Amazon has
Dumb Money (2023) (Digital 4K UHD Movie) on sale for
$4.99.
Note: Eligible Prime members may apply earned No-Rush Shipping credits to this purchase (
check balance).
Microsoft Store has
Dumb Money (2023) (Digital 4K UHD Movie) on sale for
$4.99.
Apple iTunes has
Dumb Money (2023) (Digital 4K UHD Movie) on sale for
$4.99.
VUDU has
Dumb Money (2023) (Digital 4K UHD Movie) on sale for
$5.
Thanks to Community Member
starbearer92 for finding this deal.
About this Movie:- Dumb Money is the ultimate David vs. Goliath tale, based on the insane true story of everyday people who flipped the script on Wall Street and got rich by turning GameStop (yes, the mall videogame store) into the world's hottest company. In the middle of everything is regular guy Keith Gill (Paul Dano), who starts it all by sinking his life savings into the stock and posting about it. When his social posts start blowing up, so does his life and the lives of everyone following him. As a stock tip becomes a movement, everyone gets rich - until the billionaires fight back, and both sides find their worlds turned upside down.
Leave a Comment
Top Comments
But they made one 'artistic' choice that I think was ill-conceived, and I'm sure hurt its theatrical success. And that is they put in a lot of needless profanity into the movie; thus making it R-rated, limiting its reach. I suspect starting out they probably felt the audience may find subject matter too dry (stocks and Wall Street etc); that they ought to insert some raunchy humor. But this movie didn't need such humor to shine, and in fact comes across as jarring in a feel-good underdog story.
As an example of how needless it is - multiple times background soundtrack comes up with songs that have extremely profane lyrics. There is no reason to have such songs there in those instances. Any upbeat song with catchy lyrics would have sufficed. Another example - There is a 5-second throwaway scene where a girl puts her hand down another girl's panties in a party. Again, very clearly a needless attempt of them trying to 'spice up' the movie.
Now personally, I'm not taken aback by such humor, and in fact enjoyed it. However, I cannot shake the feeling that this decision of theirs actually did a great disservice to an otherwise excellent movie. Nobody that chose to see this movie in theaters, did so because they wanted to see raunchy humor. The movie was about a regular guy going up against Wall Street. The target audience that wanted to see an underdog story would have been served just as well by a PG-13 movie without sacrificing anything in terms of overall impact. And having made the decision to include such humor, they didn't even sell the movie as a raunchy comedy, so even that audience skipped this one.
The movie made only about $13 million in US+Canada in its theatrical run. I think it deserved a lot more. A prime example of bad decision making in terms of what rating it ought to be coupled with bad marketing.
38 Comments
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
https://www.rottentomat
Our community has rated this post as helpful. If you agree, why not thank starbearer92
Our community has rated this post as helpful. If you agree, why not thank WayneTeK
Our community has rated this post as helpful. If you agree, why not thank Hellyea
Amazon [amazon.com]
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
But they made one 'artistic' choice that I think was ill-conceived, and I'm sure hurt its theatrical success. And that is they put in a lot of needless profanity into the movie; thus making it R-rated, limiting its reach. I suspect starting out they probably felt the audience may find subject matter too dry (stocks and Wall Street etc); that they ought to insert some raunchy humor. But this movie didn't need such humor to shine, and in fact comes across as jarring in a feel-good underdog story.
As an example of how needless it is - multiple times background soundtrack comes up with songs that have extremely profane lyrics. There is no reason to have such songs there in those instances. Any upbeat song with catchy lyrics would have sufficed. Another example - There is a 5-second throwaway scene where a girl puts her hand down another girl's panties in a party. Again, very clearly a needless attempt of them trying to 'spice up' the movie.
Now personally, I'm not taken aback by such humor, and in fact enjoyed it. However, I cannot shake the feeling that this decision of theirs actually did a great disservice to an otherwise excellent movie. Nobody that chose to see this movie in theaters, did so because they wanted to see raunchy humor. The movie was about a regular guy going up against Wall Street. The target audience that wanted to see an underdog story would have been served just as well by a PG-13 movie without sacrificing anything in terms of overall impact. And having made the decision to include such humor, they didn't even sell the movie as a raunchy comedy, so even that audience skipped this one.
The movie made only about $13 million in US+Canada in its theatrical run. I think it deserved a lot more. A prime example of bad decision making in terms of what rating it ought to be coupled with bad marketing.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
Leave a Comment