Rounders (1998) User Reviews

Who would have thought a film about Poker would be so good?

[LebowskiT1000 · 8/10 · 16 October 2002]

There is a lot of good stuff in this film. You have a great story, an excellent cast, excellent directing, and a couple great games of poker.

When I first heard about this film, I was a bit skeptical. It's a game about poker, how exciting can it be? The fact that Edward Norton was in the film was the prime reason I wanted to see "Rounders". After seeing the film, I couldn't believe how much I liked it. The film flows very well from start to finish and you can't wait to see what happens in the next scene. Also, the film is filled with interesting, well-written characters.

As I mentioned above, the cast is fantastic. You have Matt Damon, Edward Norton, John Malkovich, John Turturro, Gretchen Mol, Famke Janssen, Martin Landau and some small roles by Melina Kanakaredes (of "Providence") and Goran Visnjic (of "ER"). Matt Damon is quite a good actor and this is just another great film to add to his list of already impressive roles. Edward Norton is fantastic as "Worm", he plays a truly unlikeable person, but at the same time you respect him for taking the fall for his friends. John Tuturro is excellent, as always, he has such a cool style about him. John Malkovich is superb in his portrayal of Teddy KGB. And the rest of the cast does a great job as well in their respective roles.

If you are a poker fan, then I recommend you see this film, hopefully you'll enjoy it. I myself am not a huge fan of poker, but I do play the occasional game and I loved this film. I loved the characters, the dialogue, the acting, EVERYTHING. I truly hope you enjoy the film. Thanks for reading,

-Chris.

Interesting story, great acting

[Paul-103 · 7/10 · 3 March 1999]

Have to first mention the great performances by Matt Damon, Edward Norton, John Malkovich, and Martin Landeau. Good story, although Worm was one the biggest jerks I've seen interpreted on film lately. Really liked the narration of what's going on during high stakes poker matches. Talked to poker playing people who thought the game was represented well. The one-on-ones between Damon and Malkovich were terrific.

excellent movie

[hbs · 8/10 · 29 December 2001]

I have no idea if this movie is at all realistic (certainly so many people inhabiting this strata of the poker world can be so good looking), but at least it has the ring of verisimilitude. Not only does it show us the workings of a somewhat exotic (to me, anyway) part of the world, but it manages to do this stylishly while treating us to an interesting character study and a clever plot.

The story is about a young "rounder" who is trying to go straight by going to law school (although our first glimpse of him shows him losing all his money in a high-stakes poker game with a Russian gangster). He quits gambling for a while until a old friend (played by Norton) returns to his life and lands him in deep trouble. What I especially like about the movie is that is starts off as if this plot line is the main subject, when in fact the movie is about this person learning important things about himself. And there is a lot of information about poker...

Damon is especially impressive among a uniformly good cast.

The Son of the Cincinnati Kid Rides Again!

[pae-sk · 2 October 2001]

I love this movie: the plot line is pat and predictable as it effortlessly unfolds; the characters are clearly defined and you know who to root for and who to despise; and there are no dull scenes or dead end sub-plots. Matt Damon is Mike, an affable law student with little interest in the law and a passion for high stakes poker. When he loses his shirt and promises his girl friend (cute and perky Gretchen Mol) that he will never play poker again, you know this pie-crust promise will quickly be broken. And broken it is when Matt picks up his former schoolmate buddy, "Worm" (Edward Norton) who is getting out of prison and leads him back to the poker table and deep, deep into debt and hot water.

As usual, Matt Damon is adorable as the talented gambler, flashing those dimples and that Gary Cooper down-turned grin; John Malkovich is over the top as cookie-munching Teddy KGB, and, yes, if you're familiar with Russians just off the boat, you know they really DO speak like that and have a natural flare for the dramatic; Martin Landau delivers another impeccable performance as the aging, melancholic law professor whose family expected him to become a rabbi; Famke Janssen is nicely understated as the errand girl who has the obvious hots for Matt; and John Turtorro puts is solid as Knish, the grinder. Indeed, Mr. Turorro is becoming one of the most reliable and dependable supporting players to grace any film in which he appears. When the time and the role are right, his time will come.

