Good , But It Is Overrated By Some

This is a tender, generous movie that likes its characters and presents them as real people, full of flaws and strengths.

When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

There are zero likable characters in this film. Everyone is strictly out for themselves, and how much they stand to gain from a leveraged buyout of RJR Nabisco. The battle for the company between James Garner and Jonathan Pryce is the primary focus of "Barbarians at the Gate". The best attribute of this movie is not the acting, not the story, but the sharp dialog. The outcome is always in doubt, but the greed is always obvious. In the final analysis, this comes across more like a business instructional film than entertainment. The whole thing is rather sterile, because there really are no heroes to root for. ................................... MERK

I read once, in James Garner's Biography, that he did roles in quality TV like (Barbarians at the Gate). Now whoever wrote this lie will burn in hell forever, because this movie isn't quality TV, unless TV stands for Tormenting Vanity ! It's natural that too much of something is bad enough. Here you are a movie to know that better. The dialog is just TOO DAMN MUCH to unbearable degree. It could destroy the movie and us.The first 20 minutes are a headache. The characters speak with tons of elegant gibberish. The dialog has too many very deep information, and most of all it goes on non-stop too. Plus, it couldn't make any tie-in between us and the main character. I couldn't make any initial viewpoint towards him. They were busy making him talk, talk, and talk for all the time without presenting him appropriately. So, it was exactly like a stock market program, running annoyingly on-screen, without any drama but the tragic one in my brain !After that…the stock market channel breaks loose. There are more stiff characters in suits (too many, with no true presentation, so with the unbroken mentioning of their names I couldn't tell who's who ?!). And the case is that we have them talking in great energy, with more of the same – fully detailed – gibberish, without funny comedy, clear drama, something to understand, or a MOMENT OF SILENCE ! The scriptwriter of this movie is one rare person. He proved for someone like me, who watched countless good and bad American movies before, that America has real windbag scripts! That lethal flaw I saw in many not American movies. But who said that anyone or anything is perfect. Actually its dialog can fill 3 movies and 4 newspapers I don't buy ! The main event, as I desperately understood, is ironic, satirical, and supposedly hot. But this 1000-words-per-minute dealing made it like a sweeping speech torrent where nothing is distinct or intelligible from start till the very end; why they selected the lower offer ? The lead is portrayed eventually like a defeated knight, so why he's a knight ? Why they wanted to defeat him ? And how they did it ?!! I'll never know…from this movie ! To make the matter worse, (Glenn Jordan)'s directing was dead, literally dead. The image doesn't say a thing. I believe there isn't one in the first place, since none was portrayed by it. All what I saw is people talk while walking across closed rooms, and that's it. Without much concentration, you can notice that (Jordan) intended to wrap it up as fast as he can, even if so many things, if not all the things, died out of heart failure, or we did earlier out of apoplexy. Hence the outcome was the most long, unfunny and humdrum sitcom's episode in history !The sets are all the same. Forget the cinematography. The music is primitive electronic thing; aside from being wearisome, it fits more a kid's show. Save (Jonathan Pryce), all the actors talked the same tone. The good acting was like a fish in deep black water; hard to hunt, and hard to see. The editing made the movie so crowded without a space to breathe. Sometimes I wanted the cast to speak slower, sometimes I wanted a translation's boards, and sometimes I wanted to just scream !So, with no smart writing and no directing this lost its way, being a huge turn-off. Whenever I recall an American movie where its dialog ruined it, this is the first one to remember. I saw theatricals, but flu hallucination, with more vitality and less talks. (Barbarians at the Gate) isn't a comedy about money. It's a nightmare about something I, with considerable struggle, couldn't totally catch on!Uninteresting isn't the right word for it. It's SHUT UP !

This was my first HBO made for TV film and holds a dear place in my film collection. Not only that, "Barbarians at the Gate" holds a dear place among the explanation of greed in the 1980's - right next to my other favorite depiction of greed in the 80's film, Oliver Stone's "Wall Street".But this isn't too much pulp fiction, it's based on a real tale of the sale of RJR Nabisco where its CEO (played brilliantly by James Garner), his financiers at American Express, the board and all the other barbarians who find out its for sale wanting a piece of it. Doesn't sound funny? Oh, but it is. When you have something as popular as a profitable tobacco company which owns several other family oriented divisions such as cookies and crackers, the fight for ownership becomes very real and very profitable.And the fight is played out well within the 1980's theme of The Regan/Bush era of greed and is very funny. Sad, true and funny. From the CEO's greed of private jets, several homes, humongous salary and failed product introductions to the CEO's obviously younger, trophy wife who is just about to have her husband buy her a PhD so she can be seen as 'serious' and not be called 'cupcake' all the time; to the public relations expert who wants the account-if not from her neighbor/friend then from the person who will eventually give the winning offer, to the brokers who put together buying plans to usurp his offers, to the board that never liked the CEO's extravagances but if his money deal was big enough, who cares?; to the CEO's family dog who's spoiled rotten while you know during that time there were people starving in the streets -- you'll watch in some shock and awe but can't help but laugh at how all of this comes together. And how everyone will mess over everyone just to get it. All for the top prize: Ownership of RJR Nabisco.Excellent, excellent film.

A story of greed, F. Ross Johnson's attempt to rid himself of troublesome shareholders who bug him with cries to curb his excessive management and lifestyle ignites a bidding war for ownership of RJR-Nabisco. Through sessions of number-crunching, men's room meetings, and personal loyalties and competitions, the fate of the company and those involved is decided and standards set for what will be allowed or punished by the captains of industry of the 1980's heyday.For a movie dealing with such despicable and probably in real life boring characters, the final product is delightful, entertaining, and almost educational. While the level of greed and excess is appalling, you can't help getting caught up in the wheeling and dealing and the competition, rooting for one side or the other while knowing you shouldn't like either one. The greedy CEO or the heartless junk-bond trader (Henry Kravis), take your pick and enjoy. No one is immune to the satire of the film, down to the trophy wives and their manicurists who know more about Wall Street than they do. Still, the comic tone is maintained; as much as you want to hate them, the film avoids moralizing, content just to ridicule and make the audience laugh.The attention to detail in the movie is simply brilliant. Whenever there is a TV screen or someone lighting a cigarette in the background, pay attention or you may miss a good laugh. It boasts clearly the best costumes of any Wall Street movie, from costume parties to Bush-Quayle hoedowns. Witty and satirical dialogue is accompanied by a well-chosen score. Details and incidents with little to do with the actual plot add to the entertainment value while not distracting from the story. Overall a great movie, funny and cool, makes you think a little: would you really want to be one of them?