Mary Poppins Returns
Log in with Facebook
Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Sign up here
and the Terms and Policies,
and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and Fandango.
Already have an account? Log in here
Please enter your email address and we will email you a new password.
No consensus yet.
Tomatometer Not Available...
No consensus yet.
All Critics (25)
| Top Critics (1)
| Fresh (24)
| Rotten (1)
| DVD (8)
David Mamet's sometimes baffling, never less than fascinating glimpse into the dark underbelly of this world where it turns out that winning games of chance involve more skill (and con artistry) than luck.
O roteiro é mais previsível do que Mamet desejaria e seu primeiro trabalho na direção exibe uma teatralidade que ele gradualmente superaria, mas, apesar disso, a complexidade de seus personagens e a dinâmica de seus diálogos são admiráveis.
Since it would be unfair to spoil a moment of this perfectly-plotted masterpiece, all you need to know is that it landed on this critic's Best Movies of the Millennium List in 2000.
A conceptual film about con artists, Mamet's feature debut is a deadpan, deviously comic melodrama that proceeds with twists and reversals and builds like a poker game in which the stakes are higher and higher.
A top-notch psychological thriller about sexual politics, trust and betrayal.
The best of the con game movies
Playwright David Mamet's directorial debut is a cardsharp con game full of tricks.
One of the finest Mamet adaptations out there.
What intrigues is the con games themselves, as Mamet's film explores with a certain joyous streak of mischief some of the tricks of the trade.
...will keep you on your toes and guessing from beginning to end.
Cheesy, dated and more of a film made for tv, yet, there was something quite interesting about this film, that left me enjoying it.
Lindsay Crouse is an eminent psychologist who is desperate for adventure. One day she'll meet Joe Mantegna's character, a swindler that will provide her a few tricks to reach a little excitement in her life. There will be, of course, a few bumps on their way.
A tight and thoughtful writing and direction along with Juan Ruiz Anchia's stylish photographic work, construct a rich and atmospheric hitchcockian tour de force with no room for gratuitousness, not even in Mamet's notorious use of coarse words. David Mamet's first and easily best film.
Okay, so could Lindsay Crouse be any more awful? I know pretty much everyone hates her in this movie but Jesus Christ, that was a dull performance. I don't know if she was attempting sociopathy by way of emotional stunting, but what she really accomplished was sheer tedium. Joe Mantegna wasn't too much better, playing some unctuous cipher for the real star of the movie - the con.
Mamet's a pretty damn good writer, lack of range and self-indulgent style notwithstanding, and here he has developed a screenplay that starts out riveting but becomes predictable and floppy. I had the entire half hour of the movie mapped out before it even started; how's that for a disappointing ending? I think we can blame Lindsay Crouse for that too. God, she was bad. But yeah, the first and most of the second act are this great psychological clash between a woman and a man, both of whom make their living working out the human brain in very different ways. The cons themselves are a lot of fun to watch...just not that last one because you know what's coming. I don't know if it's a product of the movie's age or just straight-out simplicity, but it was a bust.
Not a bad movie per se, but the payoff was a mess.
Superb Con film from David Mamet.
There are no approved quotes yet for this movie.