IMDb > Bank Robber (1993) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb

Reviews & Ratings for
Bank Robber More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Index 3 reviews in total 

5 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

BRILLIANT but. . .flawed

10/10
Author: Wicked1-2 from New York
24 August 1999

Bank Robber is a rare gem of a film that mixes dark comedy with extreme social significance. The cast is an excellent eclectic mix of the serious and surreal, a bit like the film really. It has some really funny moments and some very sexy ones. The erotic stuff only lasts a few minutes but stays with you for a long time. Lisa Bonet has never been better. Patrick Dempsey, unfortunately, phones it in. It needed a Sean Penn or a Tim Roth to really make it work. Direction is good, cinematogrophy excellent and it is conceptionally intriguing, with most of the action taking place in the one room. Rent it, or if your lucky see it on the big screen late night. It's a cult film.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

good film

10/10
Author: negreadd from Romania
28 July 2006

It was a nice ,funny and interesting film, for they how have an eagle eye and a little humor. It was a good and interesting idea like Billy , the great bank robber to be in fact the poor bank robber. He wants only to have a good and lovely life with his girl friend....It was one of the best film have i ever seen, it is a transposition of the reality in a nice story...I would like to see it again...

There are many humorous things in the world: among them the white man's notion that he is less savage than the other savages." -- Mark Twain, Following the Equator People always HAVE eaten people; people always WILL eat people. You can't change human nature!" -- Flanders and Swann, The Reluctant Cannibal, At The Drop Of A Hat

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

Not an honest day, here.

4/10
Author: smatysia (feldene@comcast.net) from Houston
12 February 2002

This movie is hurt. Bad. You probably can't really blame any of the actors, although they were all bad. Most of them have done fantastic work elsewhere, so you've got to figure they were just giving the director what he wanted. The deal is that the filmmakers were shooting for camp. This is fairly dangerous, because when you miss, you are left with a boring disaster. That's what happened here. Even the sex scenes were bad and boring. (Although, I did see the R-rated version, not the original.) Don't waste your time. Grade: F

Was the above review useful to you?


Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Parents Guide Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history