How to Rob a Bank (and 10 Tips to Actually Get Away with It) (2007) User Reviews

more clever than accomplished

[Buddy-51 · 5/10 · 14 March 2010]

"How to Rob a Bank" is a low-budget oddity in which a young private citizen (Nick Stahl) gets accidentally locked in a bank vault with a hot-and-sexy would-be robber (Erika Christensen). The trick is it's hard to tell whose side young Jinx is really on - the bank robbers' who are holding the employees and customers hostage on the other side of the steel door, or the cops', led by Officer Degepse (Terry Crews of "Everybody Hates Chris"), who are stuck outside the bank trying to defuse the situation. Jinx is a customer mightily ticked off at how banks literally nickel-and-dime their depositors at every opportunity - and it is anger at this outrage that may inspire him to shift his loyalties to the malefactors in the final stretch.

Written and directed by Andrews Jenkins, the movie earns more points for creativity than it does for execution. The story is often needlessly gimmicky and confusing, the direction unpolished and lacking in finesse, and the performances low on subtlety and shading (though Stahl is very good). Plus, what with its made-on-the-cheap appearance, collection of pseudo-profundities and single-set mise-en-scene, "How to Rob a Bank" definitely has a film-school-project feel to it.

Still, it's kind of fun watching the movie turn the bank-robbery formula on its head, particularly in its blurring of the lines between the hostages and the hostage-takers, the law-breakers and the law-enforcers. Plus, for a little added kick, it has the late David Carradine appearing in a cameo role right at the closing moments.

It's okay..

[blaze9847 · 5/10 · 20 May 2008]

This movie is okay for a rainy day.

The slow plot development can somewhat get annoying and the plot is overused and predictable with few minor changes. Not much thrill into the story, just slow. The ending was somewhat lame and left much to be hanging. The acting was decent with some slight humor from Terry Crews.

"Plot" About a man named Jason Taylor who was going into a bank to use the ATM to get money for food. As he learns the bank is being robbed and somehow manages to get locked in the vault with the robbers on the outside. Basically a cry of surplus charges and taking from the little guy.

Dialog is pretty cheesy at best...

If you're bored and there is nothing better.. Go for it.

Poor writing

[SnoopyStyle · 5/10 · 1 July 2014]

Jinx (Nick Stahl) is locked in the bank vault with sarcastic Jessica (Erika Christensen) tied up. He's ranting about bank service charges but he only wants his $20. Then she receives a call from Simon (Gavin Rossdale). He's the bank robber and he wants his cohort Jessica to open the vault. Police officer DeGepse (Terry Crews) is outside wondering what's going on.

Stahl and Christensen tries a bit of quirky rom-com but that mostly fails. It's trying hard with few resulting laughs. Then there is the heist scheme. It makes very little sense. It seems more reasonable for Jinx to hold up in the vault which leads to the big problem with the ending. It makes even less sense than the original scheme. It's a movie that can't be dissected logically. I like the two leads and they keep this movie from completely crashing.

Erm.... Now I know how to rob a bank

[ichocolat · 22 March 2009]

This film is not your typical run of the mill weekend show on TV, this film is different than what the cable television channels are showing feeding the masses these days.

This film is original, creative, quirky and funny. The cast are amazing, and the storyline is simply fantastically (is that even a word, I do not know, but I used it anyway, in lack of a better word) made.

I wouldn't recommend this as a thriller, as I think this is more of a dark comedy, entwined with actions and clever conversations.

This film, whilst not Oscar worthy, is good nonetheless. Issues regarding bank security, of our dislikes of banks charging us for services they were supposed to give for free to the customers, is mentioned here.

I like the way the story is told, and of the tips given. For the record, I have no intention to rob any banks (yet), but the tips do come in handy should I decide to change my career in the future.

Just sit back and enjoy yourself...and don't trust IBMD critics who vote 1 star

[Indifferent_Observer · 6/10 · 14 December 2010]

The movie itself...Not a classic, not very memorable, and very, I mean VERY unrealistic.

