IMDb RATING
7.0/10
1.4K
YOUR RATING
A look at the growing disparity between different economic classes.A look at the growing disparity between different economic classes.A look at the growing disparity between different economic classes.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
Geraint Anderson
- Former Banker Dresdener Kleinwort
- (archive footage)
Brigitte Bardot
- Self
- (archive footage)
Jean-Paul Belmondo
- Self
- (archive footage)
Richard Brooks
- Former HMRC Tax Inspector
- (archive footage)
- …
Warren Buffett
- CEO Berkshire Hathaway
- (archive footage)
George W. Bush
- Former President, USA
- (archive footage)
David Cameron
- Prime Minister, UK
- (archive footage)
John Christensen
- Economist
- (archive footage)
- …
Andrew Craig
- Former Banker UBS
- (archive footage)
Reece Davis-James
- Looter
- (archive footage)
- …
Bill de Blasio
- Mayor of New York City, USA
- (archive footage)
- (as Mayor Bill de Blasio)
David DeGraw
- Occupy Activist
- (archive footage)
Bob Diamond
- CEO Barclays Bank
- (archive footage)
Bernie Ecclestone
- Chief Executive Formule One
- (archive footage)
Milton Freedman
- Economist, USA
- (archive footage)
Fred Goodwin
- Former CEO Royal Bank of Scotland
- (archive footage)
Philip Green
- Owner Topshops
- (archive footage)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
I don't really follow celebrity culture, and just in case you think that means I'm far too highbrow to do so, I also am pretty bad at following the other end of that spectrum either. I mention this because Russell Brand is in both of those in some ways, and in both areas I am aware of him but little more than that – for some reason I don't care for him when I have seen him, but at the same time I would struggle to specifically tell you what I have seen him in. This film of course got more attention due to his involvement, and it was this publicity that drew me to watch the film, even if it was the message that I actually wanted to hear.
In terms of that message, it is perfectly worthy and valid, and, as Brand says at the start of the film – really nothing you have not heard before. Problem with that sentence is that it is only part of the truth, because not only will you have heard all of this before, but predominately you will have heard it all done better too. Brand seems to have been identified as the key problem with the film, but for me the whole approach and tone of the film is off – okay it is off because it is modeled around the Brand brand (if you will) but this is not a solo project, there are other people who should have evened this out, not least of which is Winterbottom. The issue with the film is evident from the very start, because no matter its other faults, the film is at least consistent across its running time. It appears to be aimed at 'the people', or at least the perception of who 'the people' are. What this means in reality is that we have the 'geezer' factor turned up to 11, everything is a little bit cheeky, and things are played out in very simple terms, and with a very basic structure and approach.
For some maybe this will win you over, but personally I found it grating and patronizing – and not just Brand. To focus on the content (as we should), the film has this great point, but it makes it far too simply; getting school children to yell out like the film is a panto doesn't work, and the film not having access to people beyond security guards also doesn't work. Many other devices and specifics fall flat, and the fact we have heard this all before does tend to come across even louder – and the fact it isn't working just highlights how much better others have covered the same material, whether in documentaries or in satirical news shows. This is my fundamental problem with the film – that it doesn't make its case at all well; however there is no point in me pretending that Brand himself is not a big part of this. His style and manner here seems so insincere and patronizing. His efforts to 'speak to the people' seem too labored, and his many throwaway sentences attempting to charm just grated on me; he does appear to have good intentions, but he overplays the act of 'I'm just a simple bloke me, just a local boy like yourself mate' – for example saying he doesn't know anything about Libor when he so clearly does, as if angry ignorance is something he thinks will appeal to those watching (which maybe is true, but it still speaks to his views on the 99% when he thinks such a character is one we will appreciate). To be fair, in the film people do seem to respond to this approach, so he may well be a matter of taste.
Ultimately the film is Brand and it is hard to separate them. As such it is a film with a mostly worthy message and intent, but done in an insincere and messy fashion which seems to be trying to ingratiate itself to the populace but actually just comes off as an insincere act which at best is a bit grating, and at worst is patronizing and condescending.
