The 55 scene
Would that actually be possible?
shareIs it possible I could make a no look full court shot? Sure. I wouldn't bet millions on it. Priming is weak, but this movie, playing off Derren Brown's schtick, makes it seem like puppet-master level control. It's like if one pair of black shoes is marginally more attractive with your attire than another pair -- every little bit helps, but you ain't gonna bang Margot Robbie. There are other more important factors, but "pickup artist" hucksters can't change your income, jawline, or height, so they sell these tricks the way priests sell prayer. It's all a con.
sharewhen she asked if he had lost what would he have done he did say "we would have kept playing". it was just the odds that eventually on those 50/50 bets he would win eventually. All he had to do was act devastated when losing.
I think that scene is actually one of the few well done parts of the film.
I didnt buy the cheesy modern hipster con artist group pick pocketing. that was dumb af. But everything we had learned about Nicky's character until then (or maybe it was used to prime Jess so she would truly appear devastated) pointed to him doing that.
I thought rather than it being a con it was just the dark path the story took (Nicky losing the cash and fucking over the crew)
when she asked if he had lost what would he have done he did say "we would have kept playing". it was just the odds that eventually on those 50/50 bets he would win eventually. All he had to do was act devastated when losing.
It's been a while since I've seen the movie, but if his contingency plan was to keep playing 50/50 bets, then his mark would have to already be broke due to the fact he's an all-time moron. The bet wasn't for Smith to win his money back, but to come back a winner, which means odds (i.e., a non-even bet, either in terms of probability and/or payoff). If you owe me a 100K, we're not going to flip a coin to see if I'll pay you a 100K, unless I'm getting a huge payoff (substantially more than 300K). If you're offering highly improbability bets, then our wannabe clever protagonist likely compounds his deficits.
Also, it's intuitively obvious to everybdoy that if you play Smith's game often enough, you're bound to lose eventually. The odds are NOT 50/50; given enough trials, they approach 100%. If there were enough trials, then the eventual loser would commonly expect an opportunity to win HIS money back. share
the odds were consistently double or nothing. Smith loses his 10 k or wins 20k. he loses his 100k or wins 200k. he wins 2.4 million, or loses his 1.2 million.
not all the bets were 50/50 odds.
the thing is the audience didn't know that was Smiths plan (or wasn't supposed to) or nor did smiths mark. and he was a known obsessive gambler. I know it's because "the plot demanded it" but the description of the marks character would fall in line with this. the mark wasn't some small millionaire who would lose 2 million and be devastated. He seemed on billionaire level and was a well know gambler.
Although he did seem sympathetic to smith losing, likely there was a plan (due to the plot contrivance) of course to keep him interested and take the next bet.