Review...."The Gambler"

This is a remake of a 1974 film loosely based on a novel by Dostoevsky. Sort of a dark, slick character study. Mark Wahlberg actually puts in a credible though flat performance. The style of the film and authentic locations kept your attention but the script with it's phony philosophical academic rambling got stale fast. IMo the best part of the film was the supporting cast, especially Brie Larson and John Goodman.
Dosen't really need the big screen but a good, not great film.

a reply to: olaru12

I was not disappointed with the Gambler. I thought that it presented a number of existential dilemmas. The protagonist is a young man from wealth who is faced with questions of what is his own being. How much of his questionable success in life is due to his own undertakings and how much to his position of birth and wealth. He seeks freedom from repetitious tedium and longs for an individuality he has sadly encountered in no other. Except maybe the young student with whom he ends up tying his dreams. The gambling was no more than just a symbol of his at times suicidal angst. He seemed to me to be stuck in that old Aristotelian of "either/or. Original or copy. Total freedom of total slavery. Win or lose.

Though it, by nature of the subject itself, could not be really dealt with in a really comprehensive manner for popular consumption, it at least for me , presented some of these issues in an colorful way.

The dialogue of Goodman, was put forth with force. Clearly, for me, one of his best rolls.

As a suicidal problem gambler. I relate well to this.

Haven't seen it yet but I'll watch almost anything about gambling, so I'll add this to my list. The best gambling show I've ever seen was actually an anime called "Kaiji: Ultimate Survivor". If you like psychological mind games and gambling, it's a must watch.

originally posted by: olaru12
This is a remake of a 1974 film loosely based on a novel by Dostoevsky. Sort of a dark, slick character study. Mark Wahlberg actually puts in a credible though flat performance. The style of the film and authentic locations kept your attention but the script with it's phony philosophical academic rambling got stale fast. IMo the best part of the film was the supporting cast, especially Brie Larson and John Goodman.
Dosen't really need the big screen but a good, not great film.

The original was not based on a novel by Dostoevsky. It was an autobiographical screenplay written by James Toback. pmcdeadline2.files.wordpress.com...

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: olaru12
This is a remake of a 1974 film loosely based on a novel by Dostoevsky. Sort of a dark, slick character study. Mark Wahlberg actually puts in a credible though flat performance. The style of the film and authentic locations kept your attention but the script with it's phony philosophical academic rambling got stale fast. IMo the best part of the film was the supporting cast, especially Brie Larson and John Goodman.
Dosen't really need the big screen but a good, not great film.

The original was not based on a novel by Dostoevsky. It was an autobiographical screenplay written by James Toback. pmcdeadline2.files.wordpress.com...

I did say loosely based....I don't know James Toback's motivation.

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: olaru12
This is a remake of a 1974 film loosely based on a novel by Dostoevsky. Sort of a dark, slick character study. Mark Wahlberg actually puts in a credible though flat performance. The style of the film and authentic locations kept your attention but the script with it's phony philosophical academic rambling got stale fast. IMo the best part of the film was the supporting cast, especially Brie Larson and John Goodman.
Dosen't really need the big screen but a good, not great film.

The original was not based on a novel by Dostoevsky. It was an autobiographical screenplay written by James Toback. pmcdeadline2.files.wordpress.com...

I did say loosely based....I don't know James Toback's motivation.

en.wikipedia.org...

It's not loosely based on Dostoevsky. It is entirely based on Toback's life. He's written about it in the link I posted.

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: olaru12
This is a remake of a 1974 film loosely based on a novel by Dostoevsky. Sort of a dark, slick character study. Mark Wahlberg actually puts in a credible though flat performance. The style of the film and authentic locations kept your attention but the script with it's phony philosophical academic rambling got stale fast. IMo the best part of the film was the supporting cast, especially Brie Larson and John Goodman.
Dosen't really need the big screen but a good, not great film.

The original was not based on a novel by Dostoevsky. It was an autobiographical screenplay written by James Toback. pmcdeadline2.files.wordpress.com...

I did say loosely based....I don't know James Toback's motivation.

en.wikipedia.org...

It's not loosely based on Dostoevsky. It is entirely based on Toback's life. He's written about it in the link I posted.

The link you provided has no text. It's just the picture of, I assume Toback. Nevermind, I can look it up myself.

I concede, Toback wrote " the Gambler" screenplay. It does seem similar to "The Gambler" by Dostoevsky. Sorry!!....My mistake!!