Yar, you be here: Rounders > Customer Reviews

Rounders Customer Reviews (1 - 3 of 41 Reviews)

Perfect Dialogue -- A Poker Classic!
This movie is made great by perfect dialogue. I wouldn't change a word. It is intricate dialogue though, so you will need to watch this movie several times. That is the main reason you should own this movie. I still enjoy this movie enough to watch it about once per season, and it came out in 1998!

The movie is narrated by Matt Damon, who is one of the few actors that could pull his character off. The movie has a suspense and rythym about it that keeps you interested. That is true even if you know nothing about poker.

Finally, if you play poker at all, you NEED to watch this movie. This movie will not make you a better player. i.e. unless you didn't know there is an element of skill, or you play with cookie eating Russian Mob types. But most of the lingo in this movie is still in use today, and poker players often quote/mimick this movie. You need to watch this movie just to follow some of the table banter.

Rounders (1998)
Director: John Dahl
Cast: Matt Damon, Edward Norton, John Malkovich, Gretchen Mol, John Turturro, Michael Rispoli, Famke Janssen, Ray Iannicelli, Merwin Goldsmith, Martin Landau.
Running Time: 121 minutes
Rated R for pervasive strong language, some sexuality and brief drug use.

While walking into an underground club, where the rich flounders swim, while the sharks circle for the kill, Mike McDermott (Matt Damon) sits down at a Texas Hold'em table with his gambling winnings from past games, $30,000. Across Mike sits Teddy KGB (John Malkovich), one of the top guys of the Russian mob, and one of the most feared players in the 'underground' games. Mike loses his entire bankroll and vows to his girlfriend Jo (Gretchen Mol) that he'll never play again. Months later his lifetime friend Worm (Edward Norton) gets out of prison for scamming credit cards, yet the cocky, but confident Worm shrugs Mike's warnings about getting back into gambling and gets him to play in a game that very night. Mike is a law student and his grades begin to slip as well as his relationship with his girlfriend ever since Worm's release. His professor Abe Petrovsky (Martin Landau) is concerned with Mr. McDermott, and his absences in his class. Abe tells Mike 'to follow your heart.' Worm is out playing in games and getting into debt with the wrong people. Mike finds out and tries to help his friend. Worm is other places getting further in debt, and he's getting his friend in debt. Mike is stuck with the debt of his former friend. He goes back to his professor, where the professor lends Mike the money to pay off the debt. Knowing that he can beat the game of Hold'em, Mike goes to the place where this all started, and sits down with KGB. He plays the mad Russian, but will he win this time, will KGB force Mike for all his chips, or will he triumph and buy a seat at the World Series of Poker?

The biggest problem with "Rounders" is that it tries to create a multi-faceted story where there really is nothing but poker playing as a plot. The audience is supposed to contemplate the bonds of friendship, the struggle in relationships, etc., but these plot lines are so weak in favor of the poker playing that the film would have been better off had these elements not been introduced at all. Instead, there are many plot holes and a couple of moments where the audience will be left saying "so what?". The poker scenes were indeed very interesting and well done; they probably should have been either expanded on or toned down a bit in favor of stronger and more clearly defined conflict lines in terms of the supporting story. Having said that, the acting in "Rounders" is quite good - Matt Damon was, well he was "Matt Damon" and Edward Norton, who is always good, was solid as the degenerate hustler. The greatest acting, however unsurprising as it is at this point, was the small but effective role of KGB, played by Malkovich. He is virtually unrecognizable beneath baggy clothes and a big beard, and his accent, though I'm not an authority, was flawless. Malkovich is best in his small, quirky roles, and this was absolutely no exception. His acting was the high point of the film, despite the fact that he was on screen for perhaps fifteen minutes total. "Rounders" is not a bad film because of its flaws, but unfortunately its one-dimensionality makes it only a decent film and while it isn't a great film, it is an entertaining one.

Boy was I disappointed!
I really expected to like this movie based on both my admiration for pretty much everyone in the cast (did you all catch the guy from ER?) and the fact that I like to play poker. But while it is not a terrible movie, I think it missed the mark by quite a bit.

First, the opening scene where the Matt Damon character loses all his money seemed pretty unbelievable to me. I'm not a particularly good poker player, but I certainly would not have made that mistake with that much money on the table. He should have known he didn't have the "nuts", ie. the best possible hand.

Then there is his bizarre friendship with the guy played by Ed Norton. It does not seem fathomable that these two would speak on the street much less be best friends. The Damon guy is so clean cut he squeaks and the other guy is a complete dirtball. This mismatch seems even less tenable after the Norton character keeps screwing the Damon character over. How much would someone tolerate from a jerk like that?

And the Malkovich character is just pretty unbelievable as well. I hate it when they make actors do fake accents; why not just hire a Russian for God's sake? I guess it's just to be able to market his name.

In summary, while interesting this was disappointing. I think it could have been so much better.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Next Page