Still, I say who cares? Some people take every issue so seriously. I was reading one reviewer who was whining about the screens on the computers in the movie that were on for probably a whole 30 seconds...huh? People take things way to seriously. As stated the movie itself isn't the best and the ending is kind of rushed, but it has some great actors(including the late David Carradine) and its a fun flick. So, If your like me and you don't care that someone's tie didn't match their shirt then check it out.

I give it a 6 and It deserves no less then a 5

alright for ,and as a weired-wacky comedy

[beregic · 6/10 · 6 June 2008]

a "dark" comedy with some weired moments,very "new age" production style; hot babe (by universal terms at least).

i did not find it "bad" at all; i have seen better from this genre, yet there is a certain "sweetness" that will likely keep you watch on, without feeling "bored" generally(the first 5-10 minutes i found them as irrelevant), even if the whole action happens in and in-between the "valut"(Nick Stahl and Erika Christensen), bank's main floor (with the bad guys+ hostage), and the front street with Terry Crews (as the negotiator).

i say "new age" dark comedy because there are many scenes that technically suppose to be funny but they are not; such as letting you think" along the line "ok...and...?". however the plot keeps reinventing itself to the point where the unfunny becomes comic, but still with the ability to hold its course. basically if you like British humor( even if it is a Hollywood production) and looking for pure entertainment values, this might be for you. and especially if you are part of the young generation and/or withing the start of the middle age one.

i found the end to be disappointing in traditional sense and there also some references to internet use that play out right from the "regulaters" political agenda! there are way too many phones and calls involved yet i THINK i can see the sarcasm in itself (if this was intended to be commercial it definitely fails flat and the investors should demand their money back).actually the plot in itself falls flat as well, since the "surcharge" theme has been played out many times before and much better. the thing that holds quiet well the movie together are the wacky dialogs(or most of them) and the camera work. David Carradine is a nice touch even if only actually see him once(i recognized his voice from a mile away without looking into credits first).

all in all is a good "progressive" time waster. it entertains

Simple but Beautiful Enough!

[nazim_mahmood · 7/10 · 2 September 2011]

This movie is simply beautiful and surely this is not what you are expecting after hearing the title.

Though nothing remarkable happens, but it will definitely keep you in track as sufficient suspense is presented there. It reminds me of "The Blair Witch Project (1999)" where the mental pressure of fear, mystery and suspense was more intense than those were graphically presented.

Erika Christensen (Jessica) and Nick Stahl (Jinx) looks perfect in it. Especially sweet and very sexy Erika did a decent job with the role. The unspoken chemistry between them was pleasurable.

Debutant Andrews Jenkins was creative both in writing the script and directing the movie. The theme with something new in it worked well.

Not highly recommended but yet enjoyable.

Good acting, pointless snore-worthy script.

[TheEmulator23 · 3/10 · 3 July 2008]

How this was ever turned into a movie I honestly have no idea. What is even more amazing is the excellent cast would have anything to do with it. Nick Stahl, Erika Christensen, Gavin Rossdale, & Terry Crews are all quite talented, too bad they have nothing good for them to do. This reminded me of a a failed TV pilot that just wasn't any good so it wasn't aired. I respect what the writer/director was trying to do, sorry he failed miserably. This made a total of 1K in theaters then to video, and for good reason it sucks. Please don't bother wasting your time or your money with this very good looking (the cinematography is looks great) yet utterly pointless & extremely boring film.

A Fun Romp!

[review-7 · 8/10 · 28 June 2007]

It's difficult to make a film where nothing happens exciting to the viewer, but the filmmakers have done that here. Because nothing happens. And it works anyway. The cinematography is original and well done. The way the DP has the camera move gives you a real feel for the location and the claustrophobia the characters must feel. One shot in particular stands out. The camera moves from the vault back through the bank, out a bullet hole, and ends with the cops.

The dialogue is sharp and often funny. You might not be repeating any lines to your friends but the dialogue feels real. Okay, there was a little exposition, but not a lot. The exchange that ends with "I have his number if you want it" cracked me up.

The situations with cell phone use feel authentic in how they play out. The characters' frustrations and lack of cleverness is a refreshing change from most films. The editing is fairly tight. Scenes don't drag.

An allegorical take on social dynamics.

