I HAD seen trailers for Greed at the start of the year and thought it looked fairly entertaining.

It has a solid cast, featuring stellar British names like Steve Coogan, David Mitchell and Asa Butterfield.

But the film has nothing going for it. I don’t know who it was made for, I don’t know who’s enjoying it and I don’t know who thought it was worth making.

Swindon Advertiser:

It’s an attempt at a satirical look at capitalism and the fashion industry and is reportedly loosely based on the life of Sir Philip Green, who owns the Arcadia Group which owns TopShop.

It may or may not be a coincidence that the lead character is based in Monaco, is questioned by government and hosts a big party abroad.

Steve Coogan stars as Sir Richard McCreadie (the clues are listed above) and was presumably given the brief of portraying an over-the-top caricature of a rich billionaire.

But we’re introduced to him like he’s the protagonist of the movie and that we should be rooting for him to succeed and recover from his latest scandal – something that is completely against the attempted message.

The rest of the cast aren’t much better.

David Mitchell is fine in this, just as he is in most things. But he doesn’t offer anything new.

Swindon Advertiser:

If you’ve ever seen anything featuring Mitchell then he’s playing that same character. He likes historic fiction and knows his Greek mythology and he’s just as socially awkward as ever.

It was about halfway through the film when I realised it has no protagonist.

Coogan definitely couldn’t be it and Mitchell wasn’t – he was just there for the ride.

It definitely wasn’t Isla Fisher who plays Coogan’s ex-wife. I really didn’t know who I should be rooting for.

Swindon Advertiser:

Should I be happy that this billionaire’s empire is collapsing or should I be hoping he pulls it out the bag and gets a comeback? Well luckily the film kind of gave me an answer.

It transpires that one of Coogan’s assistants has a connection with one of the old businesses that he used to own and an incident happened in a sweatshop where this character's mum worked.

So I guess this assistant is our real champion?

The film's message is the real problem here. At times it tries to take the stand of ‘isn’t capitalism bad?’ and that if you spend your whole life treating people terribly it will all come back at you.

But then one of the final scenes of the film completely undoes this message and just says ‘yeah capitalism is fine, don’t worry about how you treat people’.

The other ‘message' in this movie is one about Syrian refugees.

Swindon Advertiser:

It tries to be satirical and suggest that the rich and famous pretend to care about the refugees when they actually hate them.

It initially shows how the refugees are making the best of the bad situation they have been put in but then the film portrays them as slaves and has them stealing items from a hotel.

This completely undoes yet another message.

Swindon Advertiser:

It’s hinted early on that Coogan’s business isn’t entirely ethical but the theme of ‘oh aren’t these people in sweat-shops so underpaid’ is incredibly shoehorned in during the middle of the film. It is then ignored for a little while and then one of the main characters goes to work in one by the end, just like her mum, with nothing changing.

Some satire can be good, Jojo Rabbit is a brilliant example of showing how to bring a sensitive topic to the general public and making it hit home.

Greed does not achieve this. If you go and watch it then you'll be wasting your money.

Connor Mountford