Rating: 
Summary: Profoundly Intriguing
Review: "House of Games" is one of those movies that keeps you thinking through and after the movie. It reveals human nature at its darkest side. It is a study of how a person could transform himself or herself under different circumstances. The cinematography is one of the most original I've seen; th lighting and the camera angles convey the mood very precisely. The dialogue is probably the most perfect aspect of this great film. It gets deep and makes you think. Highly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: "Look Out for The Tell...."
Review: ....or, "The Large Con consists of a series of Small Cons put in an 'attractive' order".....or, "Everybody's got a little bit of small con in them. Well, some folks have larger cons..." I saw this movie again and, despite my distaste for certain aspects of the Mamet approach (He wishes actors to read the dialog as written, without emoting too much. The emoting is somehow brought across in the words. In my opinion sometimes the dialog comes off as more staccato than true life, but who am I? Mamet is the world renown author/director, here. I am simply a hack reviewer--but I digress)...this, I think, is a very cool movie with a lot going for it. The chemistry with Crouse and Mantegna is subtly packaged...the cool psychologist becomes child like to the swaggering, but one step from being oily, con-man. She wanted so much to believe that she was being allowed in a world of secrets, privy to only a few, so she trusted this guy to Father her thru this mesh of crosses and double-crossings. Those moments with the con-artist to her were romantic, exciting, hell, downright sexy and she was feeling more alive than the sterile clinical environment offered to her as a psychologist. Until, that is, The Big Tell gave her a kick in her nether regions. What makes the movie a surreal experience is that on one level anyone who is in movie making and story telling (or sometimes health services like psychiatry/psychology) is some what of a con artist that we all surrender to one way or another. And we in the audience usually have to remind ourselves to Look Out for The Tell...do you see where I'm going with this? Good. Remember then. And see this movie. It's a good one.
Rating:
Summary: a chick rather than chic flick?
Review: All discussion of Mamet's art aside, I recommend this film to female audiences. Lindsay Crouse's performance has been deservedly positively reviewed above, but what hasn't yet been mentioned is how well she protrays a woman who knows her place and therefore dares to venture beyond it. The world of con men is much more dangerous, exciting, and even self-admitted than the cons of nurture that women in our society are routinely limited to, at least as this film attests. Mike offers Dr. Ford to take her into a new thing. He catches her blushing. This is one of the most genuine and yet instructive seduction scenes I've ever watched. Artistic value aside, House of Games is a "fun" film for all those women out there who think they are above being conned by men. The climax and denouement first satisfy and then edify--to know a con is to be one. The final scene of Dr. Ford in the restaurant is painfully accurate.
Rating:
Summary: The Con is On!
Review: An oversimplification of this story might be that it is a darker version of "The Sting", or at least some elements of it. But it is much more intellectually sophisticated, and definitely a little-seen gem. David Mamet directs his own material for a change, and we are treated to some superior gamesmanship. Some notable info: look for a quick scene early in the film where actress and future Mamet wife Rebecca Pidgeon approaches the character played by then-Mamet wife Lindsay Crouse for an autograph. And look for a small role by actor William H. Macy as a customer at a telegram office. Macy would go on to star in Mamet's "Oleanna" both on stage and on screen. And this film features an early film role by the late, great J.T. Walsh, an actor born to "do Mamet". This film centers around a series of confidence games, but you're never really sure just who the "mark" is. That's the beauty of Mamet's talent. And Mamet was just getting warmed up with this movie. James Foley directed the most talented all-star cast in history for the film version of Mamet's 1984 Pulitzer Prize-winning play "Glengarry Glen Ross" in 1992, and Mamet himself directed his own "Oleanna" and "The Spanish Prisoner" in recent years. But "House of Games" has it all, too. Deception, murder, more deception, and Mamet's trademark dialogue.
Rating:
Summary: The Con is On!
Review: An oversimplification of this story might be that it is a darker version of "The Sting", or at least some elements of it. But it is much more intellectually sophisticated, and definitely a little-seen gem. David Mamet directs his own material for a change, and we are treated to some superior gamesmanship. Some notable info: look for a quick scene early in the film where actress and future Mamet wife Rebecca Pidgeon approaches the character played by then-Mamet wife Lindsay Crouse for an autograph. And look for a small role by actor William H. Macy as a customer at a telegram office. Macy would go on to star in Mamet's "Oleanna" both on stage and on screen. And this film features an early film role by the late, great J.T. Walsh, an actor born to "do Mamet". This film centers around a series of confidence games, but you're never really sure just who the "mark" is. That's the beauty of Mamet's talent. And Mamet was just getting warmed up with this movie. James Foley directed the most talented all-star cast in history for the film version of Mamet's 1984 Pulitzer Prize-winning play "Glengarry Glen Ross" in 1992, and Mamet himself directed his own "Oleanna" and "The Spanish Prisoner" in recent years. But "House of Games" has it all, too. Deception, murder, more deception, and Mamet's trademark dialogue.
Rating: 
Summary: A classic yes, but Crouse's acting is miserable...