[AvihooI · 7/10 · 24 October 2009]

While the title of this movie is "How to Rob a Bank", it had only scenic reference to bank robbing. This movie really is an allegory about social dynamics; how to be a master of your own destiny (rob a bank) instead of being moderated into a meaningless controlled life by society (pretty much having very little money after paying for charges, etc...). "How to Rob a Bank" is a good movie that can be easily misunderstood if taken as either an action movie, a thriller or a straight on comedy. It has a genre of its own and a powerful message. The acting is the strongest aspect of the movie and rightly so, in order to deliver that message. The movie could have been better if it had more time to emphasize and elaborate, but then the rather short runtime of the movie (81 minutes) were quite effective. If you do watch that movie, pay attention to social dynamics instead of technical bank robbing details.

Like getting little moments stolen from you until you have nothing left.

[Charlesc-5 · 2/10 · 4 June 2008]

Sure this MAY contain spoilers, but the thing that will be more spoiled is your time by watching it. It took me a while to realize it was a "PG-13" movie, but then I realized I didn't hear any "naughty" words. This is a teenage bank robbery / hostage flick.

That would explain why people talk like teenagers, and that the cop in charge acts like a teenager, instead of like all of other hostage negotiators you may have seen in all of those "R" rated bank hostage movies. ("R" for "realistic") The biggest problem was that it was trying SO HARD to be funny, or witty, or whatever, and it was just STUPID.

Quick question for those who've seen the film. Do banks have PHONES any more? I believe they DO, but you wouldn't know it if you saw this movie. I just remember one ringing RIGHT AWAY with the cop in charge calling in like the first 3 minutes of just about every other bank hostage flick I've ever seen. I also remember the cop-in-charge REALLY knowing what he's doing, too, you know, like he's taken a class or something.

The thing that I find a real shame about this is that, technically, it was well made - all the pieces where there. The story wasn't really bad, as an outline. The DIALOG was a BIG problem, along with the lack of believable characters, and editing that was too smart for itself by way of "lock, stock and two smoking barrels" whose self-conscience style has infected cinema with its small-screen editing and overlays. Please give me a long shot and some atmosphere! There's one good thing about this film, however, Erika Christensen is HOT, and seriously, if it weren't for her, I would have stopped this within the first half hour.

A well paced and lighthearted masterpiece.

[spoon30002 · 9/10 · 13 May 2011]

The first thing I did after watching this film was take it to my friends house and watch it again. I was so taken up with the cast the witty lines and the hand to mouth existence that the main character personifies. The acting was superb with the feelings of each character portrayed so well that it's almost impossible to take your eyes off the screen. The timing of each line was done so masterfully you're drawn even further into the story. I've read some of the other reviews and I honestly believe that this film is worth far more than they're giving. It's lighthearted nature, range of believable and identifiable characters as well as the sheer brilliance of its time and pacing has made this one of my favorite films of all time.

banks

[kairingler · 7/10 · 15 July 2013]

I really liked this movie because our main character, he has some issues like me with banks and what they charge us,, they nickel and dime us for every little thing,, but besides that. I thought that this movie was very funny,, an average guy goes into a bank and somehow ends up getting locked in the vault with one of the robbers,, but she is very sexy. so not to bad for me,, the robbers on the other side of the vault however are very inept. the cops even worse. our main character has to figure out right and wrong,, and if he wants to help the cops or help the sexy young bank robber girl. I thought this movie was hilarious, definitely thrilling, and just the whole premise of getting locked in the vault,, not a bad little gem,, not gonna win an Oscar but way above average.

Nick Stahl Marathon

[yusufpiskin · 5/10 · 14 October 2020]

The plot idea is fine and the story telling is not too long.

This is so dated and noticeably low budgeted, but damn if it isn't charming. Nick Stahl playing the meandering goofball protagonist, who can be particularly clever when he wants to be, is what makes this movie click, and it's filled with a few chuckles here and there from B characters as well. I enjoyed it overall, don't expect Heat, but expect a little fun.

