Miss Sloane Review (Political Melodrama, 2016)

Learn more about the movie "Miss Sloane" released in 2016. Honestly review and critics. Is it worthing to watch "Miss Sloane"?
Last Updated
June 05, 2020

Explore this Article


Miss Sloane - Storyline, Actors And Ratings

The movie "Miss Sloane" is a Political Melodrama production.

IMDB rated the movie with 6.5 / 10.

According to Google Users - 88% of the people watched the movie liked the story.

Director: John Madden Actors: Mark Strong, Michael Stulbarg, Jessica Chastain, John Lithgow, Alison Pill, Jake Lacy, Gugu Embatha-Ro, Sam Waterston, David Wilson Barnes, Chuck Shamata

Miss Sloane has been produced with the budget of Budget: $13 million,

Fees around the world: $ 9 million.


About how beautiful and decisive Elizabeth Sloan lifted a five from the floor and saved America from uncontrolled weapons. Cat Bagel about the content of the film has a humanistic message. And I can even say exactly where the message is. Cat Bagel about the humanistic promise where it should be.



Miss Sloane Review

Experienced political technologist, virtuoso lobbyist, psychologist, athlete, Komsomolskaya Pravda, a little addict and just a beauty Elizabeth Sloan (Jessica Chastain) works for a large lobbying company. Colleagues accuse her of manipulative, unscrupulous and cynical, but in this business such qualities are rather a reason for compliment. 

At some point, however, she found a scythe on a stone. Influential businessman Bill Sanford (Chuck Shamata), representing the gun lobby, brought to the company "Cole, Kravitz and Waterman", which employs Ms. Sloan, an order to oppose "Bill Hitton-Harris" - a bill restricting the freedom to buy and own firearms in the United States. 

Sloan flatly refuses to oppose this bill and leaves the company, taking with him part of his team. She and her team are immediately hired by Rodolfo Schmidt (Mark Strong), president of Peterson White. Rodolfo is trying to push through the bill in Congress. 

And then begins the classic lobbying activity Sloan, which consists in manipulation, a fine political game, some types of blackmail and other things that form the basis of this profession. 

But Sloan contacted very strong opponents, and now this activity can bring it to the tsugunder. 


That's just i looked amazingly giftedly staged fuflo called "The Big Game," where the purposeful, beautiful and determined Molly Bloom, played by Jessica Chastain, confronted the world of greedy and voluptuous men, organizing for them underground poker games, when suddenly again stumble upon the beautiful and determined Elizabeth Sloan, played by the same Jessica Chastain, opposing the gun lobby and unscrupulous politicians, organizing for some to push the bill - against others Exactly the same.

However, what is interesting, if the script "Big Game" wrote one of the best (read - understand how to please the members of the Film Academy) hollywood screenwriters Eron Sorkin, and he put this movie, here the author of the script - unknown newcomer Jonathan Perera. And this movie turned out clearly better than the "Big Game" (I note, by the way, that "Miss Sloan" came out a year earlier), although to him we have all sorts of claims, because the same extremely annoying stamps here, too, enough.

What's so good about it? Very good Jessica Chastain, here is practically her benefit (as well as in "The Big Game"). And it is so bright and so fills all the cinematic space that such cool and usually very charismatic actors as Mark Strong and Michael Stulbarg, against its background just lost. However, this is due to the script: it was written exclusively for the first violin, and the rest of the strings there only for furniture. 

It is very interesting to watch Ms. Sloan and her work for the benefit or harm of American society (a good lobbyist, in theory, should be absolutely equal). From this point of view, there are good moments in the script: you never know why Sloan does certain things. And she never does anything for nothing.

And the character itself is quite interesting: Elizabeth gave everything to her career, she has no personal life - she prefers to fuck with the guys from escort services for money, she sleeps very little and cheers herself with some pills - and it is clearly not ascorbic. 

It is fundamentally unscrupulous and gladly manipulates people, periodically just substituting them. 

But since she is currently busy with the noble goal of pushing through a bill to limit gun ownership, she is supposed to sympathize and empathize.

