The film is narrated from a third- person point of view; the best work shirts
makes the film formal and informational rather than focusing on high entertainment value. In Part I, tilted “How We Got Here”, it becomes clear that the film considers investment banks to be the antagonists of the story, riddled with greed and self- interest.
Part II of the film, titled “The Bubble: 2001-2007” employs charts and graphs to aid viewers in contextualizing the statistics, numbers, and figures being delivered. In addition, this section of the film arranges montages of wrongdoers from Wall Street on- trial, struggling to vindicate themselves and often stumbling over their own greed and arrogance. These montages are meant to discredit officials, but do so in a way that is non- aggressive. This allows viewers to create their own meaning of the politicians’ gaffs. Part III, “The Crisis”, also uses bar graphs to illustrate evidence of the incredible spike in foreclosures nationwide. While bar graphs are often misleading in structure, the film uses appropriate graphs, although they disappear from the screen quickly. A powerful montage is also depicted, with sad music setting the mood for the following shots of halted construction on half built buildings, unkempt residential streets, and lock boxes on homes. The montage is appropriate for the content it is meant represent; the film reports six million foreclosures in 2010.
In the final section, “Part IV: Accountability”, a bar chart displays the billions of dollars that the top five Lehman Brothers executives made from 2001-2007. This use of a bar graph successfully serves as evidence to the assertion that big bankers are responsible for the wealth gap in America.
Inside Job further provides evidence by taking note when a bank official refuses interviews. Among those who refuse interview are Alan Greenspan, Larry Summers, Tim Geitner, Ben Bernanke, Henry Paulson, Laura Tyson, the CEO of Goldman Sachs’, and all of the Goldman Sachs senior executives. Furthermore, both the presidents of Harvard and of Columbia refused to comment on academic conflicts of interest and refused to be interview.