BroadcastChic Excellent, a Must See

StyleSk8r 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.

Ariella Broughton It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

Jemima It's a movie as timely as it is provocative and amazingly, for much of its running time, it is weirdly funny.

D' Francis Born Rich was made in 2003, long before the fascination of rich people and dialogue on income inequality even began. This film is sure to bring up political controversy, but I don't even view it in a political sense: rather a human one. In the wide cast of wealthy heirs (of beautiful girls and awkward looking guys from New York City) interviewed, you get a different spectrum. All of them were spoiled rotten but some of them are respectful and others are arrogant and disdainful. Luke "I can buy your family" Weil is the obvious villain.It turns out that most of them didn't even know they were rich until they turned 18, as money was a subject their parents were reluctant to talk about. Does money buy happiness? I guess you'll find out. But like Ivanka Trump said, wealthy people are still people and they - while having an easier life - feel pain just like everyone else. Jamie's directing skills in his debut aren't anything special and it sometimes looks like a homemade film. But the content itself is good and that's what matters.

Innsmouth_Apprentice I expected Born Rich to be a slice of high society life, hopefully giving me some (potentially valuable) insight into the mechanics of the world of the very rich. It's not quite that, but I still watched this documentary with interest. Born Rich is basically a short catalog of faces+personalities of rich heirs talking about how they feel about being born into wealth. Most of these guys and gals are charming, fairly smart, and come off as decent. A couple are irritatingly superficial, but not on a grotesque level. Realistically, - and the creator Jaime Johnson (of Johnson & Johnson) strongly implies this in the beginning, - these people have to be relatively open and sincere to agree to participate in this film in the first place. Some of them are probably combining those qualities with the pragmatism of getting some publicity for own ends, but I personally think that digging around in motivation in order to try and measure the degree of someone's "selfishness" or "shrewdness" is, in this case, somewhat pointless, so never mind that.Josiah Hornblower (a Vanderbilt heir) was the most fascinating person to watch, since he seemed to intensely ponder and struggle over the purpose of his own life, and life in general.After you watch this, you'll want to check out an article published at MailOnline in October 2013 that looks at the heroes of the film 10 years later. It gives you more perspective on these people.Director and writer Jaime Johnson says in that article: "I would have liked to have spent more time with each subject in the film, creating a more nuanced portrait of each of their lives." I agree with his assessment in that deeper and more complex portrayals of the film's stars would have improved it.Turns out Jaime Johnson also made the documentary "The One Percent", which might have more of the stuff that I was seeking from this one. Will watch it next. As for Born Rich - it's a solid 7/10, and an interesting gallery of characters.

pcox104 Johnson & Johnson heir Jamie Johnson was born into an ultra-rich family and stands to inherit an enormous sum of money on his 21st birthday. He is thus faced with the question: what does one do when one can do anything or nothing at all? Born Rich is (whether intentional or not) the result of Johnson looking up to his parents, down to his legacy, all around to his peers, and most importantly, within himself for the answer. If such introspection isn't hard enough for the common folk, it appears to be exceedingly difficult for the ultra-rich who habitually measure themselves by status rather than personal achievement.Unavoidably guided by the weight of such measurement, Johnson gives us a glance at what everybody else is doing to answer that age-old question. No more than a glance is granted by the participants - other wealthy heirs and their parents - thanks to a deep sense of exclusivity and a hearty helping of insecurity prevalent within ultra-rich societies. But alas, no more than a glance is needed. With exceptions, their words and behaviors commonly reveal poor judgment and a unique lack of morality bred by a world in which moral dilemmas are handled by family attorneys. Perhaps that's why Jamie Johnson was sued to have one heir's appearance removed and waivers voided (it didn't work). By the end of it all, the movie-goer has passed out more letters of approval and condemnation to the parents and their children than he had come prepared to give. It is, no doubt, a movie which makes the viewer feel better about himself.And yet, the question looms: what does one do with his life, when he doesn't have to do anything? Jamie Johnson seems to have found a spark. Despite the shortcomings of a first-time filmmaker, Johnson deserves more kudos than criticism for his work. One should applaud the intestinal fortitude to lift the veil - albeit a bit, but a coveted bit - on the lives of those born ultra-rich and the society in which they live, and also for making a legitimate effort to seek fulfillment and self-actualization in his life. In doing so, Johnson has actually accomplished something. He has overcome an often troublesome sense of life which deceptively presents itself as a mere dare to ultra-rich individuals who don't have to do anything if they don't so desire.

hexepatty I saw the film last night, as it is featured for March (2005) on HBO On Demand. I'm so pleased I watched it. Mr. Johnson satisfied my morbid curiosity and fascination with the heirs to great wealth. Nothing shocked or surprised me frankly.I was bored w/ the Euro-Trash Toy Boys... (Cody - from another universe. I mean, come on: time should Pretty Much be spent on Cultivating one's self if found fortunate enough to be born into privilege? And that Viscount/Baron from Germany. He was another pill.) Luke Weil, well enough has been said on him that I should not waste a keystroke more on him. He makes his own case for why folks are disgusted by the idle heirs of fortunes.I was sad for the Whitney/Vanderbilt kid (Hornblower??). He looks like a tragic, scarred young man. I suspect he probably would have been that way whether rich or poor.My favorites were Johnson himself, Ivanka Trump and the Newhouse young man. These three make no pretenses to be anything but themselves: young folks with big bank and huge legacies to live up to or shoulder the burden of. I trust them to make something of their lives that will do something for others, even if it is limited in scope with how it will impact others.But overall? I'm glad they all stick to the same gene pool. Best to keep them separated...Great documentary. Hope he makes more! Hope he doesn't listen to his Dad who recommended he collect historic documents for a living?!?!