But the real star of this film is Edward Norton as the low-life sociopath who bears the appropriate sobriquet "Worm." Twenty years ago when I first saw "The Onion Field," I thought James Wood had created the sleaziest character ever to appear on film. Jim, move over. Norton is cheap, slimy, and skinny, devoid of scruples and empathy, a little wise guy with a big mouth and nothing to back it up. You just KNOW this scumbag neither bathes nor brushes his teeth, and when the little rat gets the stuffings beaten out of him by a group of off-duty cops whom he has cheated, you want to join in and get in a punch. Women will want to slap him. In his first scene he lets you know he's a hard-hearted louse: told that he is being released from prison in the middle of a penny-ante card game with his cell mates who beg him to leave his cigarettes behind, he gathers them up and then contemptuously drops them in the dumper on the way out. This is a cockroach with no redeeming social value who lives to use and con and degrade people.

It's no trick for an actor to make you love him; to make you despise him so much you'd like to throttle him takes real talent. I've seen Ed Norton in "Fight Club," "Primal Fear," and "The People vs. Larry Flynt" and this is one young actor to watch. He's one of those natural actors who can be whatever he wants to be and it will be sheer joy watching him grow and mature.

"Rounders" may be short on originality, but it's long on suspense, action, and entertainment and while not the best flick to come down the pike, it's a wonderfully satisfying two hours. I don't know much about the game of poker, but I sure do know a good movie when I see one. I give it an 8 out 10 rating for human interest.

A tightly focused vehicle for Damon's charm and swagger.

[Stay Puft · 7/10 · 15 March 1999]

This film is incredibly focused. There is not one throw-away line or one extra frame in the entire movie. From the first establishing shot to the final line, the production team plays it tight and aggressive. I couldn't help but think of "The Hustler" as I watched, and Damon more than survives this comparison to a young Paul Newman. His swagger and charm and the even, controlled truthfulness of his performance all serve to place him solidly in the game with any of Hollywood's best. Highly recommended.

One of the most widely underrated movies of our time

[ironman0304manutd · 10/10 · 5 January 2005]

Rounders is I believe, one of the most widely underrated movies of our time.

I first saw this movie as it was a 'bonus DVD' thrown in for free with my DVD player back in 2000, so naturally I didn't expect much (as the other bonus DVD's were very mediocre), but what I found was a very enjoyable movie.

At that stage in my life, I had only played a little poker as a child growing up, and never 'Texas Hold'em' so to be honest, a lot of the terminology went 'over my head', but even so, the film became an instant favorite of mine purely because of the performances.

The film has so much star power, and yet none of the fine actors try to 'steal' scenes. Damon, Norton, Malkovich, Landau ... and then the fine supporting cast of Turturro, Jansen, and Mol.

In fact, there is a scene with Martin Landau and Matt Damon that is perhaps one of the most beautiful performances I have seen in a long time between two very fine actors.

So even if you're not a poker player, the story is tighter than a lot of Hollywood 'pop fluff' and the performances alone can sell the film as an enjoyable movie capable of multiple viewings.

But ... if you start playing poker and get really into what they are talking about, and reading about poker theory (like Doyle Brunson's book Super System) then the movie moves up to a whole different level.

A lot of the time, Hollywood will attempt to cover a specialized error, and usually fail, or at best only partially succeed, whereas Rounders managed to get everything 'spot on', just look at the US DVD, it has a commentary track from 4 World Champion Poker players, if that's not a stamp of approval then I don't know what is.

When you factor in how the film can be enjoyed by someone who has little to no idea about Poker (as I did when I first saw the film) just because of the tight story and stellar performances and also be 'immortalized' by poker enthusiasts as the best movie ever made on the subject (and truth be told, a big reason why the World Series of Poker has been doubling it's entries year after year) ... what you have here is a true gem that works on so many levels and what I believe is, as I said initially, one of the most widely underrated movies of our time.

Well made but eventually a bit thin for anyone not a poker fan

[secondtake · 6/10 · 25 May 2013]

Rounders (1998)

A charming idea, almost romanticized: if you are young, clever, good looking, and savvy at playing poker you can be ultra cool and maybe even wealthy. That makes for a pretty good movie, if not a very accurate reality. It isn't quite enough to keep two hours going, however, and so the big picture here is to enjoy what it has.

A quick comparison might be made to "The Hustler" and related pool shark movies. And like that classic, "Rounders" is about charming deceit. Matt Damon is the main man here, an ex-poker champ who has "gone straight" until his former partner in crime, Ed Norton, gets out of jail and ropes him back into the thrills and malevolence. Like the pool movies, and like the glitzier and more ambitious "Oceans" movies, personalities matter most. The setting, the glint of money, and most of all the plots matter less than you'd think.

