Romes
Romes
  • Threads: 29
  • Posts: 5600
Joined: Jul 22, 2014
April 30th, 2015 at 8:52:10 AM permalink
Did anyone else see this movie? The scenes look like they were all shot in sequence, then chopped up and intentionally put together out of sequence. There doesn't seem to be a plot. You never learn the true intentions of the main character played by Mark Wahlberg. Half the reason I saw this was because I thought it would be interesting/exciting with him, plus "gambling" =P.


Essentially his grandpa is super rich and dying and on his death bed tells him that he's leaving Mark's character with nothing to build his character. Now this is speculation, because it's not explained, but then Mark's character apparently gets depressed and decides he's going to just go try to lose an amount of money that will get him killed. He gets in deep to 3 different gangsters and has a zero f*cks given attitude the ENTIRE movie.

He has NUMEROUS opportunities with money IN HAND to pay off the people he owes, but instead just blows it all pressing non stop. At one point he bets $500 on a blackjack hand, gets an 18, doubles, and of course pulls the 3. The next hand he bets $10k and loses. Basically, if he wins, he just bets more and more so that when he loses he loses it all. He does this 2 or 3 times, each time the movie could have ended as he could have just paid his debts and been free. Every time he gets money, as a viewer, you have this sinking feeling of "oh come on man... just go pay the damn guys their money."

Then suddenly he 'mildly' cares (for no apparent reason) enough to get the 3rd loan shark to loan him a ton of money. He then helps one of the gansters fix a game of college basketball in which apparently he takes this large sum he just got from the 3rd loan shark and bet it as well. So you think he's free, or you think he had a ton of other money he also stuffed on the game that he's been hiding (as this was his opportunity of a lifetime to make millions)... but no. Even with his winnings he pays off the smallest gangster, but doesn't have enough to pay the other 2 off completely (and one of them threatened to end his family bloodline if he didn't pay). So what does he do now? He bets it all on BLACK on roulette (to have enough to pay off everyone he owes). Black lands and he says he's not a gambler, then leaves. The problem I have again is multiple times during the movie he says he's not a gambler... but yet he never has any side agenda, no AP play, no extra knowledge, no hidden super smart plan that we didn't see coming as a viewer that makes us actually like, or respect, him. He's just literally betting tons of money with no set strategy, etc (although in the blackjack you do see he at least plays basic strategy, never mind him just stacking his winnings every hand until he loses it all every time).


Does anyone else have any idea or theory behind this movie??

I created a better story line and ending in my head within 10 minutes of the movie ending:


Pissed his grandpa wouldn't give him money he devises a plan to make millions on his own... He hates/resents his mom for not sharing the money she was given with him (apparently she's a super millionaire), so he wants to hurt her along the lines as well. Well, his plan is to sort of "Don Johnson" them. Play the role of a sucker, bet tons and tons and intentionally keep losing until he can get a very positive situation and steam role them for millions. At one point in the movie he says "I've been up 2 and a half million before..." and it's implied he lost it all back but never said. Let's pretend he did stuff this money away and the whole movie he's pretending he's broke. Then, when the gangsters start calling his mom for money she freaks and gives him $260,000 to pay it off. His lack of caring emotionally breaks her and ultimately ends their relationship (which is what he wants since he hates her). So he breaks her, gets a chunk of money from her, then dumps it so he can still appear broke and find this "AP" situation. Then when he finds it (fixing the college basketball game) he uses the last loan sharks money to "win" enough to pay everyone off, but in the mean time he takes his millions he stashed away and bets it as well, making life changing money in the process and proving to himself that he IS in fact talented/smart enough to make it on his own, oddly accomplishing what his grandpa wanted him to in the first place.


