As other users have said Sizemore was nothing more than a "Jay Leno impersonation" of Rose - only the haircut even remotely resembled the real Pete Rose. Moreover, Dash Mihok (who portrayed Paul Janszen) looked more like the real Rose. But casting error aside, the movie was genuine to its subject matter.
"Hustle" was an apt name playing off Rose's nickname "Charlie Hustle" in order to reference his gambling habits. Anyone who says the movie lacked because it didn't revere Rose for his baseball accomplishments is missing the point. The movie was about latter-life Pete Rose the gambler, not a biopic in general on the "greatest thing to ever happen to Cincinatti." Also, some criticize the film for not exploring avenues of Rose's colleagues; however, while Eric Davis was a background character and other famous Reds were mentioned, said colleagues' consent is required to have their likenesses and views to be used.
Furthermore, not even Rose himself confessed to his illegitimate activities until the beginning of this year.Before making any criticism, viewers should research.
As for the story itself, the one problem I noted was that the screenplay couldn't clearly delineate who was the protagonist. While Rose was clearly meant to be the 'villain,' focus and sympathy shifted between him and Janszen so much so that near the end, the movie may have been more appropriately entitled "Paul Janszen." Of course, ESPN would NOT have been able to sell that.
"Hustle" was an apt name playing off Rose's nickname "Charlie Hustle" in order to reference his gambling habits. Anyone who says the movie lacked because it didn't revere Rose for his baseball accomplishments is missing the point. The movie was about latter-life Pete Rose the gambler, not a biopic in general on the "greatest thing to ever happen to Cincinatti." Also, some criticize the film for not exploring avenues of Rose's colleagues; however, while Eric Davis was a background character and other famous Reds were mentioned, said colleagues' consent is required to have their likenesses and views to be used.
Furthermore, not even Rose himself confessed to his illegitimate activities until the beginning of this year.Before making any criticism, viewers should research.
As for the story itself, the one problem I noted was that the screenplay couldn't clearly delineate who was the protagonist. While Rose was clearly meant to be the 'villain,' focus and sympathy shifted between him and Janszen so much so that near the end, the movie may have been more appropriately entitled "Paul Janszen." Of course, ESPN would NOT have been able to sell that.