Review: As one other reviewer here very accurately put it: "we've become smarter since this movie was made". Especially when we've since seen mega-stunners like the "Usual suspects" or "Sixth Sense", movies that took the "film with a twist"-genre to a whole new plataeu.
A hotshot psychologist finds out the hard way that her trade doesn't cut it much down at the streets when she becomes emotionally (and otherwise) involved with a con-man and his circuit. As she's awed by all the "rules" and even more so the tricks that make the con-world spin, she asks to be "shown more", only to see that being shown more includes being caught in an invisible and catastrophic spider web. I don't want to give the plot away since this is obviously the strength of the film, but "House of Games" was one of the premier twist films for the time it was made, even if it might seem dated today. Some of the twists might (emphasis on the "might") be somewhat predictable but that would be the case only for the very initiated viewer. Mamet has got some great scripts under his belt, but if there's one thing that seriously undermines his film hee (he also directed it) is the acting of J.Crouse. While Joe Mantegna (the other lead in the movie) is in my opinion absolutely great, Crouse gives a half-dead performance, wooden and surreally uninspired, especially when one considers that she was acting (?) a part in a solid story. Were it not for her terrible performance this movie would be elevated into whole new heights. Some people thought that the dialogue was problematic, but in my view it's exactly the bizzarity of the dialogue that makes the "House of Games" all the more special. The dialogues are unique in the way things are being said and not in what is being said. But otherwise, this is a great film, also in a historical way, since it provided a cue for many scriptwriters since, with maybe better results but this doesn't diminish this film's importance. Well worth its reputation and the time you'll invest in watching it.
Rating:
Summary: A classic yes, but Crouse's acting is miserable...
Review: As one other reviewer here very accurately put it: "we've become smarter since this movie was made". Especially when we've since seen mega-stunners like the "Usual suspects" or "Sixth Sense", movies that took the "film with a twist"-genre to a whole new plataeu.
A hotshot psychologist finds out the hard way that her trade doesn't cut it much down at the streets when she becomes emotionally (and otherwise) involved with a con-man and his circuit. As she's awed by all the "rules" and even more so the tricks that make the con-world spin, she asks to be "shown more", only to see that being shown more includes being caught in an invisible and catastrophic spider web. I don't want to give the plot away since this is obviously the strength of the film, but "House of Games" was one of the premier twist films for the time it was made, even if it might seem dated today. Some of the twists might (emphasis on the "might") be somewhat predictable but that would be the case only for the very initiated viewer. Mamet has got some great scripts under his belt, but if there's one thing that seriously undermines his film hee (he also directed it) is the acting of J.Crouse. While Joe Mantegna (the other lead in the movie) is in my opinion absolutely great, Crouse gives a half-dead performance, wooden and surreally uninspired, especially when one considers that she was acting (?) a part in a solid story. Were it not for her terrible performance this movie would be elevated into whole new heights. Some people thought that the dialogue was problematic, but in my view it's exactly the bizzarity of the dialogue that makes the "House of Games" all the more special. The dialogues are unique in the way things are being said and not in what is being said. But otherwise, this is a great film, also in a historical way, since it provided a cue for many scriptwriters since, with maybe better results but this doesn't diminish this film's importance. Well worth its reputation and the time you'll invest in watching it.
Rating:
Summary: Mamet At His Mesmerizing Best
Review: David Mamet wrote the screenplay and made his directorial debutwith "House of Games," a character study fraught withpsychological overtones, in which a psychiatrist is lured into thedark world of the confidence game. Margaret Ford (Lindsay Crouse) has a successful practice and has written a best-selling novel, "Driven." Still, she is somewhat discontented with her own personal life; there's an emptiness she can neither define nor resolve, and it primes her vulnerability. When a patient, Billy Hahn (Steven Goldstein), confides to her during a session that he owes big money to some gamblers, and that they're going to kill him if he doesn't pay, she decides to intervene on his behalf. This takes her to the "House of Games," a seedy little dive where she meets Mike (Joe Mantegna), a charismatic con-man who wastes no time before enticing her into his world. Instead of the "twenty-five large" that Billy claimed he owed, Mike shows her his book, and it turns out to be eight hundred dollars. And Mike agrees to wipe the slate clean, if she'll agree to do him one simple favor, which involves a card game he has going on in the back room. In the middle of a big hand, Mike is going to leave the room for a few minutes; while he is gone, her job is to watch for the "tell" of one of the other players. By this time, not only Margaret, but the audience, as well, is hooked. The dialogue, and Mamet's unique style and the precise cadence with which his actors deliver their lines, is mesmerizing. As Mike leads Margaret through his compelling, surreal realm of existence, and introduces her to the intricacies of the con game, we are swept right along with her. From that first memorable encounter, when he demonstrates what a "tell" is and how it works, to the lessons of the "short con," to the stunning climax of this film, Mamet keeps the con going with an urgency that is relentless. And nothing is what it seems. In the end, Margaret learns some hard lessons about life and human nature, and about herself. She changes; and whether or not it's for the better is open to speculation. Mantegna is absolutely riveting in this film; he lends every nuance possible to a complex character who must be able to lead you willingly into the shadows, and does. Crouse also turns in an outstanding performance here; you feel the rigid, up-tight turmoil roiling beneath that calm, self-assured exterior, and when her experiences with Mike induce the change in her, she makes you feel how deeply it has penetrated. She makes you believe that she is capable of what she does, and makes you understand it, as well. The dynamic supporting cast includes Mike Nussbaum (Joey), Lilia Skala (Dr. Littauer), J.T. Walsh (The Businessman), Ricky Jay (George) and William H. Macy (Sergeant Moran). "House of Games" is the quintessential Mamet; he's written and directed a number of high-caliber plays and films since, and will no doubt grace us with more in the future. But this film will be the one that defines him; and you can go to the dictionary and look it up. You'll find it under "Perfection." This is one great movie you do not want to miss.
