How to Rob a Bank

I really enjoyed this documentary. It's not often a documentary directly recruits the perpetrators to explain their side of the story, and it's even rarer where you end up routing for the bad guys. What's unique about this doc is that it really explains how these group of bank robbers were not hardened criminals but rather an eclectic group of educated misfits, and used their smarts to, well, outsmart the banks and the cops and eventually FBI for so long.

What's also nice is that this doc is very honest. The cops made mistakes. They aren't perfect and they aren't exactly Americas brightest (only need a high school degree and a few weeks of training to be a cop). They also got very trigger happy in the end. These robbers were yes, robbers. But they never hurt anyone. They never shot anyone. Never hit them, never took hostages etc. However the police and by extension the feds really wanted to scare the banks/public into thinking Hollywood was this violent unhinged monster just waiting to snap in the hopes they would get tips coming in as to who these guys were, when all evidence contradicted this notion. They end up having a shoot out against guys with jammed guns, lying that they shot first. You can't fire an unloaded or jammed weapon... so how could they "shoot first". Then the story changed to, "we saw them carrying a rifle in the van's rear window" despite them clearly stating numerous times the windows we blacked out and you could not look through any of the windows except the front windshield...

Then when one of the robbers offs themselves, the police then fire 76 freaking rounds into the corpse. Absolutely disgusting. What isn't stated in this documentary (but stated in other videos, look it up) is that a by standard got hit from the police reckless, excessive rounds.

Great documentary. Definitely very cool to learn how these guys planned their heists and strategized to evade the police for long.

It was an interesting and well done documentary, but the major flaw was that it tended to make a hero out of the villain.

ABOUT MY REVIEWS:

I do not include a synopsis of the film/show -- you can get that anywhere and that does not constitute a meaningful review -- but rather my thoughts and feelings on the film that hopefully will be informative to you in deciding whether to invest 90-180 minutes of your life on it.

My scale: 1-5 decreasing degrees of "terrible", with 5 being "mediocre" 6- OK. Generally held my interest OR had reasonable cast and/or cinematography, might watch it again 7 - Good. My default rating for a movie I liked enough to watch again, but didn't rise to the upper echelons 8- Very good. Would watch again and recommend to others 9- Outstanding. Would watch over and over; top 10% of my ratings 10 - A classic. (Less than 2% receive this rating). For Lifetime Movies for Chicks (LMFC), drop the above scale by 3 notches. A 6 is excellent and 7 almost unattainable.

True crime doc based on a string of bank robberies in 90s Seattle, this is a decent show coming in at 86 mins. Anything more would have been too drawn out, glad they decided not to go the three episode route with this story.

There's not much to watch visually; while there are some old clips and photos used, the doc mainly uses old audio and interviews from the present time. Several motion posters have also been used. So, you can either play it in the background or if you'd rather 'watch this as a podcast', that'll work too. If you have 1.5 hrs to spare and aren't sure what watch as a true crime content enthusiast, this should be on your list.

I wonder if Netflix true crime docs are all beginning to look and sound the same.

Really compelling crime doc with a thoughtful and sensitive character study at its center. What a strange and enigmatic man Scott was... the home video footage is so beautiful and used to great effect here. Engaging, thought provoking, and morally complex stuff! I could rob a bank no problem though.

I see there are some reviewers on here wringing their hands about the ethics of the film and 'true crime' in general. While I think this is a valuable conversation to have, I don't believe this film is part of the problem. I think How to Rob a Bank does a very good job of holding Scott and his accomplices accountable; bank robbery is not a victimless crime and this is told to us directly through interviews with the victims themselves. Additionally, Scott's accomplices express deep regret at the path their lives took, the crimes they committed, and the people they hurt. The film and filmmakers seem well aware of the complicated subject matter. This is a true crime film but it is far from exploitative.

From the guy doing the robberies to the people hunting him, all this documentary does is give you an insight into incredible egos of the wannabe criminal mastermind, his clearly easily influenced friends and the FBI agents hunting them.

It goes out of its way to paint a picture of Hollywood as some free spirit who used the money from bank robberies to live a carefree life in his tree house, hanging with friends and writing down his pretentious thoughts in a diary. Just read between the lines when people that knew him talk about him and you'll see a manipulator, not a happy go lucky guy.

The FBI are no better. One of the agents oozes ego that I nearly quite watching over the arrogance. I did this, I did that, I, I, I... Everyone keeps talking about "something horrible was bound to happen" and yet there was not a single hint throughout all the robberies that the pattern was evolving in that way. He intimidated people, tazed someone, but to make a leap that he'd go all out... that's just being generals after the battle.

It would be an interesting documentary if the people it talks about weren't so annoying.