So everything is pretty good along those lines, partly because Damon is fun to be with and Norton is simply terrific. An embarrassing appearance in the beginning and end of the movie by an overacting John Malkovich gets in the way of Damon's performance, however. And the general attempt at creating a bunch of bad guys behind the scenes is filled with thin clichés and mediocre acting.

This is the result of having to make more of the story that was ever there. The main idea--that the two leads get into money trouble and have to earn a ton of cash in a few days of wild poker games--is eventually actually a bit of a bore. The gamesmanship is always interesting, of course, but the impetus behind it grows old. The addition of Martin Landau as a Jewish lawyer who gives Damon a mitzvah as a kind of honor paid to continue a favor once given him is a touching part of the larger plot, making you wish there was more of this somehow, more of something genuine and a bit different.

It might not have helped that I recently saw "Croupier" with a young Clive Owen as a poker dealer, because that movie, whatever its simplicity and other limitations, actually made the poker scenes more real for me. In fact, one problem with "Rounders" is you never get to actually sense the betting itself, and the cards--the playing and the strategies of playing--are glossed over with some tossing of chips and flipping of cards, all in a vague muddle.

I did enjoy watching overall, but it left me a little disappointed and restless.

One of the most under rated films ever!

[baumer · 10/10 · 11 April 2005]

Rounders is nothing short of hypnotic. It is a film that introduced me and many others to the surreal world of poker. High stakes, Texas Hold Em, winner take all poker. For those unfamiliar with the game, not only is this a perfect tutorial to understand the game, but this is a movie that will entertain you right to the very end.

I like to think that this is just like Rocky. Matt Damon plays Mike McDermott, just like Stallone played Rocky. He has all the talent in the world but he needs to find a way to harness it and get the right opportunity. KGB is a little like Appollo Creed and John Tuturro is like Mickey in some ways. But enough of the comparisons of Rocky.

What makes Rounders so compelling is the interpersonal relationships in the film, no doubt, but let's face it, what really makes the film as vibrant and energetic as it is, is the poker scenes. We are introduced to several games here, namely Omaha, Omaha Hi Lo, 7 Card Stud and of course Texas Hold Em. According to Mike, Texas No Limit is the Cadillac of all poker games. He of course got that info from reading books by some of the poker greats such as Phil Helmuth, Amarillo Slim and of course The Godfather of poker, Doyle Brunson. Great detail is spent on the feel of poker in this film. When you are in the poker rooms, you can smell the smoke, taste the mustiness of the air and you can feel the emotions that the players feel. It really is a masterful job by Dahl to convey these emotions. And full credit has to be give to the screenwriters to know the lingo, to mollify us with terms like "flop", "river", "rags" and "bicycle". Rounders helped introduce me to this nefarious world and just like many others before me, I am hooked. Rounders can take credit for that.

What also must be mentioned here is the performances. Like many of the reviewers before me, I was awed by the absolute mastery of these characters by Damon, Norton, Malkovich, Turturro and Landau. My favourite performance is that of John Malkovich. He plays a Russian mobster called KGB. He is a master poker player and in the beginning scene, he takes all of Mike's bankroll as he hits a full house on fourth street, to cripple Mike's smaller boat. Malkovich is a master. He can play any role and he proves it in spades here. Think of his performance in a film like In The Line of Fire or in Of Mice and Men and this is about as diametric from those roles as you can get. There is not one second in the film when you don't believe that he is a Russian mobster with a propensity for gambling. If this film would have been more recognized back in 98, he could have received an Oscar nomination. He is that good. Matt Damon is really a fine actor and this film, while not as known as some of this others, is really a layered performance and one of his best. He plays the young prodigal son here with absolute zeal. Damon has to be one of the best actors working today and seeing as this was one of his first performances after Good Will Hunting, you have to give him that much more credit for taking on such an esoteric role. Kudos to him.

Rounders has grown in reputation over the years to the point where a special edition DVD with the likes of Helmuth, Johnny Chan, Chris "Jesus" Ferguson and 2003 WSOP champion Chris Moneymaker providing some excellent and enlightening commentary on the track. If you love this film, it is imperative that you pick up the SE DVD. It will enhance the experience for you and will help you appreciate the film that much more. It is fun and exciting to hear the 4 of them laugh when Mike finally busts KGB using Johnny Chen's methods from his first win in the World Series of Poker. Rounders is a fantastic movie and for those that haven't seen it, you should.