This isn't a spoiler, but a bit of a warning... John Goodman appears like 3-4 times in the movie, and more than half the time is shirtless.
Playing it correctly means you've already won.
OzzyOsbourne
OzzyOsbourne
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 184
Joined: Jul 10, 2012
April 30th, 2015 at 8:59:00 AM permalink
I also thought it wasn't that good. There really isn't any character development between the woman and him. also at one point he doesn't double a 9 against a 6 but does hit or double a hard 17 or 18. I couldn't remember but it was something ridiculous!
casino's money disappears the execs worry when the wizard is near He turns tears into joy Everyone's happy when the wizard walks by
odiousgambit
odiousgambit
  • Threads: 326
  • Posts: 9557
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
April 30th, 2015 at 9:28:09 AM permalink
should be able to see the movie soon and will comment

previous movies and book have threads

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/off-topic/12918-any-dostoevsky-fans/

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/off-topic/17412-the-gambler-1974-film/

and this is the second thread for the 2014 movie

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/questions-and-answers/casual-corner/20088-the-gambler-2014/
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!”   She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
Romes
Romes
  • Threads: 29
  • Posts: 5600
Joined: Jul 22, 2014
April 30th, 2015 at 10:10:41 AM permalink
Thanks for linking the old thread I didn't see. Still, even in that thread everyone kind of discussed how it wasn't as good as the old one, etc, etc... I'm still curious to hear opinions: What was the actual plot? He's just a degenerate depressed gambler and he gets lucky at the end to be alive? Or was there some deeper meaning associated with the gambling and the reason why at the end he says "I'm not a gambler" ??
Playing it correctly means you've already won.
Greasyjohn
Greasyjohn
  • Threads: 135
  • Posts: 2178
Joined: Dec 8, 2013
April 30th, 2015 at 10:59:27 AM permalink
It's funny, because a really good movie about the world of gambling could be made. Take some computer expert that goes out of his way to meet a slot mechanic off premises. They don't know each other, don't live in the same building, nothing. This is important, because if a scam is uncovered or suspected a software called Nora can be used to see if there are any relationships between dealers and players, or players and casino employees--same school, mutual friends, relatives, etc., etc?

(This is what bought Ron Harris down. He was staying in the same room with the guy that won $100,000 at Keno when they had a software that rigged it so they had an, I believe 1 in 10 chance of the big win. I think the accomplice won on the third bet. This by the way is a great story. And now Ron Harris is in the Black Book.)

Anyway, a good story about two stable people, one a slot mechanic, the other a software gaming guru--how they decide it is worth it to combine their forces for a big score.

In similar scenarios, one of the accomplices gets greedy. Or one may drop the dime on the other if there's trouble in order to cut a better deal with prosecutors. All these issues can be addressed before the two put their plans together.

I just think there could be a great movie with a plot like this.
gordonm888
Administrator
gordonm888
  • Threads: 60
  • Posts: 5005
Joined: Feb 18, 2015
April 30th, 2015 at 11:00:33 AM permalink
Has there ever been a good realistic gambling movie? Or, a good realistic lengthy gambling scene in a movie? I guess Rounders is the best depiction of gambling that I can remember at the moment. I thought 21 was unrealistic and disappointing as were all of The Gambler movies (1974 James Caan film and Kenny Rogers' films), Casino Royale, Maverick and 5 Card Stud. Any one have a recommendation?
So many better men, a few of them friends, are dead. And a thousand thousand slimy things live on, and so do I.
Romes
Romes
  • Threads: 29
  • Posts: 5600
Joined: Jul 22, 2014
April 30th, 2015 at 11:21:04 AM permalink
Quote: gordonm888

Has there ever been a good realistic gambling movie? Or, a good realistic lengthy gambling scene in a movie? I guess Rounders is the best depiction of gambling that I can remember at the moment. I thought 21 was unrealistic and disappointing as were all of The Gambler movies (1974 James Caan film and Kenny Rogers' films), Casino Royale, Maverick and 5 Card Stud. Any one have a recommendation?


As you said, Rounders. Possibly some aspects of Pool Hall Junkies too (rounders but for pool).

Also, I still am curious: What do other people think the plot was, or what Marky Mark's character was thinking the whole movie???
Playing it correctly means you've already won.
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
April 30th, 2015 at 11:33:34 AM permalink
Quote: Romes

As you said, Rounders. Possibly some aspects of Pool Hall Junkies too (rounders but for pool).

Also, I still am curious: What do other people think the plot was, or what Marky Mark's character was thinking the whole movie???



