Owning Mahowny

I decided to watch this true story about a gambling addiction when I worked at the casino. It never ceases to amaze me the lengths / extremes people will take to fill that void. He had a position at a bank where he could call the shots & it wasn't noticeable for a while. Just felt like seeing it again for old times sake

Let me preface this by saying that I'd read "Stung" years ago and found it incredible.I was very disappointed with the movie. At the time I read the book, I thought it would make a wonderful movie, and expected one when I read news that this movie, though small in budget, would be made, and done so with a cast including Hoffman and Hurt.Hoffman is great as always, required to act like a degenerate gambler without being able to say much because of what I believe was a debilitating script. Hoffman adopts a realistic Canadian accent and was made to look the part accurately -- even as accurate as the food in which he liked to indulge.Hurt, however, is a joke. He's supposed to play some kind of host/casino exec/pit boss -- neither of whom I'm sure he's ever met in his life and neither of whom in the book was enveloped into the machismo of a character he portrays. I think so highly of Hurt as an actor, that I'm inclined to blame the script for any of his scene's shortcomings. Exchanges between Hurt's character and that of Hoffman's could have been majestic (think how great Hurt was in Contact and in Rob Roy), but the script rendered Hurt just ordinary, sometimes over-the-top, and left Hoffman to rely on a more physical presence. The best exchanges are between Hoffman's character and his bookie, but they are few and far between.What's good? The story itself. The conflicted, chaotic rage you sense in Hoffman at all times. The movie looks good, and the casino shots are realistic when you take into consideration that the movie takes place in the early 80's and the casino is in Atlantic City.Very little character development is illustrated (at the bank and in the personal home-life of Mahoney for examples), and any insight into the pathological condition exhibited by 'Mahoney' is done mostly through Hoffman's incredible acting. There's little imagery and even less detail with respect to the casino play.For example: There's a scene in the movie where Mahoney is playing Craps. He's clearly on a great roll. He hits his point, and the whole table goes nuts. He's got a gazillion dollars worth of chips in front of him and then proceeds to roll a whole bunch of crap numbers before re-establishing a new point. He starts losing all his Pass Line bets because of the 2,3's and 12's he's rolling, but you don't see that.. you only hear it because of the dealers' chatter. So, people start leaving the table and the sense of the scene now is that the roll is done for and that Mahoney is going to go hit a horrible losing streak. Anyone who's ever played craps knows that this is utter nonsense. If you haven't played craps, or are not much of a casino patron, you will understand the essence of the scene either way, but be aware that it was a horrible and dishonest sell. Mahoney never made a monster Pass Line bet without hedging it on a prop bet. This wouldn't bother me so much if the movie hadn't been about casino gambling.In any case, the movie's 'feel' is good, but the writing of the screenplay was just too weak in my view. I wish the movie would have given the audience some credit and made it a full 2 hours so to ensure that as much detail from the book could be adapted.I also wish the DVD had some features that would have compenstated the viewer and ultimately, the consumer. Final verdict: I'd rent it at best.

I rent Owning Mahowny about a year ago and still often find myself thinking about it. I do not rent or see lots of movies anymore, largely due to the flashy, tabloid-fodder being churned out by Hollywood studios these days (curiously, who are all strangely confused why box office receipts keep dropping year-after-year).I very much like Owning Mahowny, and will be buying a copy. I have a bias towards factual, documentary-style accounts which is part of the reason I like it. But it carries a sober (if unintentional) message to it. I agree with the reviewer who said this should be required viewing before any trip to Vegas. Maybe for stock and options traders too.The setting of the early 80's is quite convincing, and I found it nostalgic to see the hairstyles, the cars, even the CDN $50 and $100 bills being counted in the opening credits. The character Dan Mahowny is indeed an "unexciting guy" who speaks in a monotone...that's part of the character, as Philip Seymour Hoffman faithfully reproduced after speaking for hours with the real Brian Molony, whose name was changed slightly for the movie's title owing to privacy concerns. Therein lies much of the movie's appeal. This is truly an average guy who did something stunning. Combine this with the movie's matter-of-factual attention to small details, and you suddenly feel like you're there, in 1981, watching this man implode before your very eyes.If you prefer an Angelina Jolie bad girl, or Uma Thurman dressed up in a yellow suit with a sword, or Will Smith punching-out an alien from the cockpit of an F-16, you're in luck. Hollywood has made all of those movies, and many, many more just like them. Some gratuitous Hollywood production values can be fun, but the original, riveting story of Owning Mahowny was an entertaining and welcome change for me.

I teach auditing students in an MBA program, and this is a great movie to recommend to them. Auditors need to think in terms of the motivation to steal funds, the opportunity to do it, and the rationalization that the Fraudster tells himself to maintain his view of him/herself. The movie - which is based on a true story has all these elements - in spades!I know other people - such as someone who thinks about the hazards of gambling and gambling addiction - would appreciate the movie as well.Thank you for making it available to us.Carolyn Anderson

This is a sleeper. No one I have shown it too has heard of it let alone watched it.Based on true events in Toronto in the early eighties, it deals with an upcoming bank accounts manager with a gambling addiction.Hoffman is superb, Minnie Driver has her Canadian accent down pat, and one of my favorite actors, John Hurt, gives a great performance as the casino owner. Maury Chakin is tailor made for his role in this drama too.A great screenplay, brilliantly directed, its one for the collection.

This was a very interesting story and I did enjoy the movie. The fact that it's true makes it even more interesting. As usual Philip Seymour Hoffman's performance was exceptional. I think anyone who purchases this will find it interesting.

Hoffman in a role which he underplays nicely. Based on a true story. The reason I knocked a star off is that the writer never gets to the root of Hoffman's problem.

Truly disappointing expose of Canadian mis-fit banker's gambling problem. We see him in the vortex, but never really understand what drives him or anything further about him. All the supports are pastiche and 2-dimensional. How could a subject like gambling, ingredients like a high-rolling casino backdrop and John Hurt as a wily casino owner result such a dull movie. We know little more by the end of the protagonist, than we did at the beginning.

PSH puts in a credible performance. His addicted gambler was believable and at times painful to watch in terms of the absolute denial of the addict. The gambling scenes are well shot and overall the director does a good job of slowly building the tension which accentuates the end of seat dynamic. Worth watching if you are a PSH fan and enjoy a jaunt into the mind of an addict.

As always Philip Seymour Hoffmnan stole every scene ,I didn't realise that it was based on a true story ,thoroughly enjoyable .

Excellent.

Recommended.