقصص الرومانسية والدراما الجديدة مع تحديثات يومية سريعة.