There are some compulsive gamblers who can no nothing but press more action no matter what is going on in reality. The great poker player Stu Unger was like that with gambling (and with drugs), and the Canadian bank loan officer Brian Mulroney [?] crashed and burned, also made into a move called Owning Mahoney.
What kind of destroys the suspension of disbelief are the miraculous lucky breaks and saves the main character receives when he should have been dead by that point. In this regard, Owning Mahoney was more believable, because Mahoney didn't slip by at the end by the skin of his teeth.
The plot was the second chance, where he gambled and won in the end.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
Avincow
Avincow
  • Threads: 24
  • Posts: 395
Joined: Oct 17, 2014
April 30th, 2015 at 11:46:54 AM permalink
Quote: gordonm888

Has there ever been a good realistic gambling movie? Or, a good realistic lengthy gambling scene in a movie? I guess Rounders is the best depiction of gambling that I can remember at the moment. I thought 21 was unrealistic and disappointing as were all of The Gambler movies (1974 James Caan film and Kenny Rogers' films), Casino Royale, Maverick and 5 Card Stud. Any one have a recommendation?



owning Mahowny is the only good one I can think of. It's based on a true story of a degenerate gambler. I highly recommend it.
terapined
terapined
  • Threads: 89
  • Posts: 6088
Joined: Dec 1, 2012
April 30th, 2015 at 11:54:49 AM permalink
Quote: gordonm888

Has there ever been a good realistic gambling movie? Or, a good realistic lengthy gambling scene in a movie? I guess Rounders is the best depiction of gambling that I can remember at the moment. I thought 21 was unrealistic and disappointing as were all of The Gambler movies (1974 James Caan film and Kenny Rogers' films), Casino Royale, Maverick and 5 Card Stud. Any one have a recommendation?



A Big Hand for the Little Lady
gordonm888
Administrator
gordonm888
  • Threads: 60
  • Posts: 5005
Joined: Feb 18, 2015
April 30th, 2015 at 11:56:37 AM permalink
What is interesting is that there are now hundreds or thousands of YouTube videos depicting televised Texas hold'em hands - so any movie screen-writer can see Daniel Negreanu or Phil Ivey or Antonio Esfandiari in action. I wonder if that will change the quality of future movies that contain poker scenes.
So many better men, a few of them friends, are dead. And a thousand thousand slimy things live on, and so do I.
Kavouras
Kavouras
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 52
Joined: Apr 22, 2014
April 30th, 2015 at 12:36:16 PM permalink
It's a bad movie, I agree.
Instead of trying to go into the gambler's psychology, they tried to gain attention by the big amounts of money that were at stake.
http://www.Roulette30.com
Ayecarumba
Ayecarumba
  • Threads: 236
  • Posts: 6763
Joined: Nov 17, 2009
April 30th, 2015 at 1:43:58 PM permalink
Quote: gordonm888

Has there ever been a good realistic gambling movie? Or, a good realistic lengthy gambling scene in a movie? I guess Rounders is the best depiction of gambling that I can remember at the moment. I thought 21 was unrealistic and disappointing as were all of The Gambler movies (1974 James Caan film and Kenny Rogers' films), Casino Royale, Maverick and 5 Card Stud. Any one have a recommendation?



Good scene: James Bond playing craps in "Diamonds are Forever" (okay, mainly because of Lana Wood as "Plenty O'Toole" hustling chippies).

I have heard good things about the poker play in, "The Cincinnati Kid", but can't recall since it has been many, many years since I watched that Steve McQueen movie.

The problem with "realistic" gambling is that the vast majority of the time, it is very boring to watch. This grind is occasionally interrupted by small periods of excitement. It is hard to watch.
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
Dicenor33
Dicenor33
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 624
Joined: Aug 28, 2013
April 30th, 2015 at 2:04:27 PM permalink
Name ANY good movie made in recent years?
Ibeatyouraces
Ibeatyouraces
  • Threads: 68
  • Posts: 11933
Joined: Jan 12, 2010
April 30th, 2015 at 2:05:29 PM permalink
Quote: Dicenor33

Name ANY good movie made in recent years?


