How To Rob A Bank Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES PLOT SUMMARY
Jinx (Stahl) has coasted through life oblivious to the world around him and without a care in the world, Jessica (Christensen) is a bank employee bored by her mundane life. Their lives are thrown into a spin when they both get caught in the middle of a bank heist and are forced to arbitrate this intense situation between the thieves and the police.
| Nick Stahl | Jinx |
| Erika Christensen | Jessica |
| Gavin Rossdale | Simon |
| Terry Crews | Officer DeGepse |
| David Carradine | Nick |
| Nicolo Dorian | Gunman |
| Adriano Aragon | Fellow Officer |
| Britt Delano | Key Witness |
| Chris Lerude | SWAT sniper |
| Sabrina Machado | Hostage |
| Andrews Jenkins |
6.20 out of 10 (2281 votes)
Visitor Reviews
Get ready for something different!
posted on 28 May 2009It seems that IMDb only posts the reviews from "plants" from the people who somehow made filmed this mess. There is nothing redeemable about this tired heist premise, nothing new is brought to the table, with cliché after cliché, this movie never fails to deliver. The actors, Stahl, Christensen, Rossdale, etc seemed to have been blackmailed (or held at gun point) to star in this film and it shows since their performances are their worst, no thanks to the "wacky" tired and just bad dialog... so bad you can almost see that the actors are saying their lines as if read directly from the script... Of course some of you may think this is so bad it's good... but it's hardly as it's painful to watch how terrible the performances are as well as the story and the way the "cops" act... which in turn make the resolution the more unbelievable. A waste of film.
Like getting little moments stolen from you until you have nothing left.
posted on 22 Apr 2009Sure this MAY contain spoilers, but the thing that will be more spoiled is your time by watching it. It took me a while to realize it was a "PG-13" movie, but then I realized I didn't hear any "naughty" words. This is a teenage bank robbery / hostage flick.That would explain why people talk like teenagers, and that the cop in charge acts like a teenager, instead of like all of other hostage negotiators you may have seen in all of those "R" rated bank hostage movies. ("R" for "realistic") The biggest problem was that it was trying SO HARD to be funny, or witty, or whatever, and it was just STUPID.Quick question for those who've seen the film. Do banks have PHONES any more? I believe they DO, but you wouldn't know it if you saw this movie. I just remember one ringing RIGHT AWAY with the cop in charge calling in like the first 3 minutes of just about every other bank hostage flick I've ever seen. I also remember the cop-in-charge REALLY knowing what he's doing, too, you know, like he's taken a class or something.The thing that I find a real shame about this is that, technically, it was well made - all the pieces where there. The story wasn't really bad, as an outline. The DIALOG was a BIG problem, along with the lack of believable characters, and editing that was too smart for itself by way of "lock, stock and two smoking barrels" whose self-conscience style has infected cinema with its small-screen editing and overlays. Please give me a long shot and some atmosphere! There's one good thing about this film, however, Erika Christensen is HOT, and seriously, if it weren't for her, I would have stopped this within the first half hour.
A Fun Romp!
posted on 09 Feb 2009It's difficult to make a film where nothing happens exciting to the viewer, but the filmmakers have done that here. Because nothing happens. And it works anyway. The cinematography is original and well done. The way the DP has the camera move gives you a real feel for the location and the claustrophobia the characters must feel. One shot in particular stands out. The camera moves from the vault back through the bank, out a bullet hole, and ends with the cops. The dialogue is sharp and often funny. You might not be repeating any lines to your friends but the dialogue feels real. Okay, there was a little exposition, but not a lot. The exchange that ends with "I have his number if you want it" cracked me up.The situations with cell phone use feel authentic in how they play out. The characters' frustrations and lack of cleverness is a refreshing change from most films. The editing is fairly tight. Scenes don't drag.
what's with all the hatin'?
posted on 04 Sep 2008all the negative reviews had me worrying I was in for a dog but this was a surprisingly enjoyable romp with some good ideas, snazzy camera work and editing (almost too snazzy) and a clever way of telling the story. The movie starts part way through the story and then fills in the details as and when you need to know them. you do have to pay close attention to figure out what's going on, and why, and on some details you're left wondering, which is the one flaw in an otherwise good movie. There are some plot holes that don't hang that well, specifically to do with the account and who set it up and if they did set it up why did they need someone to put a pin number on it etc. all those details were not clear and appeared to be a major plot hole, but if you can suspend disbelief for that the rest is plain sailing. Of particular note is Erika Christensen. She has an excellent screen presence as a particularly hot bank robber tech expert and has a playful and believable interaction with Nick Stahl - good chemistry and a pleasure to watch. Some good lines and a nice bitch about bank charges etc. I enjoyed it. There are far worse movies out there and much worse ways to spend 90 mins.