In terms of that message, it is perfectly worthy and valid, and, as Brand says at the start of the film – really nothing you have not heard before. Problem with that sentence is that it is only part of the truth, because not only will you have heard all of this before, but predominately you will have heard it all done better too. Brand seems to have been identified as the key problem with the film, but for me the whole approach and tone of the film is off – okay it is off because it is modeled around the Brand brand (if you will) but this is not a solo project, there are other people who should have evened this out, not least of which is Winterbottom. The issue with the film is evident from the very start, because no matter its other faults, the film is at least consistent across its running time. It appears to be aimed at 'the people', or at least the perception of who 'the people' are. What this means in reality is that we have the 'geezer' factor turned up to 11, everything is a little bit cheeky, and things are played out in very simple terms, and with a very basic structure and approach.
For some maybe this will win you over, but personally I found it grating and patronizing – and not just Brand. To focus on the content (as we should), the film has this great point, but it makes it far too simply; getting school children to yell out like the film is a panto doesn't work, and the film not having access to people beyond security guards also doesn't work. Many other devices and specifics fall flat, and the fact we have heard this all before does tend to come across even louder – and the fact it isn't working just highlights how much better others have covered the same material, whether in documentaries or in satirical news shows. This is my fundamental problem with the film – that it doesn't make its case at all well; however there is no point in me pretending that Brand himself is not a big part of this. His style and manner here seems so insincere and patronizing. His efforts to 'speak to the people' seem too labored, and his many throwaway sentences attempting to charm just grated on me; he does appear to have good intentions, but he overplays the act of 'I'm just a simple bloke me, just a local boy like yourself mate' – for example saying he doesn't know anything about Libor when he so clearly does, as if angry ignorance is something he thinks will appeal to those watching (which maybe is true, but it still speaks to his views on the 99% when he thinks such a character is one we will appreciate). To be fair, in the film people do seem to respond to this approach, so he may well be a matter of taste.
Ultimately the film is Brand and it is hard to separate them. As such it is a film with a mostly worthy message and intent, but done in an insincere and messy fashion which seems to be trying to ingratiate itself to the populace but actually just comes off as an insincere act which at best is a bit grating, and at worst is patronizing and condescending.
Labelled as a film regarding the growing disparity between economic classes, Michael Winterbottom's The Emperor's New Clothes is an effective documentary balancing political and economic investigation with Russell Brand's palpably galvanic and marmite personality.
The film combines interviews with Brand himself, along with politicians and bankers. Brand begins by summating that much of what will be explored in the documentary won't be instantaneously enlightening, a far stretch from the explosively impactful manner as last year's masterful Citizen Four. Despite this, where I do believe the film achieves success is in its exposing of issues and its raising of awareness towards certain issues. As aforementioned, much of Brand's insight is foreseeable to those of a certain age. However; the teenage and young adult audience, much of what is explored could be thought-provoking, and is presented in a straightforward and confronting style which appears purposeful yet remains focused throughout. This, taken in combination with Brand's personality, does make what initially appears challenging subjective matter abundantly more digestible.
What is problematic is that the film at times felt like a flaccid attempt of a brief Russell Brand biopic. For the majority of the film Brand's presence is handled adeptly, yet I find at times the focus on his unabashed comedic set pieces (pleading at the top of his voice to bystanders to give up corrupt bankers and his Michael Moore-ish attempt of breaking and entering a bank) turned the focus from suggested gargantuan corruptness into a love letter to Brand's eccentricity. For fans of Brand, it's nothing particularly abhorrent, but for those on the other side of the fence, this shift will do little to convince them to change their tune.
The film combines interviews with Brand himself, along with politicians and bankers. Brand begins by summating that much of what will be explored in the documentary won't be instantaneously enlightening, a far stretch from the explosively impactful manner as last year's masterful Citizen Four. Despite this, where I do believe the film achieves success is in its exposing of issues and its raising of awareness towards certain issues. As aforementioned, much of Brand's insight is foreseeable to those of a certain age. However; the teenage and young adult audience, much of what is explored could be thought-provoking, and is presented in a straightforward and confronting style which appears purposeful yet remains focused throughout. This, taken in combination with Brand's personality, does make what initially appears challenging subjective matter abundantly more digestible.