10/10 One of the most under rated films of the last 10 years!

Feel-good film about compulsive gambling

[Andrew · 7/10 · 12 September 1998]

Rounders is helped by a rich cast, led by the increasingly more likable Matt Damon. John Turturro adds a quiet strength and dignity to his standard misfit prodigy character. The film has a surprisingly low-key feel, with many scenes filmed in dim rooms punctuated with hushed dialogue. It's an entertaining film, but it seems unlikely that Mike (Matt Damon) could go through what he goes through and maintain such a sunny disposition and steadfast sense of honor. The dialogue is rife with poker references and inside lingo. If a viewer has no understanding of the game of poker he/she will certainly be lost.

Very underrated character piece, although not without its flaws

[MovieAddict2016 · 8/10 · 1 April 2005]

"Rounders" is about a straight-flying legal student (Matt Damon) who leaves behind his gambling habits to satisfy his moralistic girlfriend. However when his best friend "Worm" (Edward Norton) is released from jail, the two embark on a cards-journey that leads them from success to misfortune after Worm is caught cheating and the man who caught him (John Malkovich) wants his money back.

Whereas Ben Affleck continues to go downhill after "Good Will Hunting," Matt Damon has striven uphill, taking on daring productions such as "The Talented Mr. Ripley," "The Bourne Identity" series, and of course "Rounders," which features one of his best performances. Damon has become typecast as some sort of bad actor in the league of Affleck, but he's much better than his pal, and films like this prove it.

Norton is once again superb as one of his characters you love to hate. He's got the character of Worm down pat, and it really elevates the acting (along with Damon) to a level of greatness.

The film is directed and written very well, offering realistic dialog and gritty environments. However the flaws of the movie are its long running time (two hours exactly), which could have been shortened, and probably the fact that its card playing is sometimes a bit alienating to the audience.

That said, this is still a very underrated movie featuring outstanding performances and a unique spin on gambling flicks. Worth watching at least once in a lifetime.

Just another movie

[mm-39 · 6/10 · 5 February 2014]

Rounders is not a bad movie, but does not stand out either. Rounders is about hold 'em poker, and Matt Damon trying to help a friend, Edward Norton who Matt owes. The Norton doesn't seem to learn his lesson and always relies on others' good nature to help him out of it. He uses his friends and does not seem to care. A couple of side stories where Matt ruins a love interest, and his university. The main story line of Rounders is about dealing with, reading, and playing poker with people. The directing, acting, and story is so so! I watched Rounders off a cable channel. Would I watch Rounders again? No! Just okay. Something to do on a cold February late night. Rounders is a six out of ten. Not a good hand which one would have to bluff their way through.

You Read The Opponent, Not The Cards

[bkoganbing · 9/10 · 4 September 2008]

Rounders is a story of a pair of prep school buddies, Matt Damon and Edward Norton, who are a pair of poker sharks. Damon's used his winnings to pay for law school and Norton's gone on to other enterprises like identity theft which has landed him a stretch in prison.

Damon after being taken to the cleaners by Russian mob guy John Malkovich has given up poker for law school. Norton's finishing his stretch in the joint and as it turns out he owes Malkovich some heavy duty debt. He's needing some help, especially after leg breaker Michael Rispoli gives Norton a sample of what he can expect.

Damon owes Norton as well for not ratting him out on some prep school scam that could have gotten him expelled like Norton. Needless to say he goes back into the life.

I'm willing to wager (no pun intended) that because Rounders came out right after Good Will Hunting that this was a project intended for Damon and Ben Affleck. I think Ben probably showed good sense in thinking he was not quite right for the role. Certainly Norton who plays some really edgy characters was far better for the role of Lester 'Worm' Murphy.

Damon does all right for himself as the standup Mike McDermott. He also because he discharges the debt he owes Norton, realizes that he should follow his dream as well. What it is and how the film ends I won't say, but if you have a dream you have to follow it because you won't know if you don't try.

In addition to everything else Rounders is quite a look into the world of professional gambling. As Damon says even if you play it honest, it's far more skill than luck. You read the opponent, not the cards.

Rounders was a great career followup to the acclaimed Good Will Hunting for Matt Damon. Even if you're not a gambler by nature, this film will fascinate one.

Entertaining look at seedy NYC gambling...

