Rounders 2 - Is it possible?

[Shells]

Edward Norton teased about a “Rounders 2,” and poker players around the world couldn’t be more excited.

Do you really think 'Rounders 2' could be produced?

Edward Norton, ‘Rounders’ Co-Star, Says Movie Sequel Could Happen

 

[Backlash]

Just read the article. I am as excited as a little kid if this comes to fruition...

 

[vuk011]

I don't think the second part will ever get the glory of the first part. Mission Impossible. But I would love to watch it lol

 

[greatgame230]

I hope they make the movie will not be as good as the first one (I say this because it is practically impossible for it to be better than the first one) but I wouldn't stop watching it for anything, I really hope they can do Rounders 2

 

[rj_montana]

Rounders sequel would be absolutely brilliant. Norton was the best, loved when he mouthed off to Gramma

 

[myquickwit]

That would be awesome. I hope this happens.

 

[riverokker]

Brilliant Movie. They should really do Rounders 2. It would be a great sequel to a great poker movie.

 

[darthjewel]

No,no,no.
What a crazy idea.
Everybody knows that the best remakes are made with the actors in their early 70s.
An Matt is ONLY 49 years old.
Edward Norton may tease, but he knows they are simply too young.

 

[77ecos]

It will not be successful for one simple reason, if an impressive number playing poker and know worldwide but accept that a large percentage did not attract attention that I see as the main reason, another reason hardly would achieve a great movie, not you closer and 50% to the first ,, is a complicated and difficult the challenge will

 

[Shells]

It will not be successful for one simple reason, if an impressive number playing poker and know worldwide but accept that a large percentage did not attract attention that I see as the main reason, another reason hardly would achieve a great movie, not you closer and 50% to the first ,, is a complicated and difficult the challenge will

It may not be perfect but if the director and producers can keep as real as they can, that is a start - we have to remember the storyline is always scripted.

 

[Deeznutzzzz]

Just watched Rounders on Netflix. It's probably been 5 plus years since I saw it last. John Malkovich's character was excellent, his use of oreo cookies was a classic move. On the other hand, I felt Damon's performance was luke warm at best. A Rounders 2 movie doesn't sound as compelling as a Stu Unger movie starring Johnny Depp, for example.

 

[kkonicke]

I truly hope I'm wrong, but I've gotten my hopes up too many times to have any faith that this actually happens.

 

[DS3]

I am lukewarm on this but I think Ed Norton nails it when he says that Worm would have been 'on the fringes'. People seem to forget he had run away and disappeared at the end of the film.

Conversely, Matt Damon as Mike McDermott would have taken a different path. Gone to Vegas and stayed low profile - not gone for the public 'main event' win, too obvious. Playing high rollers and well liked, he morphs into an industry insider a la Bobby Baldwin and then ends up running a casino.

The confrontation could then be Worm has become the sophisticated scammer, taking either the casino's or their customers to the cleaners. Mike McDermott is the figure who gets to the bottom of the scam to discover it is being led by his teenage partner in crime Worm. Mike McDermott would be left with the moral dilemma of how to resolve things (again) with Worm.

What I can't see, as Ed Norton implies, is a story where the two lives thread through each others. It would not make sense.

 

[Poker_Mike]

Why be negative about a second movie?

It all depends on the writing and storyline.

If they try to do the same story as the first then it will flop.

But if they smartly elaborate on the story OR even better have a completely different poker story then it has a lot of promise.

I will watch it either way.

But, I am not holding my breath for this to come out. We will see.

Good luck !

 

[jrgum25]

It would be interesting if they made a Rounders 2 because I don't think it could ever live up to its predecessor but if they do make it you can bet I'll watch it several times because I love Rounders.

 

[Shells]

Why be negative about a second movie?

It all depends on the writing and storyline.

If they try to do the same story as the first then it will flop.

But if they smartly elaborate on the story OR even better have a completely different poker story then it has a lot of promise.

I will watch it either way.

But, I am not holding my breath for this to come out. We will see.

Good luck !

I won't be holding my breath either.