And/or made with Wahlberg
DUHHIIIIIIIII HEARD THAT!
jml24
jml24
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 295
Joined: Feb 28, 2011
April 30th, 2015 at 2:13:50 PM permalink
Hard Eight
terapined
terapined
  • Threads: 89
  • Posts: 6088
Joined: Dec 1, 2012
April 30th, 2015 at 2:18:02 PM permalink
Quote: jml24

Hard Eight



I liked Hard 8, especially the craps scene with Phillip Seymour Hoffman.
What I did not like was the so called AP main charachter plays Keno :-(
Greasyjohn
Greasyjohn
  • Threads: 135
  • Posts: 2178
Joined: Dec 8, 2013
April 30th, 2015 at 2:46:35 PM permalink
I can't remember one good movie about gambling. I've never seen a craps scene where it wasn't a winner or a loser on the come out roll, or if the point is established it's concluded within four rolls (usually one). If it's about poker, some player has 4oak beating a full house. Or it's a stone cold bluff. And the players don't guard their cards from view; very amateurish. But then, what do writers and directors know about the accurate portrayal of gambling? For that matter, what does the public know?

Remember this, a picture is made foremost to make money, not to be good.
kmumf
kmumf
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 182
Joined: Jul 5, 2011
April 30th, 2015 at 2:53:48 PM permalink
Quote: gordonm888

Has there ever been a good realistic gambling movie? Or, a good realistic lengthy gambling scene in a movie? I guess Rounders is the best depiction of gambling that I can remember at the moment. I thought 21 was unrealistic and disappointing as were all of The Gambler movies (1974 James Caan film and Kenny Rogers' films), Casino Royale, Maverick and 5 Card Stud. Any one have a recommendation?



I liked "Hard Eight"

Edit Looks like a lot of people do too.
Greasyjohn
Greasyjohn
  • Threads: 135
  • Posts: 2178
Joined: Dec 8, 2013
April 30th, 2015 at 2:59:32 PM permalink
Yes, Hard Eight was one of the better ones (even if there were a lot of hardways bet).
gordonm888
Administrator
gordonm888
  • Threads: 60
  • Posts: 5005
Joined: Feb 18, 2015
April 30th, 2015 at 4:39:46 PM permalink
Quote: Ayecarumba


I have heard good things about the poker play in, "The Cincinnati Kid", but can't recall since it has been many, many years since I watched that Steve McQueen movie.



I saw The Cincinnati Kid a long time ago as well. I remember that the poker in it was 5-card stud. The poker scenes did have some tension in them but let's face it - 5 card stud is at the shallow end of the poker pool.
So many better men, a few of them friends, are dead. And a thousand thousand slimy things live on, and so do I.
Ayecarumba
Ayecarumba
  • Threads: 236
  • Posts: 6763
Joined: Nov 17, 2009
April 30th, 2015 at 5:38:22 PM permalink
Quote: gordonm888

I saw The Cincinnati Kid a long time ago as well. I remember that the poker in it was 5-card stud. The poker scenes did have some tension in them but let's face it - 5 card stud is at the shallow end of the poker pool.

While it is not popular anymore, I enjoy the game because skill (bluffing and reading the other players), has a bigger role than the actual cards in your hand, compared to most any other game.

Karl Malden was in that movie. I wonder if he was just a good actor, or actually played a lot of poker?
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
jopke
jopke
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 132
Joined: Aug 14, 2012
April 30th, 2015 at 6:55:36 PM permalink
Quote: Romes

As you said, Rounders. Possibly some aspects of Pool Hall Junkies too (rounders but for pool).

Also, I still am curious: What do other people think the plot was, or what Marky Mark's character was thinking the whole movie???



The Hustler is an excellent movie and depicts gambling. Pool Hall Junkies, IMO, sucked. I started playing pool at 12 and used the winnings to pay rent and I was excited to see PHJ thinking it would be the "rounders of pool" but it was a huge miss.