Diatriabe against banks?
posted on 03 May 2008who gave an individual with a credit card debt and a lack of funds due to constant over withdrawing , the budget to make a movie. Was this intended to scold banks for the methods they use to amass their wealth? Anyway, the acting was mediocre at best, the actors not of any caliber and given a poor script to engage their modest skills. I thought the actors prone to histrionics at times, and deficient in their capacity to portray their characters. It was an interesting concept yet poorly executed. It was an interesting combination of hostage/bank robbery scene and yet the harsh lighting of the vault combination with the aforementioned acting skills severely undercut the quality of this film. I did not like it and personally would not recommend this movie to a friend. Maybe an acquaintance, if i wish to be rude!
Stunningly bad
posted on 25 Apr 2008I was shocked at how bad this was. Having seen this on Canadian cable, I was certain that this was one of the movies created as filler to satisfy their Canadian-made content requirement, and I was prepared to rip into my government again for funding this. So I was somewhat pleased that, as far as I can tell, Hollywood gets to own responsibility for this mess. What is the world coming to when Canadian cable is involved a competent film like Passchendaele, and Hollywood gives us How To Rob a Bank? It's a new dawn.The entire film seems to be about how two cute new adults can sound really really cool when they deal with all the incredibly stupid people around them. Stupid people like cops, bankers, criminal masterminds, and so on. I think the inevitable porn version of this film is actually going to have a better plot with better acting.The story is based on the entire idea that a criminal mastermind couldn't hack a simple 4-digit PIN. There are only 10,000 possible PINs. It's not that difficult. If you are capable of hacking the system to divert service fees to another account, you can crack or reprogram a PIN.By the way, how are they going to withdraw those funds? You can't get it out of an ATM. You have to transfer it somewhere else. And that is tracked and held, of course.And how about the bank's own tracking software? You think they don't notice when one penny is out of place? Trust me. No fee diversion scam will work for longer than one day. Those numbers are checked so many different ways, automatically, by a separate computer. This might have made some sense at the time of Superman III, but that time has long since passed.Bad script, bad acting, REALLY bad computer screen with nothing on it.Really, to justify all the nonsense in this film, it really cries out for John McClane to come in and sort things out about half an hour in. That would be a great short film.I gave it a 5 solely because the two leads aren't bad to look at.
It's okay..
posted on 01 Apr 2008This movie is okay for a rainy day. The slow plot development can somewhat get annoying and the plot is overused and predictable with few minor changes. Not much thrill into the story, just slow. The ending was somewhat lame and left much to be hanging. The acting was decent with some slight humor from Terry Crews. "Plot" About a man named Jason Taylor who was going into a bank to use the ATM to get money for food. As he learns the bank is being robbed and somehow manages to get locked in the vault with the robbers on the outside. Basically a cry of surplus charges and taking from the little guy.Dialog is pretty cheesy at best...If you're bored and there is nothing better.. Go for it.
alright for ,and as a weired-wacky comedy
posted on 28 Jan 2008a "dark" comedy with some weired moments,very "new age" production style; hot babe (by universal terms at least).i did not find it "bad" at all; i have seen better from this genre, yet there is a certain "sweetness" that will likely keep you watch on, without feeling "bored" generally(the first 5-10 minutes i found them as irrelevant), even if the whole action happens in and in-between the "valut"(Nick Stahl and Erika Christensen), bank's main floor (with the bad guys+ hostage), and the front street with Terry Crews (as the negotiator).i say "new age" dark comedy because there are many scenes that technically suppose to be funny but they are not; such as letting you think" along the line "ok...and...?". however the plot keeps reinventing itself to the point where the unfunny becomes comic, but still with the ability to hold its course. basically if you like British humor( even if it is a Hollywood production) and looking for pure entertainment values, this might be for you. and especially if you are part of the young generation and/or withing the start of the middle age one.i found the end to be disappointing in traditional sense and there also some references to internet use that play out right from the "regulaters" political agenda! there are way too many phones and calls involved yet i THINK i can see the sarcasm in itself (if this was intended to be commercial it definitely fails flat and the investors should demand their money back).actually the plot in itself falls flat as well, since the "surcharge" theme has been played out many times before and much better. the thing that holds quiet well the movie together are the wacky dialogs(or most of them) and the camera work. David Carradine is a nice touch even if only actually see him once(i recognized his voice from a mile away without looking into credits first).all in all is a good "progressive" time waster. it entertains
Erm.... Now I know how to rob a bank
posted on 29 Dec 2007This film is not your typical run of the mill weekend show on TV, this film is different than what the cable television channels are showing feeding the masses these days.This film is original, creative, quirky and funny. The cast are amazing, and the storyline is simply fantastically (is that even a word, I do not know, but I used it anyway, in lack of a better word) made.I wouldn't recommend this as a thriller, as I think this is more of a dark comedy, entwined with actions and clever conversations.This film, whilst not Oscar worthy, is good nonetheless. Issues regarding bank security, of our dislikes of banks charging us for services they were supposed to give for free to the customers, is mentioned here.I like the way the story is told, and of the tips given. For the record, I have no intention to rob any banks (yet), but the tips do come in handy should I decide to change my career in the future.