I'm thinking teasers such as this, are feelers for a couple reasons...maybe to see how relevant a particular movie actor is? and to find out if there is enough interest to seriously consider making this movie? This is not the first time this topic has been brought up, that's for sure. It has to have a good storyline or it will be forever compared to the first one or maybe they need to have a completely different cast?

 

[bablovod]

with the right storyline, the movie can be amazing.
I in any case d look if he will, Ah and already then let us to think about criticism.

 

[Poker_Mike]

I won't be holding my breath either.

I'm thinking teasers such as this, are feelers for a couple reasons...maybe to see how relevant a particular movie actor is? and to find out if there is enough interest to seriously consider making this movie? This is not the first time this topic has been brought up, that's for sure. It has to have a good storyline or it will be forever compared to the first one or maybe they need to have a completely different cast?

I don't know what they are doing by talking about a movie that doesn't exist.

The poker community is too small to support the cost of movie production.

I mean did they "feel" out the poker community before the original Rounders was made?

Maybe they did.

I think it might just keep the news leaker in the headlines and relevant?

Promises promises. When it comes out Shells I will bring the popcorn over! LOL

 

[DS3]

Poker Mike-

There are a few interesting factors to consider with a remake though - and as I say, I am lukewarm.

First, as many know a category of film exists, outside of blockbuster/franchise movie where the aim is to make money for all concerned and recoup investment- forget a large profit scenario. Writers, production crew, cast etc. all gainfully employed (very well paid) for a few months. So if you can keep cost under say $30m (and this is likely as there will not be expensive action sequences) and it takes $30m at the box office, no harm no foul.

Ed Norton and Matt Damon, if interested would be a big draw.You could likely get both to sign on for a percentage on the back end if the gross was good- with a fairly low front end guarantee. Neither 'needs' the money. As I said, fairly low production costs as the movie would feature few costly scenes.

You also have Brian Koppelman as writer/producer whose stock is high due to 'Billions' so it could be backed by HBO or a production subsidiary of WarnerMedia.

I could see it getting made...but if it was simply an exercise in cashing in and didn't really drive forwards as in independent story (as above I don't think it would work if the two main characters are in each others lives) then I would expect it to fall flat.

 

[Shells]

I don't know what they are doing by talking about a movie that doesn't exist.

The poker community is too small to support the cost of movie production.

I mean did they "feel" out the poker community before the original Rounders was made?

Maybe they did.

I think it might just keep the news leaker in the headlines and relevant?

Promises promises. When it comes out Shells I will bring the popcorn over! LOL

I like my popcorn with extra butter (real butter! yum! )

In my opinion, you are right - the poker community is a small community. I don't know how they could create new poker fans from a movie about poker these days...I'm open-minded enough to know other topics would have to be incorporated in the script. I loved the whole concept of Rounders, not just because it was about poker but the way it was presented. It was partly real and had drama and who could beat that cast! Ed Norton and Matt Damon have grown to be much bigger stars and I have this feeling the script would have to be juicy enough that they could both create a present-day character. John Malkovich, what can I say - one of the most versatile and entertaining actors of our generation - love that guy in anything he does!

I'm usually a 1/2 full kinda girl but with a little thought, I'm more 1/2 empty. It may sound a bit cynical, but I cannot possibly see how a remake or sequel could be made without a lot of comparisons to the original. Therefore, this is all about some level of publicity, in my opinion. The few documentaries on poker or interviews I've seen have tons of drama without any script - maybe there is something there to build from?

 

[0cean]

I sure hope so, I would love to see a

Rounders 2. My boyfriend was a poker dealer at the Taj when Rounders was originally filmed.​

 

[Shells]

Poker Mike-

There are a few interesting factors to consider with a remake though - and as I say, I am lukewarm.

First, as many know a category of film exists, outside of blockbuster/franchise movie where the aim is to make money for all concerned and recoup investment- forget a large profit scenario. Writers, production crew, cast etc. all gainfully employed (very well paid) for a few months. So if you can keep cost under say $30m (and this is likely as there will not be expensive action sequences) and it takes $30m at the box office, no harm no foul.