However, near the end - to these hearings in Congress - the writer and director so changes the sense of proportion that the film actually rolls into a fake and completely inappropriate melodrama. And Miss Sloan is no longer a cynical lobbyist, but the Mother of God, who put all herself on the alt-right of the fatherland. And it really spoils the experience. (I'll talk about the claims to the script in P.S. to this review so as not to spoiler.)

In addition, the stamps used by the creators of the film were so obvious and predictable that they were calculated just for once or twice: the wife who watched the film with me, will not let you lie - I predicted all the main points exactly. 

What did we get as a result? After all, a good movie ("Big game", in my opinion, noticeably worse), which seems to roll down the mountain: at first it goes well, develops interestingly, then rolls down and lower, well, and at the end breaks out such kindergarten and panties in polka dots, that it's just ridiculous. 

And I'm silent about these periodic spells about the "Holiness of the Constitution," "the inadmissibility of manipulation," all these "ethics commissions" - it was clearly designed for an extremely undemanding public. These are spherical lobbyists in the vacuum of the American political field. 

So scenno - almost scoreless, Jessica Chastain liked, and her dresses are beautiful (in the "Big Game" dresses were still noticeably improved), on Mark Strong, Michael Stulbarg and John Lithgow to look always nice, so that in general did not regret that looked. However, all this could be done much more interesting and reliable than the nonsense, which the audience snasked closer to the finale. In addition, it's all pretty long: half an hour could be easily reduced.

To my surprise, I learned that this film just specifically failed, and above all - in the States, for which this picture, in fact, was shot: $3.5 million of fees in the U.S. with a budget of $13 - it's a fiasco, bro! Strange, like the audience should love such films. Both beautiful and determined. And drooling snot. And for world peace. No, it failed. (Although the rating on IMDB is very high.) But "Big Game" seems to have swept quite decently. 

P. S. What, you may ask, is the difference between this film and the repeatedly mentioned "Erin Brockovich: Beautiful and Determined"? And that the film was staged for real events: a simple American housewife at the expense of her perseverance, determination and intrepidity sued the giant corporation, resulting in the corporation paying $333 million to the victims of the pollution by the corporation water. And this story was worth respecting. And then there's some lobbyist who's a lobbyist (it's a diagnosis), and then suddenly decided to put her fate under the train for the sake of pushing some bill? Don't be ridiculous. I was still hoping to read in the story about the creation of the film something like "set on real events" (well, suddenly in reality there was such a strange woman), but then it turned out that it's just wet fantasies of the screenwriter.    

P. P. S. And now let's talk about my claims to the script. There will be continuous spoilers, so if you have not watched this movie, but are going to watch - immediately either close your eyes, or leave the room. 

So. Well, let's say Elizabeth is so important to this bill that she dropped everything and went nowhere from the firm where she was in a very good account. It is hard to believe that a professional lobbyist is capable of such a thing, because he will no longer be professional. Well, let's say Elizabeth fights for this bill using any methods, even pretty dirty. 

The story of the shooter's attack on Esma Manudjarian, and the shooter kills a civilian who used a weapon - it is so sucked out of the finger (and still absolutely incompetently put) that for this it is necessary to drive from the writers. 

And when Elizabeth just raised a five-year-old in prison to bring to the surface a vile senator and the head of her former company - it's all incredibly charming. Well, she wanted to shove this bill, that she could not even throw, and was ready to rewind five years on the quiche - well, yes, yes. 

Well, like a cherry on this poorly baked cake - a call to the court of Ford, the boy on call, with whom Elizabeth fucked. Have you provided sexual favours to Miss Sloan, asks the vile Senator Sperling? After all, the hotel recorded your visits to her. No, the boy responds on call, committing a criminal offense, we only played checkers with her and discussed political impositions at Britten's. And I'm afraid to ask the screenwriter: what pills did he take before he would do that? Same as Miss Sloan, or are they the same?

P. P. S. By the way, in Russia very few people know why the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was actually introduced. That is, everyone knows that it guarantees the right of citizens to keep and bear arms. But they do not know why citizens are given this right. This is clearly written in the Declaration of Independence: "But when a long series of abuses and nassies, invariably subordinated to the same purpose, demonstrates the insidious plan to force the people to accept unlimited despotism, overthrow such a government and create new guarantees of security for the future becomes the right and duty of the people."


Frequently Asked Questions

No added frequency questions and answers yet.

Community - Q&A