About the Gambler remake, I think it was a film that had a poor script and the editors did what they could to splice together something that didn't look too much like a school project. I don't think Mark played a real character in any sense and speculating on what he was thinking is akin to wondering what the smiling sun is thinking on a kindergartner's drawing. In all, I think they tried to make a mainstream Owning Kahowny and failed miserably. Between this movie and "Runner Runner" I've pretty much given up any hope of a decent gambling themed moving for at least a decade.
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22272
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
April 30th, 2015 at 7:18:31 PM permalink
Focus is about a con man. Some parts were good.

It has a betting scene in it that's fairly close to someones actual emotions during a tilt( or hot suckered ) episode.

The movie could've been good without all the the romantic cutesy BS and if it was a lot darker and they didn't try so hard.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
darkoz
darkoz 
  • Threads: 296
  • Posts: 11419
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
April 30th, 2015 at 8:41:28 PM permalink
Quote: AxelWolf

Focus is about a conn man Some parts were good.

It has a betting scene in it that's fairly close to someones actual emotions during a tilt( or hot suckered ) episode.

The movie could've been good without all the the romantic cutesy BS and if it was a lot darker and they didn't try so hard.



It was a fun movie but the title sucks. I didn't know what it was about going in, only that it was a Will Smith film and when you mentioned it in the above post, I had no idea what the film was until I looked it up - I forgot the name of the film I had seen was Focus and I only saw it in theaters two months ago.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
JohnnyQ
JohnnyQ
  • Threads: 262
  • Posts: 4021
Joined: Nov 3, 2009
May 1st, 2015 at 3:28:40 AM permalink
Quote: Romes



Does anyone else have any idea or theory behind this movie??

I created a better story line and ending in my head within 10 minutes of the movie ending:



So screen credits for ROMES for "The Gambler 2"..... straight to DVD ? Perhaps we could get CET to fund it, since apparently they are not very good at investing.
There's emptiness behind their eyes There's dust in all their hearts They just want to steal us all and take us all apart
Romes
Romes
  • Threads: 29
  • Posts: 5600
Joined: Jul 22, 2014
May 1st, 2015 at 7:31:37 AM permalink
Quote: JohnnyQ

So screen credits for ROMES for "The Gambler 2"..... straight to DVD ? Perhaps we could get CET to fund it, since apparently they are not very good at investing.


CET probably funded the first one, and still didn't comp a room to Marky Mark when traveling to their casinos to film.
Playing it correctly means you've already won.
Greasyjohn
Greasyjohn
  • Threads: 135
  • Posts: 2178
Joined: Dec 8, 2013
May 1st, 2015 at 7:49:23 AM permalink
Anyone remember The Runner from 1999. Pretty good movie as I recall.
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22272
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
May 1st, 2015 at 12:13:01 PM permalink
Quote: Greasyjohn

Anyone remember The Runner from 1999. Pretty good movie as I recall.

Best BJ scene in a movie, talking about the dreaded female dealer.


I can't find just that scene.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
Boz
Boz
  • Threads: 155
  • Posts: 5701
Joined: Sep 22, 2011
May 1st, 2015 at 12:18:42 PM permalink
Quote: Greasyjohn

Anyone remember The Runner from 1999. Pretty good movie as I recall.



Another John Goodman appearance.
teddys
teddys
  • Threads: 150
  • Posts: 5527
Joined: Nov 14, 2009
May 1st, 2015 at 1:09:01 PM permalink
Horrible, horrible movie. Actually, the original was based on the semi true-to-life story of screenwriter James Toback. He was living in New York City, came from money, went to Harvard, had a steady job in education or writing or something, and was just gambling enormous sums of money. So the story could have been interesting but they fucked it up royally.

I did like some of the monologues from John Goodman including the "fuck you" speech, and the threats he made. They gave him all the good lines.
"Dice, verily, are armed with goads and driving-hooks, deceiving and tormenting, causing grievous woe." -Rig Veda 10.34.4
odiousgambit
odiousgambit
  • Threads: 326
  • Posts: 9557
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
May 1st, 2015 at 1:29:55 PM permalink
I’ve seen it now and agree - it really blows.