Ed Norton and Matt Damon, if interested would be a big draw.You could likely get both to sign on for a percentage on the back end if the gross was good- with a fairly low front end guarantee. Neither 'needs' the money. As I said, fairly low production costs as the movie would feature few costly scenes.

You also have Brian Koppelman as writer/producer whose stock is high due to 'Billions' so it could be backed by HBO or a production subsidiary of WarnerMedia.

I could see it getting made...but if it was simply an exercise in cashing in and didn't really drive forwards as in independent story (as above I don't think it would work if the two main characters are in each others lives) then I would expect it to fall flat.

Do you think Brian Koppelman would do the movie? It's not a matter of 'could' because we all know he is very capable. With Damon, Norton and Koppelman the price tag before there is even a script written will not likely be covered in box office or residual sales especially if they were just making a movie for the sake of making one (too many of those kinds of movies out there as it is).

I'm thinking if a young up and coming writer/director was out there and had a passion for the topic, I bet we would see a better production in the end. When one single notable actor/writer/director/producer is attached to a movie for the purpose of sales, there is no guarantee that the movie is worthy. My opinion only

 

[DS3]

Do you think Brian Koppelman would do the movie? It's not a matter of 'could' because we all know he is very capable. With Damon, Norton and Koppelman the price tag before there is even a script written will not likely be covered in box office or residual sales especially if they were just making a movie for the sake of making one (too many of those kinds of movies out there as it is).

I'm thinking if a young up and coming writer/director was out there and had a passion for the topic, I bet we would see a better production in the end. When one single notable actor/writer/director/producer is attached to a movie for the purpose of sales, there is no guarantee that the movie is worthy. My opinion only

Yes, Shells, I think Koppelman would write the movie as he is still a die hard poker fan (why he conceived Rounders in the first place, of course). I have listened to his interview podcasts over the years and the issue of poker comes up with some regularity. Let's also not forget that Damon is a poker fan too (hence my note above re Norton and Damon might be interested for the hell of it).

I think what made the movie really tick in the first place was the direction and cinematography- as John Dahl has stayed more in television since Rounders, he should be a get and I presume interested. Yet another thing to consider is Molly's Game took US$60 million domestic and international at the box office (with a production budget of US$30 million)- and that was definitely a niche movie.

However, this is where I am with you I think Shells, and those who are underwhelmed at the prospect. It could get financed and made, and everyone enjoy a nice pay day- if not in Hollywood blockbuster terms, certainly in real world terms. But, does the movie lend itself to a sequel? I am not sure it does so and I would hate to see a Rounders 2 that felt contrived, a step too far.

 

[Aldorabe]

Edward Norton teased about a “Rounders 2,” and poker players around the world couldn’t be more excited.

Do you really think 'Rounders 2' could be produced?

Edward Norton, ‘Rounders’ Co-Star, Says Movie Sequel Could Happen

I read the article I am very excited [emoji7]

 

[Shells]

Yes, Shells, I think Koppelman would write the movie as he is still a die hard poker fan (why he conceived Rounders in the first place, of course). I have listened to his interview podcasts over the years and the issue of poker comes up with some regularity. Let's also not forget that Damon is a poker fan too (hence my note above re Norton and Damon might be interested for the hell of it).

I think what made the movie really tick in the first place was the direction and cinematography- as John Dahl has stayed more in television since Rounders, he should be a get and I presume interested. Yet another thing to consider is Molly's Game took US$60 million domestic and international at the box office (with a production budget of US$30 million)- and that was definitely a niche movie.

However, this is where I am with you I think Shells, and those who are underwhelmed at the prospect. It could get financed and made, and everyone enjoy a nice pay day- if not in Hollywood blockbuster terms, certainly in real world terms. But, does the movie lend itself to a sequel? I am not sure it does so and I would hate to see a Rounders 2 that felt contrived, a step too far.

Agree, DS. Time will tell!

I am definitely not opposed to a Part Deux of Rounders, at all! Only a little skeptical as to how appealing the finished product would be in the end - this doesn't mean I wouldn't watch it though.

(side note - I think this is the 3rd time this year, that I've read, something has been said in regards to a Rounders movie...just saying)