What is problematic is that the film at times felt like a flaccid attempt of a brief Russell Brand biopic. For the majority of the film Brand's presence is handled adeptly, yet I find at times the focus on his unabashed comedic set pieces (pleading at the top of his voice to bystanders to give up corrupt bankers and his Michael Moore-ish attempt of breaking and entering a bank) turned the focus from suggested gargantuan corruptness into a love letter to Brand's eccentricity. For fans of Brand, it's nothing particularly abhorrent, but for those on the other side of the fence, this shift will do little to convince them to change their tune.
Russell Brand presents a quick look into global capitalism, the spreading ownership cult of the one percent and it's devastating effects on the working class and the unemployed.
Director/writer Michael Winterbottom tries to simplify this very complex and often esoteric issue so the average person can comprehend it. The scenes with the school children is a good example. Plus the one on one interviews with the people on social assistance is another example.
Unfortunately for me, I had a rather difficult time understand everything Russell Brand is saying with that terrible inner city British accent! I feel as if I missed some important statements by him. But please do not let his speaking influence your decision to watch this documentary. There is a lot to be learned about how the 1% is setting themselves into ivory towers --- the future overlords of all.
Director/writer Michael Winterbottom tries to simplify this very complex and often esoteric issue so the average person can comprehend it. The scenes with the school children is a good example. Plus the one on one interviews with the people on social assistance is another example.
Unfortunately for me, I had a rather difficult time understand everything Russell Brand is saying with that terrible inner city British accent! I feel as if I missed some important statements by him. But please do not let his speaking influence your decision to watch this documentary. There is a lot to be learned about how the 1% is setting themselves into ivory towers --- the future overlords of all.
After watching this documentary, the children were impressed so I asked them to reach for their mobile phones and google "how many phones are in the world". They know no other phones than mobile phones and no better source than Wikipedia. Probably, neither do you.
Wikipedia told them that there are approximately over 6,800,000,000 mobile phones in use for a global population of 7,012,000,000. They also delighted themselves by looking up the breakdown by country etc. Please also do so yourself.
Thirty, forty years ago no one could have thought that by today each person would have their own private phone line, much less in their pocket, and to boot, not just a phone but a computer.
Yet the poor are getting poorer, we are told.
I wonder what this documentary would have been like if instead of wealth, Russell Brand had had knowledge or commonsense. We will never find out.
Wikipedia told them that there are approximately over 6,800,000,000 mobile phones in use for a global population of 7,012,000,000. They also delighted themselves by looking up the breakdown by country etc. Please also do so yourself.
Thirty, forty years ago no one could have thought that by today each person would have their own private phone line, much less in their pocket, and to boot, not just a phone but a computer.
Yet the poor are getting poorer, we are told.
I wonder what this documentary would have been like if instead of wealth, Russell Brand had had knowledge or commonsense. We will never find out.
He's bringing up some really good points about the lawlessness of the city when it comes to financial crimes committed by the banks.
One thing he keep's blaming it on is a 'free market' This is just simply not true, we don't have a free market by any stretch of the imagination.
We live in an oligarchy with the rich being above the law.
Don't be fooled, more power to government is not the answer.
There's been many attempts to blame it on capitalism, since Marx. This has never and will never lead to a revolution that will do the common people any good whatsoever.
One thing he keep's blaming it on is a 'free market' This is just simply not true, we don't have a free market by any stretch of the imagination.
We live in an oligarchy with the rich being above the law.
Don't be fooled, more power to government is not the answer.
There's been many attempts to blame it on capitalism, since Marx. This has never and will never lead to a revolution that will do the common people any good whatsoever.
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- El traje nuevo del emperador
- Filming locations
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Gross worldwide
- $50,539
- Runtime
- 1h 41m(101 min)
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content