unbelievably bad
posted on 03 Dec 2007It might only tell you that I disliked the movie or maybe even didn't understand the plot when I state now that I am convinced that the screenplay writer must be a longtime cocaine addict. You might think that I am bad with people when I say that the persons in this movie must be from a different planet, that what they uttered clearly did not come from motivation but from awfully bad writing that was supposed to come over as cool.At some point, the movie just starts to hurt the consciousness. If it doesn't hurt yours, then you either didn't see it or that you don't have consciousness.I think I am caught in a hellish reality tunnel with a pretentious movie and people who think that the movie's displayed wannabe-coolness is to be studied and imitated in real life because it makes you feel "good" about yourself. Those are the people that get shot dead in "Dogma" by Loki while he shouts "Fakes! All of you, fakes!".Did you read the comment "A Fun Romp!"? It describes the opposite of what I think about this movie. It is unbelievable how people can not see that this movie is a load of mind vomit.
Teenage Comedy
posted on 25 Nov 2007The DVD jacket premise was interesting: a kid gets accidentally locked in the bank's vault during a robbery. I knew this would be sort of slick, Hollywood stuff. But what I didn't know is that it would be trying to be a teenage comedy. And it was not funny. "Cool" music every second (God forbid any silence), an impossibly hot and just-turned-18 robbery accomplice who says she got her tip off an internet Duran Duran blog. The first l0 minutes of the film are completely wasted, as we think we are seeing the main character prepare for a bank job, repeating stupid ad-hoc questions from his "hostage". But we learn this is not a rehearsal, just lazy stupid dialog to introduce us to the frivolity of this film.At least it sets the tone correctly for what is to follow. Teenage comedy...inside a bank robbery job! yay.2 points.
Good acting, pointless snore-worthy script.
posted on 01 Nov 2007How this was ever turned into a movie I honestly have no idea. What is even more amazing is the excellent cast would have anything to do with it. Nick Stahl, Erika Christensen, Gavin Rossdale, & Terry Crews are all quite talented, too bad they have nothing good for them to do. This reminded me of a a failed TV pilot that just wasn't any good so it wasn't aired. I respect what the writer/director was trying to do, sorry he failed miserably. This made a total of 1K in theaters then to video, and for good reason it sucks. Please don't bother wasting your time or your money with this very good looking (the cinematography is looks great) yet utterly pointless & extremely boring film.
How to Make a Bad Movie
posted on 31 Jul 2009How Rob a Viewer is more like it. I just saw this on On Demand HD Cable. For the first time ever with On Demand I really want my $ 6.99 back! I saw that this was an independent movie with a first time director released by IFC and it looked like it might be a cool little flick. Boy was I wrong. This thing is one of the worst films I have ever seen. If I had any power I would nominate this for a Razzie Award. It would win. Definitely the worst film of the year nomination. The story goes nowhere cinematically, photographically or thematically. Some of the acting is worse than a high school drama. Witness the exchange between the COP on the street and the angry young man trapped in the bank. I don't know if I can blame the actors as they look completely lost, as if they have no idea of what they are supposed to be doing and no direction. The lead performances are schizophrenic, without tracking any kind of performance. One minute the man trapped in the bank vault, with the horribly cheese ball sexy receptionist, is freaking out in a panic and the next he is chill and calm and delivering smooth cool lines to the femme fatal. Horrible. The dialog is trying so hard to be clever but it trips all over it's self conscious self. The clumsy attempt to message this plot out with a angry protest cry at banks for charging $ 1.50 ATM fees is laughable - but not funny.The direction and production blatantly audition for an ultra mainstream Hollywood production in attempts to look slick and keep the camera fluid but just call attention to itself in it's half baked passionless, committee driven excuse for a movie. IFC I want my $ 6.99 back.