The Emperor's New Clothes (2015)

I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Powerful

it is finally so absorbing because it plays like a lyrical road odyssey that’s also a detective story.

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

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.

Oh great, another celebrity walking around in $500 jeans talking about the ills of society and how bad poor people have it.I find it ironic that Brand blames the free market system for making the poor, poorer and the rich, richer than how things used to be when meanwhile the markets have only grown less free and the social safety nets have only grown over the same period of time. But then again, he's a burn out that suffers from buying his own BS.If we had Brand as our Dear Leader, he'd raise income taxes on the wealthy, property taxes, and raise minimum wage significantly. In turn, with everyone making more money and the prices of goods increasing dramatically, we'd see prices go up significantly on everything from rent to toilet paper and groceries. Essentially the poor would be back in the exact same place they were before, except it would be even harder to accumulate any wealth so we'd be completely dependent on the state. Brand the rescue would enact price ceilings on goods in response to the inflation and then we'd see shortages.Worst of all, Brand would be all fired up about this from his multi- million dollar house and would call his producer friends so that they could make another worthless documentary exactly as this one with the exact same solution.So don't listen to this infant, don't let him have an excuse to make another film full of advice worth far less than his jeans.

This documentary, as led by Russell Brand and directed by Michael Winterbottom, essentially shows where unbridled capitalism takes us. We live in a time where a cleaner earns 300 times less than his/her boss, and if all bankers in the UK would give up their salary for one day, they would double what said cleaners would make for a YEAR.Also, lest not forget that no UK (nor anywhere else, really) bankers are spending time in jail if they are sentenced for economic crimes. A man may be jailed for a year for stealing orange juice - as shown in the documentary, yes, really - but not any bankers. Why? They make the rules, you see, with the corporations. That's what you get.Brand/Winterbottom aren't gripes. They also show ways to try to get away from the bad stuff, from the poorer turning more poor and the wealthier getting more money. I mean, 80 people own more than half of the money in the World. 80 people, of which some are merely heirs, like the Wal-Mart heirs. By the way, did you know that Wal-Mart employees receive 8 billion American dollars per year in social benefits, as they don't receive a salary that enables them to make ends meet? This is not an American phenomena; the documentary examines that, and Tescos, and it's naturally not a US/UK phenomenon, it's everywhere, mate! Check this out. It's a well-worth ride. It's your life, basically, whether you like it or not, and of where we're heading. I wish they'd discussed how corporations are treating the environment and how that'll turn us on our heads in about 10 years' time, because that's roughly how long we have left to change things before they become irreversible and humanity is doomed. Some Naomi Klein, anyone? Don't take the Matrix pill that lets you continue being an ostrich. Go on, see the trews.

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.