Review of Freakonomics (2010) by Dana A — 03 May 2010

This was one of the most highly anticipated movies for me. I loved the book and constantly told others about it, so when I found out this was becoming a movie I quickly asked: HOW?? While the book tells a story, its not exactly movie material, even the authors admitted it was just several topics untied together, where nothing relates to each other.

The main problem with the movie is just that. Its a bunch of unrelated topics somehow strung together, without much of a purpose. It feels like random information is being thrown at me. While it works for a book format, not so much as a documentary.

One of the more interesting facts was just how the movie was made. Six of the most profilic and highly talented documentarians came together and each directed a topic from the book. Each segment was no longer then 20 minutes.

So each segment has a different feeling then the last. Animation, interviews and re-enactments were used. Thank heavens these directors knew what they were doing and how to pick their subjects, cause it could hve easily fallen apart with a bad interview.

Something this film does not have. One of the most entertaining segments was directed by Hedi Ewing & Rachel Grady tackling school incentives. However, as great as this segment and Sumo wrestling segments are, nothing compares to Eugene Jarecki's segment tackling abortion.

From choosing the right voice-over actor to the comparision of It's A Wonderful Life, its literally the perfect pace, lenght and tone. But for every amazing segment someone was bound to fall. This most suprisingly was Morgan Spurlock, who tackled the name segment.

It felt too short, while it was funny, it somehow was lacking substance. Chad Troutwine, one of the producers and directors had the most difficult task of tying all the segements together while creating little segments inbetween.

Mainly with intereviews of the authors discussing various unrelated topics. This too didn't feel well executed and sadly his segments felt more random then anything. Another disappointing factor was not all the topics from the book were included.

My favorites being the KKK and why crack dealers still live at home. These along with others were omitted and replaced with current topics involving Bernie Madoff and the housing market....most likely to connect with the audience better.

Honestly there was no need for this book to become a movie. The book stands as one of the most interesting economic books ever written and the movie seems to cheapen and dilute the books charm, genius and overall amazing messages.

The segments are so short except for Jarecki's, Heidi's and the sumo wrestling I was really unable to enjoy and immerse myself fully in the movie. Instead Freakonomics comes across as a thinly conjoined blend of snippets of potentially interesting films.

Itâ??s more like a highlight reel than a satisfying or even thought provoking cinematic experience. If the picture is meant to function as a supplement to the book, to intrigue viewers just enough to add to the sales total, it achieves its mission.

If, however, the Freakonomics producers and directors intend to make a movie that stands apart from its source, theyâ??ve taken a fundamentally, irrevocably wrong approach. This adaption was sadly just too good to be true.

While it made for a great companion for the book, I would not reccomend this over the book itself.