[Don-102 · 7/10 · 17 March 1999]

Here is a movie with a lot of stars, both established and on the rise, that creates a fully believable world of lowly card-sharks, ex-cons, and a straight kid who is in the eye of the storm. Matt Damon is the young man and lead of a cast of actors, who are hidden behind the facade of their characters. This film easily could've been one of those all-star outings where we identify more with an actor's image than with what we are supposed to experience through the story. John Dahl, director of 1993's RED ROCK WEST, keeps the movie focused and does not allow it to stray into a morality play between Damon and his girlfriend (Gretchen Mol). My worst fears did not come true when the girlfriend was placed in the background and the real story involving the friendship between Damon and Norton was told.

Edward Norton is one of the best young actors of his generation. His character is aptly titled 'worm'. Damon proves again that he can play the lead effectively amongst a crowd of monster talent. Martin Landau plays the quiet, vulnerable professor, John Turturro the constant on-looker of the poker underbelly, but the most interesting performance comes from John Malkovich, playing a Russian card player who acts and speaks strangely, but happens to run the Russian mob. The key scenes do involve Norton and Damon. You never wonder why Damon keeps helping his paroled buddy. They seem as if they have been through tough times together.

ROUNDERS is also told in a Docu-drama style, showing us the way the games are played and the consequences you may face if you screw up. The cinematography is sharp and the movie as a whole is an enjoyable romp through this dangerous lifestyle that always seems to clean people out. Gambling is all these people know, thus they continue to make the "rounds".

Good Movie For Poker Fans

[ccthemovieman-1 · 5/10 · 13 May 2007]

If you like poker - and more and more people seem to be playing it or watching it on TV - you might want to check out this movie. Although a fictional story, you get some good insights on the game, the how and whys.

My only warning is that it isn't a family film, that's for sure. There is tons of profanity, beginning with many f-word usages. If you can deal with that, you can deal with the movie (yes, puns intended). Personally, I would have liked to have seen this story cut down on the sleaze factor. I like poker, I like actors Matt Damon, Edward Norton, Gretchen Mol, Famke Janssen, John Turturro, John Malkovich and Martin Landau.

With the subject matter and the fabulous cast, this should have been much better but came across a bit too much on the sordid side. Still, for card players this is a movie not to miss.

I really enjoyed this movie, more than I thought I would.

[TxMike · 18 August 2000]

I knew "Rounders" had something to do with gambling, and that Matt Damon stars in it, but not much more. So, when I watched it on DVD I was pleasantly surprised how engaging a film it is.

I am not a gambler, so maybe that is part of why I found it so fascinating. Basic story - Damon's character is a 2nd yr law student in NYC, and a good enough poker player that he has aspirations of entering and winning the million-dollar prize in the world series of poker in Lasvegas. However, Ed Norton plays his good buddy just getting out of prison. Norton's character is also a poker player, but also incorporates cheating because that just helps you make money faster. This approach gets both of them in some pretty hot water, and also deep in debt!!

Damon's character has a S.O. played by Gretchen Mol. Her distaste for gambling puts a great strain on their relationship. Will she stay, or will she move out??

And finally, John Malkovich does a wonderful job as the Russian gambler nicknamed "KGB". John Turturro is perfectly cast as Damon's friend and "street" advisor.

I simply found myself caught up in this story, anticipating the next poker game, wondering if they would all get whacked, or survive. Plus, Matt Damon has such a relaxed acting style, with that great smile of his, which makes all of his movies easy to watch.

I rate this one 8 of 10 for the well-done gambling drama depicted here.

Does no-limit make sense?

[dwasserm · 6/10 · 17 February 2001]

I don't understand how people can play poker with no betting limits. Suppose that I have more money than anyone else at the table. You have a good hand, and you bet big. What do I do? I bet my whole pile. It doesn't matter what cards I have; you can't match my bet, so you have to fold. So whoever has the most money can win every hand. Have I missed something? If I have, someone please email me to explain this.

great acting, super story

[knat33-1 · 10/10 · 21 February 2006]

OK, here we go, as a poker player ( semi professional) I have never seen such an accurate portrayal of life in the underground poker scene. The acting is superb and the story is all to real to those of us that have been there. I cant begin to describe how often I watch this movie and how many of my poker playing friends agree that this is not only the best poker movie ever written, but also a great movie for non players as well. I think that the casting agent did a remarkable job....Matt and Edward play the parts of poker players to an eerie T. All to often a fictional portrayal of so called gamblers put us into a bad light, this film does us justice and shows that poker players have ambition,desire, and skill

