source: Rounders

I don't particularly like poker. It's fine but not my favorite card game or ideal choice for the premise of a film. But damn this a great drama. The story pulls you in from glitzy casinos to underground card games. The cast is top notch and deliver fantastic performances all around (even Matt Damon). You don't need to like poker or know anything about it to enjoy this film. It's that good

Beastly movie with an awesome story. a perfect poker film. went in depth into the poker aspect. May have sparked the rise in popularity of Texas hold em. but poker was only one aspect of the movie. it had a great story with great acting. ed Norton is a beast (3 viewings)

I had heard really good reviews about this movie and was excited to put in the tape. After the first half-hour I knew that this film could be taken out with the garbage. Matt Damon is as stiff and one-dimensional as usual. The friendship with Edward Norton's character is a complete farce. Damon's love relationship felt like it never really mattered to begin with. The most exciting character (Worm) left the scene never to return with about 30 minutes of this yawner to go. Rounders literally put me to sleep and was the first film in quite a while that I did not want to finish watching. Unfortunately I did, and I wished I hadn't opened my eyes again and interrupted my good nap. This movie is a complete waste of good film.

What stuck with me in watching this? In "Confessions of a Winning Poker Player," Jack King said, "Few players recall big pots they have won, strange as it seems, but every player can remember with remarkable accuracy the outstanding tough beats of his career." It seems true to me, cause walking in here, I can hardly remember how I built my bankroll, but I can't stop thinking of how I lost it. Every time I think about poker, I remember the night I lost it with a straight flush. But, leave it to Matt Damon to remind me about that night. Damon and Edward Norton were fantastic in a film that makes poker look interesting. No, I cannot fathom how anyone could watch poker on TV, but I was enchanted by their performances. Of course, it doesn't hurt to have John Turturro, John Malkovich, Gretchen Mol, Famke Janssen, and Martin Landau to help you out. Great movie about life, losing, and chasing your dreams.

Starting from the story, acting, mood, everything in this movie is excellent. Especially the smaller parts were brilliant, John Turturro's role, John Malkovich's all Oscar worthy. Ed Norton is of course at his finest hour A must see!

Seeing a film for the second time can be an interesting experience. Sometimes you see more than you did the first time, others you're intensely annoyed by it. I saw Rounders at the cinema, but obviously forgot about that when it came to getting the video out. The cast of this film is potentially brilliant. Edward Norton as the bad guy poker player, the bad influence on the 'hero' aka Matt Damon. John Malkovich is, as he always is, excellent. He plays a brilliant cameo role as Teddy KGB, the connected Russian poker club owner. Damon and Norton get themselves into trouble and need to play their way out of it by making $15,000 at the poker table. Despite its potential, this film just seems to get more and more obsessed with Damon, who comes across as conceited and just a pretty face, not at all like his superb performance in Good Will Hunting. Notwithstanding the cast - also featuring Martin Landau and Famke Janssen - this could and should have been a heck of a lot better than it is.

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.

You won't probably get everything if you didn't ever play some hands at Texas Hold'em. But the film is so low profile and at the same time so powerful you will probably like it as for one typical Oscar worthy drama blockbuster. It's fault is it's centered on poker and there are more people disliking it than not. Every scene delivers and the 1st person story teller recounts events as if gifted with a superior perception (that of a successful poker player obviously). The film runs smoothly and the more you experienced borderline events the more you will find it an understanding companion recounting some typical wanderings of your life. The 9 is due to the writing overall (the script is a 10): actors do their job.

Sorry, but I just couldn't buy the fact that Damon's character would associate himself with a creep like Norton's character. And I just can't see Damon as a Vegas-quality poker player. And what's with Malkovich? If overacting was an Oscar category, he'd be a shoo-in, right after Pacino and Eric Roberts. Sorry, too ridiculous to enjoy.