How to Make a Bad Movie

[quintinelroy · 23 February 2008]

How Rob a Viewer is more like it. I just saw this on On Demand HD Cable. For the first time ever with On Demand I really want my $ 6.99 back! I saw that this was an independent movie with a first time director released by IFC and it looked like it might be a cool little flick. Boy was I wrong. This thing is one of the worst films I have ever seen. If I had any power I would nominate this for a Razzie Award. It would win. Definitely the worst film of the year nomination. The story goes nowhere cinematically, photographically or thematically. Some of the acting is worse than a high school drama. Witness the exchange between the COP on the street and the angry young man trapped in the bank. I don't know if I can blame the actors as they look completely lost, as if they have no idea of what they are supposed to be doing and no direction. The lead performances are schizophrenic, without tracking any kind of performance. One minute the man trapped in the bank vault, with the horribly cheese ball sexy receptionist, is freaking out in a panic and the next he is chill and calm and delivering smooth cool lines to the femme fatal. Horrible. The dialog is trying so hard to be clever but it trips all over it's self conscious self. The clumsy attempt to message this plot out with a angry protest cry at banks for charging $ 1.50 ATM fees is laughable - but not funny.

The direction and production blatantly audition for an ultra mainstream Hollywood production in attempts to look slick and keep the camera fluid but just call attention to itself in it's half baked passionless, committee driven excuse for a movie. IFC I want my $ 6.99 back.

Clever story and script

[robertemerald · 7/10 · 2 May 2019]

Things you like outweigh the things you don't with this movie, even though it feels a tad dated now. The idea is is brilliant, and how it is conceptually put together genius. Full marks to the story/scriptwriter/storyboard artist. Luckily the two leads are charismatic and very competent actors. For me, the other bank robbers and the cop were a little cliche. Perhaps they seemed fresher back in 2007, when this movie was made. That was an opportunity lost. There was some good camera techniques and editing, but the overall colour and depth to this picture seemed a bit old TV to me. Again, maybe that's 2007. You're not wasting your time watching this movie however. It is in no way another Dog Day Afternoon. Much lower budget and besides I think this movie is aiming more at an indie Inside Man. The movie isn't overlong, which is a tick from me. It has some classy lines and the spark between the two leads is terrific. It's the kind of movie that has mastered the knack of keeping you interested without any real violence or special effects. A very clever play. If you are into crime or heist movies, then see it for it's diabolical plot!

Stunningly bad

[rgcustomer · 5/10 · 29 June 2009]

I was shocked at how bad this was. Having seen this on Canadian cable, I was certain that this was one of the movies created as filler to satisfy their Canadian-made content requirement, and I was prepared to rip into my government again for funding this. So I was somewhat pleased that, as far as I can tell, Hollywood gets to own responsibility for this mess. What is the world coming to when Canadian cable is involved a competent film like Passchendaele, and Hollywood gives us How To Rob a Bank? It's a new dawn.

The entire film seems to be about how two cute new adults can sound really really cool when they deal with all the incredibly stupid people around them. Stupid people like cops, bankers, criminal masterminds, and so on. I think the inevitable porn version of this film is actually going to have a better plot with better acting.

The story is based on the entire idea that a criminal mastermind couldn't hack a simple 4-digit PIN. There are only 10,000 possible PINs. It's not that difficult. If you are capable of hacking the system to divert service fees to another account, you can crack or reprogram a PIN.

By the way, how are they going to withdraw those funds? You can't get it out of an ATM. You have to transfer it somewhere else. And that is tracked and held, of course.

And how about the bank's own tracking software? You think they don't notice when one penny is out of place? Trust me. No fee diversion scam will work for longer than one day. Those numbers are checked so many different ways, automatically, by a separate computer. This might have made some sense at the time of Superman III, but that time has long since passed.

Bad script, bad acting, REALLY bad computer screen with nothing on it.

Really, to justify all the nonsense in this film, it really cries out for John McClane to come in and sort things out about half an hour in. That would be a great short film.

I gave it a 5 solely because the two leads aren't bad to look at.

what's with all the hatin'?