Not great, but still watchable and fun

[blott2319-1 · 6/10 · 16 September 2020]

I remember back in the 1990s when Texas Hold 'Em Poker reached its pinnacle of popularity. I was even sucked into watching some matches on TV because I was fascinated by the way the professionals could manipulate a table of opponents and win big. Rounders was probably made when all this was big news, to capitalize on the craze. I think the first problem with the movie was that, despite the popularity of the game at the time, they felt the need to talk down to the audience and play to the people that know next to nothing about poker. There are long stretches of this movie, including 90% of the voice-over, that felt like taking an introductory class on Texas Hold 'Em. I'm sure some audience members would appreciate the help understanding, but for me it felt rudimentary and tedious.

That being said, I was still excited by the world they built in Rounders. It is intriguing to see how these guys manage to find games where they can make money, and it is also interesting to learn some of the dangers that await those who play for high stakes. Matt Damon plays a relatable character, and even though his girlfriend is always in the right, you still can appreciate that there's a logic in him pursuing something that he excels at as much as poker. Edward Norton is always perfect to play the unreliable sleazebag, and he delivers that in spades here. It's almost to an extreme where you can't comprehend how Damon was ever friends with this guy, but there's still something likable under all the irresponsible nonsense. John Malkovich, on the other hand, did go to the extreme with his performance and it's almost laughably ridiculous.

I had a problem with how much of Rounders is made up of our main character always struggling. It's hard to take after a while when it seems that everything is falling apart around him. However, it allows us as an audience to forgive him for returning to the game that is the one thing he feels he can control in his life. But I will reiterate that everything Gretchen Mol's character says in the film is 100% right, and if this was reality instead of a movie, the main character would have all the signs of a self-destructive gambling addiction. It's probably not the best thing that this movie doesn't address how dangerous that is, but I'm not someone who suffers from it so I can't say whether it would act as a trigger for others who do have a problem. There's a solid story in Rounders, and I enjoyed the excitement of the poker games as if they were real. I wouldn't say this is the best movie on the subject, but it's one I'm glad I've seen and I might even watch it again sometime.

This is NOT a Hold 'Em Tutorial

[AdemWeldon · 8/10 · 12 July 2005]

This film was unjustly panned as lethargic and bleak without a purpose. Considering how Hold 'Em has developed into one of the biggest social fads in the last decade, I would say that this film captures every emotional aspect the 'swings' of No Limit typically carry.

I had absolutely no idea how to play the game when I first saw this movie about five years ago. The dialogue is wrought with jargon that almost makes a mockery of itself. Especially since much of the movie is done with voice-over, I can see where critics are coming from. However, the viewer should not allow themselves to get bogged down with it all, we get the gist with well-developed staging and performances.

Damon and Norton play off each other better than Damon and Affleck. Though the story echoes in the wake of Scorsese's 'Mean Streets', the performances seem more detailed than the Keitel/DeNiro combo. The supporting roles add great depth to the film, and Tutorro shines as the wise-old has-been that successfully provides Damon's character with the cold-hard truth he never seems to adhere to (until it is too late).

Above all, we feel compelled to cheer for Damon's Mike McDermott the ENTIRE time. He acknowledges his 'bad' play but constantly tries to explain that this is a game of skill and not luck. This is an important element considering the widely accepted belief that any success in gambling is the result of luck. This may be true in the bloodsucking casinos, but in Hold 'Em you play the chips AND the man.

Now that baseball is out of the Olympics, perhaps we will see a push for a true "WORLD Series of Poker". Then again, I also wanted to see 'Four Square' made into an official event when I was 8, so maybe I'm just talking out of my ass...

Should be commended as a precursor to a pandemic fad that is costing teens (and their parents) millions daily.

*** (of ****)

The premium poker movie

[NateWatchesCoolMovies · 7/10 · 11 May 2016]

John Dahl's Rounders is the premier poker movie, an utterly charming, never too serious and surprisingly slight look at the lives of several very different individuals whose lives revolve around the game in New York City. The main focus lands on two young men who are fast friends, yet reside on somewhat opposite sides of the responsibility coin. Poker prodigy Mike (Matt Damon) has since given up his art after a soul crushing loss to local Russian bigwig Teddy KGB (John Malkovich). He's content to simmer in solitude with his perky girlfriend (Gretchen Mol, who never fails to convince me that she's Samantha Mathis until I double check on IMDb). Right in time to disrupt his quiet life is cocky street rat Worm (Edward Norton), fresh out of prison and looking for the type of trouble that landed him there in the first place. It's to long before he's racked up some serious debt to dangerous people with ties to Teddy KGB, and Mike is forced to come out of retirement and risk everything he has once again, this time for his friend. The poker scenes are staged with meticulous eye for detail and mannerisms in attempt to put you at the same table as the players, and it's nifty to see each acting style played to the microscopic hilt as Dahl maintains patient focus on his work. Norton is appropriately scuzzy with just a dollop of endearing, scrappy charm and Damon fills the protagonist's shoes very well. It's Malkovich, however, who pulls the stops out and is my favourite character of the piece. With a muddy Russian accent that rivals his french one from Johnny English, a lazily snarky streak with just a hint of intimidation and a bag of oreos at his side without fail, he's a hoot, holler and a half as the life of the poker party. Sexy Famke Janssen has as great bit as as shady chick with eyes for Damon and connections with dodgy folks, expertly playing the half sweet and seductive, half menacing game. Watch for topnotch work from John Turturro, Josh Pais, Michael Rispoli, Josh Mostel, Adam Lefevre, David Zayas, Goran Visjnic, Lenny Clarke and Martin Landau in an earnest turn as a kindly professor who looks out for Mike. It's short, sweet, concisely paced, tightly written, flawlessly acted and wonderfully entertaining stuff.

Only For Card Players....(not!)

[freaq_psv · 10/10 · 19 June 2005]

This is probably the best movie I have ever seen. I know what most people will say - another review by another card geek. If so then most people would be wrong. I've seen this movie about 30 times (love it more with each day). Until the 27th time I had no idea how to play Texas hold'em (NONE WHATSOEVER!) or any other game mentioned in the movie.

The reason why I believe it is the greatest movie of all time are : phenomenal cast (everyone seems to agree with that), good story and the sheer moral of the movie (do what you want with your life). Of course this picture has some flaws but show me a movie that doesn't ! I guess it's going to be pretty hard to find anyone who doesn't play cards and likes the movie just as much as I do. But that's not a problem because this review represents only one person's beliefs - that person is ME.

10/10 (fully deserved)

A Sports film-come-Neo Noir that lacks conflict and enough noir to be anything great and yet remains an entertaining tale.

[johnnyboyz · 6/10 · 14 November 2007]

In one sense, Rounders is like nothing I've ever seen; in another sense it's like everything I've ever seen. Director John Dahl may be famous for his love of noir with The Last Seduction springing to mind; a sort of cross between a typical 1990s heist film and the classic that is Double Indemnity but with Rounders Dahl doesn't stick to what he loves most enough to make the film anything too fantastic. Let's be honest: Rounders is a sports film and no, it's not about the sport/baseball hybrid 'rounders'; it's about poker which in itself sparks some debate surrounding whether or not it's actually a sport or just a mere form of gambling. In my book, it's a sport since it takes brains and skill to win at the game whereas something like wrestling, which is fake for the best part, can be considered of the sporting variety.

So there you have it: a sports film directed by a man in love with noir which is still evident in this film and revolving around an engaging plot whilst at the same time containing good acting. What's clever here is that the director is challenging us and poker as a whole into contemplating whether Poker is a sport. The film follows a familiar sports narrative, ie; it has the hero with nothing to loose; the disgraced mentor who is able to pick the hero back up onto his feet; a winning and/or training montage and of course 'the final showdown with the villain' only in these stories it takes place on a sports field (or a Poker table, in this case).

During the film, my mind kept harking back to Paul Newman's 1961 sports film The Hustler, revolving around another popular American sport: 9 ball pool, since although both films are decades apart in terms of film-making; the way the story is told and the way events play out remain the same. I'll never forget Newman's character playing frame after frame with Minnesota Fats and then leaving the hall a dejected and tired man after loosing so heavily; the same sort of way Mike McDermott (Damon) does so in Rounders. What follows is painful and eventful uphill struggle involving loved ones becoming detached, hard times coming to the surface and lots and lots of the respective sport being played – in Rounders, this aids McDermott since it enables to get him closer to the powers that be (Abe Petrovsky – Landau) regarding his education. This not only gives us the feeling that time is passing and relationships are developing but is a great way to not only introduce a character but to also demonstrate what a skilled Poker player McDermott is – needless to say, it happens early on in the film.