The movie pretty much is not Dostoevsky at all, but uses a revised version of the screenplay for the 1974 film. In both cases the only nods to Dostoevsky are having the main character be a teacher [again a professor and not a tutor] and to have him be a problem gambler. The type in the new movie is the total narcissist who constantly goes on tilt, same as 1974. Dostoevsky’s gambler is more nuanced, the type of player who tries to make a winning system out of patterns he sees. He is more sympathetic; this latest guy is the most completely unlikable and despicable of all, lashing out rudely to absolutely one and all. This abuse includes a female student who falls for him ... weirdly she just can’t get enough.

The movie seems to have been made because we needed to have a new one now that the F-bomb is more accepted these days. One and all relish its constant usage.

The gambling scenes in the illegal venues in New York (I assume NY, this was clearer in the 1974 flick) were OK, but not better. Blackjack was dominant in all casino scenes. I noted a the felt said a natural paid 2:1 in New York; I couldn’t make out much on the felt in Vegas. At least everything was shown correctly. The double-down on 18 [to catch a 3] made no sense in this movie; in the ’74 flick such moves had a connection with the guy’s philosophy. In the current movie it was just more insanity from a guy on total tilt at all times.

The guy never wins till the end. Absolutely loses everything with a system guaranteed to lose it all. He is presented as the ultimate in wanting to lose suicidally; that loan sharks want to kill him for borrowing money and not paying back? this suits him fine. Then to show that the film makers have no knowledge whatsoever about what they are making a movie about, they end it by having him get out of his impossible situation by crazily betting it all. That’s a good lesson to teach, eh? Then we are supposed to believe he is cured of his problem forevermore. 99% of the general public out there, including the ones who never read a word written about the nature of problem gamblers, knows better than that. You must have had entire audiences stunned at the stupidity at every showing. It's exactly the opposite of what would happen.

More comments:

*There was indeed entirely too much John Goodman flesh shown for any reasonable human being to have to take

*The Goodman soliloquy is pretty good and has made the rounds I think.

*It’s pretty much the same screenplay for both films, albeit with changes [especially the ending]. In 1974 the guy loses the girl midway, in 2014 the guy gets the girl. He is redeemed by the love of a woman, never to gamble again. Who would have thought the corniest crap would be in 2014?

*There is a distinction between the people lending money here that occurs to me. If the person lending the money is essentially the house [illegal variety], and that guy lends it to a total loser, then he and the mob are just lending it to somebody who then loses it back to him. The guy gets more and more into debt to the mob and they just wind up owning him. They squeeze him for everything he’s got and probably force him into illegally obtaining money, and they take that too. I saw this for myself when I lived in Youngstown Ohio. In the end a guy I knew like that was killed. They took him for everything and then killed him as an example of ‘what happens when you don’t pay’. This answers the question of “why would you keep loaning money to a loser?” It can have its own perverse, tragic, evil logic. [edits]The other loan sharks are seen taking on huge risk. In particular I don’t think it was realistic for the Goodman character to loan that money. His options to collect are actually vague. The 1974 film did a better job of keeping it real, when the amount needed reached the impossible level, that’s when the point-shaving came in.

*Which brings me to the Af/Am portrayal in both films. The original screenplay was auto-biographical to some degree, and apparently the writer felt pretty dragged through the dirt with his experience with Blacks associated with gambling. The 1974 movie was starkly unsympathetic to any aspect of the Af/Am community, and that goes for students, kids on the street, people in bars, you name it. A remarkable thing, really, as the Enlightenment had begun by then, you know. I sure thought the 2014 movie would make an effort to change that. Maybe the white tennis player would be the point shaver? Nope! It was the Brother again. Instead the white guy went through some harrowing thing to get a big bag of money [winnings I guess from point shaving, seemed unclear] but wanted no more to do with it, wouldn’t even take any money for his time.

*In both movies, I felt it should have been made clear that introducing the basketball point-shaving scheme to the student who was doing it was going to be an absolute disaster for the athlete in the long run. If he is really good, the NBA career is doomed. Nobody gets away with this I'm thinking.

*And how can you have a bad knee and nobody knows about it?

*The main character's mother says he is not a narcissist and I think the movie wants to explain him as someone not a narcissist. Doesn’t work. The guy is a total narcissist.

the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!”   She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
  • Jump to: