Plus they don't beat people up in back rooms anymore. Too much liabilty risk (plus it is wrong...and illegal).mdw said:We liked it, a few comments, The hand signals were too obvious. The lead girl was comped a room at the Hard Rock, but the view out the room's window was not from the Hard Rock. The movie made it appear, you could not loose in a good count. We rate this two snaps and a twist.
haha yea that was the only thing that i didnt like. as far as im concerned it was just usual hollywood entertainment and i enjoyed it but it didnt make sense that this guy with a genius IQ was placing that much money in such a stupid place lol. you knew right away that the money would get stolenace-o-aces said:Plus they don't beat people up in back rooms anymore. Too much liabilty risk (plus it is wrong...and illegal).
But the thing that bothered me the most...smartest boy at MIT doesn't know how to use a bank!?
Very well said. You can be a movie critic... heheTarzan said:I just watched the movie. Lots of stuff was "off the mark" but I guess it's a matter of making the movie interesting. I think the movie will attract lots of people to the casinos, thinking it's all such "easy money". Besides the little details that have been pointed out, such as the room view that is not from the depicted casino, etc., there is the obvious.
The movie makes it look like there's no such thing as losing in a good count, which is ridiculous. Those of us that play 25-50 hours of blackjack a week know darn well that huge losing streaks and horrific losses can occur even if the count is good. Of course the movie can't depict that because it would take away from the glitz factor of the movie. The fluctuation factor and the cold, hard fact that with an insufficient bankroll, lack of practical application, lack of experience that lends to having common sense and money management skills, etc....you can be the best card counter going and will still likely fail in the long run.
The other things, which were pointed out such as the smartest kid at MIT that stuffs loads of cash in his dorm and has no clue what a safety deposit box in a bank is....I mean...come ON! How many people are THAT stupid???? I thought the movie was still entertaining regardless.
Exactly, these are the two key reasons why I thought the show stunk. I know the writers had to take some artistic license--and appeal to a broad audience--but come on! Their deviation from believability results in two thumbs down.Tarzan said:The movie makes it look like there's no such thing as losing in a good count, which is ridiculous. Those of us that play 25-50 hours of blackjack a week know darn well that huge losing streaks and horrific losses can occur even if the count is good.
The other things, which were pointed out such as the smartest kid at MIT that stuffs loads of cash in his dorm and has no clue what a safety deposit box in a bank is....I mean...come ON! How many people are THAT stupid???? I thought the movie was still entertaining regardless.
I get a good laugh out of it again when I remember how when security came running from out of nowhere, scattering people and causing general mayhem, before abducting Ben and dragging him off to the backroom for some knuckle therapy. Yeah, right... Watch out next time you go to a casino... you too could get kidnapped, with a bit of luck. Look out! Here comes security, all running again! Get out of their way, quick!:laugh::laugh::laugh: :cat:Finn Dog said:Exactly, these are the two key reasons why I thought the show stunk. I know the writers had to take some artistic license--and appeal to a broad audience--but come on! Their deviation from believability results in two thumbs down.