Rating:
Summary: "Trust no one"
Review: David Mamet's "House of Games," is another of that director's giant flip jobs. I've been working my way through the Mamet catalogue, and one can't help but feel the director sees the world itself as a giant con. Well, that's perhaps a bit simplistic, but Mamet does cling, in movie after movie, to some core principles. One of these is that you must trust no one. In "Spartan," "The Spanish Prisoner," and "House of Games," this very line is uttered, usually by a villain to an innocent. This sounds like a negative credo, but it really isn't. First, consider who's issuing the warning: the villain. Will the innocent learn from experience? And will the learning result in corruption? (Important questions for Mamet.) Second, trusting yourself and knowing yourself (weaknesses included) in a dangerous world is advisable, necessary, in order to survive . I have to believe Mamet is a big reader of Joseph Conrad. The story behind "House of Games," involves Lindsay Crouse as Margaret Ford, a doctor and popular author. Her "big book" is titled "Driven," about compulsive and addictive personalities. It doesn't take long to figure out the book is about herself. So driven is Margaret that she is beginning to make Freudian slips in her conversations, slips that reveal dark corners of her own personality. She may be heading for a breakdown - and a teaching colleague warns her, tells her she must slow down. But "slowing down" comes as another writing project presents itself, seemingly accidently due to the dilemma of a patient , when Margaret is introduced to the world of the Con at a local bar and pool hall called "House of Games." This introduction comes at the hands of Mike (Joe Mantegna), a handsome and slick con man who is willing to provide a tour - though he does warn her: "Trust no one." To reveal any more would be telling. Like all Mamet films, the dialogue is essential. I don't think I've ever seen a director make such interesting use of dialogue. On one level the dialogue in all of Mamet's films (that I've seen so far) is seemingly stilted. But it works! Why? I can only attribute this to Mamet's precision as a director. What seems stilted, comes across instead as elevated speech - as in Shakespeare. Mamet is a dramatic poet who no doubt has Shakespeare's great maxim engraved upon his mind, and present in the framing of each scene: "Suit the action to the word, and the word to the action." (Good actors must love working with this guy.) So pay attention, there's no fat in a Mamet film, and always plenty to ponder. "House of Games" is no different. See it.
Rating:
Summary: "Trust no one"
Review: David Mamet's "House of Games," is another of that director's giant flip jobs. I've been working my way through the Mamet catalogue, and one can't help but feel the director sees the world itself as a giant con. Well, that's perhaps a bit simplistic, but Mamet does cling, in movie after movie, to some core principles. One of these is that you must trust no one. In "Spartan," "The Spanish Prisoner," and "House of Games," this very line is uttered, usually by a villain to an innocent. This sounds like a negative credo, but it really isn't. First, consider who's issuing the warning: the villain. Will the innocent learn from experience? And will the learning result in corruption? (Important questions for Mamet.) Second, trusting yourself and knowing yourself (weaknesses included) in a dangerous world is advisable, necessary, in order to survive . I have to believe Mamet is a big reader of Joseph Conrad. The story behind "House of Games," involves Lindsay Crouse as Margaret Ford, a doctor and popular author. Her "big book" is titled "Driven," about compulsive and addictive personalities. It doesn't take long to figure out the book is about herself. So driven is Margaret that she is beginning to make Freudian slips in her conversations, slips that reveal dark corners of her own personality. She may be heading for a breakdown - and a teaching colleague warns her, tells her she must slow down. But "slowing down" comes as another writing project presents itself, seemingly accidently due to the dilemma of a patient , when Margaret is introduced to the world of the Con at a local bar and pool hall called "House of Games." This introduction comes at the hands of Mike (Joe Mantegna), a handsome and slick con man who is willing to provide a tour - though he does warn her: "Trust no one." To reveal any more would be telling. Like all Mamet films, the dialogue is essential. I don't think I've ever seen a director make such interesting use of dialogue. On one level the dialogue in all of Mamet's films (that I've seen so far) is seemingly stilted. But it works! Why? I can only attribute this to Mamet's precision as a director. What seems stilted, comes across instead as elevated speech - as in Shakespeare. Mamet is a dramatic poet who no doubt has Shakespeare's great maxim engraved upon his mind, and present in the framing of each scene: "Suit the action to the word, and the word to the action." (Good actors must love working with this guy.) So pay attention, there's no fat in a Mamet film, and always plenty to ponder. "House of Games" is no different. See it.
|
