Robbery

One of the best low buget movie i've seen lately.Good Plot,Good Acting,Good Score and a pretty decent Story too....A One time watchable.Go for it!

Robbery feels tempting, and in away it is a heist film, but more of the human level, life and death, and that everything expires one day ...death.

its a film without extravagance, the story lacks a lot of substance, the dementia bait doesnt impress me, nor do the overall acting. its one of the films that is filmed so close up in the actors face, so youre fooled to believe. the setup design and locations are very abandoned factory like.

its not an exciting robbery film, so make a pass on this if your in for the action.

I really liked this movie! I recommend it. Great cast. Good story. Lots of twists. Two thumbs up.

First, the good. Video quality is good with some decent cinematography, and the sound quality is also good. Art Hindle is a very good and underappreciated actor. He actually does a good job in this, or at least the best anyone could do with what he was given to work with. Which brings us to.......

The bad. There is plenty of bad here. The supporting actors are mostly terrible, especially the younger guy hanging around Hindle. The main problem is the writing, or lack of it. The story is not just incredibly boring and poorly paced, it's just plain stupid and full of nonsensical story holes. Characters behave in unbelievably stupid fashion. Complete lacks of logic and plot holes you could drive a train through.

MILD SPOILERS AHEAD:

• The huge "twist" is one that we knew was coming literally from the first time the guy tells Hindle he's his son.
• What's the whole point of the heist at the casino? It's ridiculous yet somehow still the most boring heist in movie history
• The casino owner makes a big deal of having to fill out her last will and testament, and it's literally still sitting on her desk in front of her days later? Is that all she does, is stare at her printed out but unsigned will all day every day?
• The guy owes money to the casino owner, they bring him in and take his fingers, and the big heist plan is for these three people, all of them well known to the casino owner and the only two dudes who run the place, to come in and sneak all the money out?
• The whole heist is so stupid I just have to reiterate it again. The guy, who owes them money and whose fingers they JUST took, returns to heist them and is not recognized because he is wearing SUNGLASSES and claiming to be blind? Talking to the employees and getting them to tell him what his cards are? Cracking jokes and bumping into people? They seriously don't recognize this guy? A blind guy who also apparently just lost the exact same fingers?

Seriously, some of the worst and laziest writing I've ever seen, even in an independent film. Art Hindle deserves better and movie audiences do too.

How did this get funded? If it got grants from tax payers, I want my cash back. I did not approve of this mess.

I mean sure, the film LOOKS great, a polished production helped along by the keen eye of cinematographer Jack Yan Chen...but in actuality; it's lipstick on a pig.

It just goes to show you that money CAN buy a nice "looking" film. Stanton was even able to pull Canadian A-list ACTRA talent, and I use that term VERY facetiously. (Cool. You got Jennifer Dale--Ari Lantos' mom. Awesome.)

At the end of the day, we all know that REAL talent is in the storytelling. If it ain't on the page, revise, edit, revise, edit and revise again. And although I'm sure he's satiated his itch to "make a movie", Corey Stanton is a long way away from being a competent storyteller.

But the real question for Dr. Stanton is this: What do you do after processing my unadulterated opinions of your debut feature film? A) Take it in stride, make another movie and forge ahead, or B) Go back to making real money in medicine?