Although a sports film as such, the essence of noir can't help but worm its way into the frame. What I couldn't see was the point of it all: There are gangsters of the Russian kind; lots of people smoking; voice-overs; gambling and a dystopian urban setting. Fine you think, but the femme fatale character of Petra (Janssen) appears and then disappears without too much of an incident and without too much evidence to suggest she's even a femme fatale in the first place, there is no real conflict for the middle period of about forty minutes apart from the usual montages of poker games being won although sometimes we'll be shown the games; often when they go wrong (the match with the sheriffs is a good example). I'm not sure if Rounders was supposed to be a neo-noir of sorts because although it has the basis to be one, it doesn't utilise enough conventions of the genre to be considered one and if it's not a noir then it is most definitely a sports film; albeit a rather average one. I liked the way we are supposed to feel for McDermott; I liked the way Edward Norton does some 'acting within acting' or playing a 'character within a character' and the way characters and incident float in and out of McDermott's life was sometimes effective but Rounders is a film that relies too heavily on generic substance and star power to be truly memorable even if it does raise the debate about whether poker should be a sport or not.

Good and realistic look at a way of life

[supah79 · 8/10 · 27 August 2005]

Rounders is not an anti-gambling film. At the end, when Matt Damon defeats KGB, you want to find the nearest gambling joint...

But the film does show us the dangers of the world of gamblers and card sharks. Matt goes broke and calls it a day in the beginning of the film. But after his buddy Worm drags him back, he knows that all he really wants and is good at is poker.

Matt never hits rock bottom (like all gamblers do once in their 'çareer'). He goes broke yes, but he still has his girl, a house and a job. Most gamblers who hit bottom end up with only the clothes on their back. If there is a critique, it's that. It doesn't let it's main character experience the real downs of a gambling existence.

But that's all the bad things I can say about this film. The bad news the gambling world has to offer comes in Worm (an excellent Norton). The film has colorful and realistic characters. The dialog is authentic and film has a 'real feel' to it. I love these 'small' films, in contrary to all the 100 trillion dollar blockbuster with special effects that come out every week. Too bad Hollywood doesn't make more films like this one.

This movie did for poker players what Top Gun did for pilots...so did it even need to be made?

[superdanofsteel · 6/10 · 11 October 2002]

Wonderful acting. Wonderful cast. Empty script. Some of the characters are entirely unnecessary to the story. Some of the behaviors are obvious plot points that an attentive audience would notice before the other characters do. If every actor has their bad movie in their past, this is Edward Norton's bad movie. He shines in this basic cable flop.

This movie thinks it's better than it is

[corway-2 · 5/10 · 30 July 1999]

WARNING: These comments contain spoilers!

Actually, the movie is already spoiled. I rented this movie last night thinking that with such an impressive cast, I would be wholly drawn into a great movie. No such luck. Or, as Damon's character mentions, it's not really about luck -- it's a game of skill. And that's what this film is lacking.

The film's strong points are terrific characters brought to life by Edward Norton and John Turturro. These very different poker pros don't meet in this film, but they both tug on Damon's character is different directions: Turturro encourages Damon to play it safe, Norton encourages Damon to risk and cheat. What an interesting film it would have been if it had been a drama focusing on these three characters and the resulting struggle within Damon. Rather, this film is about Damon's circle from gambling law student, to giving up gambling, and then giving up law to become a gambler. And the movie portrays this in a good light. He's the hero because he follows his dream to gamble. What? Damon and the other stars give half-baked, phoned-in performances (excepting Norton and Turturro).

The script is also defective. Some things just don't make sense. Damon and Norton are severely beaten after they are caught cheating in a game (which made sense -- I thought the film was taking a better direction at that point), but then they argue about it and Norton's character is suddenly absent from the rest of the movie. Oops? Did the writers forget this character? Martin Landau's law professor character gives Damon $10,000 to help pay off his friend's debt. Really? Don't we all wish we had teachers like this? Damon's girlfriend leaves him because he lies to her about one game AFTER ABSTAINING FROM GAMBLING FOR NINE MONTHS!! Is she perfect? Is this how a rational human being would react? Lying is a terrible thing, but most real life relationships go through much worse than one lie -- and still survive.

The bottom line is that all the losers stay losers, and no one learns anything. But the movie doesn't play it that way -- it portrays Damon as a hero, and that gambling is a profession, not an addiction. And unless you are a card player and/or familiar with pro poker jargon, a good portion is likely to lose you and bore you. Skip this one.