[Rob-O-Cop · 8/10 · 26 June 2008]

all the negative reviews had me worrying I was in for a dog but this was a surprisingly enjoyable romp with some good ideas, snazzy camera work and editing (almost too snazzy) and a clever way of telling the story. The movie starts part way through the story and then fills in the details as and when you need to know them. you do have to pay close attention to figure out what's going on, and why, and on some details you're left wondering, which is the one flaw in an otherwise good movie. There are some plot holes that don't hang that well, specifically to do with the account and who set it up and if they did set it up why did they need someone to put a pin number on it etc. all those details were not clear and appeared to be a major plot hole, but if you can suspend disbelief for that the rest is plain sailing. Of particular note is Erika Christensen. She has an excellent screen presence as a particularly hot bank robber tech expert and has a playful and believable interaction with Nick Stahl - good chemistry and a pleasure to watch. Some good lines and a nice bitch about bank charges etc. I enjoyed it. There are far worse movies out there and much worse ways to spend 90 mins.

Hot chick meets dude in vault

[p-stepien · 3/10 · 15 March 2010]

My summary basically points out the only reason this movie may be worth the watch. Erika Christensen is extremely hot and she gets an enormous amount of screen time. If that's enough for you to watch a movie go for it. Else - pass on the experience.

Jinx (Nick Stahl) is having a bad day. Hungry and frustrated he tries to retrieve his 20 dollars from the ATM machine only to find out that he doesn't have enough funds to pay the $1.50 surcharge. Angry he heads to his local bank unaware it was being robbed. Panicking he locks himself in the bank vault with bank robber Jessica (Erika Christensen), whom he quickly ties up. The robbers want in, whilst Jinx wants out... and his 20 bucks.

The plot actually sounds promising and given a proper director with some feel for building the suspense it might actually work. This director however went for Fight Club type editing and a script trying so hard to be intelligent, that it fails to notice how stupid it is. Add to that some really poorly acted sequences and an absolute lack of suspense and this is what you get... One of the worse bank robbery movies in living memory.

Life gets the better of us

[dimboD · 10/10 · 9 July 2014]

I rated this movie a ten not because of the brilliant actors' play the magnificent director work or the incredible make-up, I rated this movie a 10 because the screenplay is amazing. The simple truths hiding in plain sight. The value differential between one decision and another and the comatose state in which we make those decisions - there is the genius of this movie. Revealing things hiding in plain sight like the surcharges in the bank and the way small decisions can realizations can make your life different. I first watched the movie when I was 13 or 14 now I am 20 and I have watched the movie more than 6-7 times. I love it. I hope you appreciate the brilliant screenplay and the subtle messages that it tries to send through the whole situation that the movie is set in. You won't enjoy the movie if you don't want to think at all or you are too proud to recognize your blind spots...

Get ready for something different!

[humberto-7 · 1/10 · 26 February 2008]

It seems that IMDb only posts the reviews from "plants" from the people who somehow made filmed this mess. There is nothing redeemable about this tired heist premise, nothing new is brought to the table, with cliché after cliché, this movie never fails to deliver. The actors, Stahl, Christensen, Rossdale, etc seemed to have been blackmailed (or held at gun point) to star in this film and it shows since their performances are their worst, no thanks to the "wacky" tired and just bad dialog... so bad you can almost see that the actors are saying their lines as if read directly from the script... Of course some of you may think this is so bad it's good... but it's hardly as it's painful to watch how terrible the performances are as well as the story and the way the "cops" act... which in turn make the resolution the more unbelievable. A waste of film.

unbelievably bad

[c0mM3n14ry · 1/10 · 7 March 2009]

It might only tell you that I disliked the movie or maybe even didn't understand the plot when I state now that I am convinced that the screenplay writer must be a longtime cocaine addict. You might think that I am bad with people when I say that the persons in this movie must be from a different planet, that what they uttered clearly did not come from motivation but from awfully bad writing that was supposed to come over as cool.

At some point, the movie just starts to hurt the consciousness. If it doesn't hurt yours, then you either didn't see it or that you don't have consciousness.

I think I am caught in a hellish reality tunnel with a pretentious movie and people who think that the movie's displayed wannabe-coolness is to be studied and imitated in real life because it makes you feel "good" about yourself. Those are the people that get shot dead in "Dogma" by Loki while he shouts "Fakes! All of you, fakes!".

Did you read the comment "A Fun Romp!"? It describes the opposite of what I think about this movie. It is unbelievable how people can not see that this movie is a load of mind vomit.

Quirky and worth a watch

[Prometheus-101 · 8/10 · 9 November 2021]

I really enjoy this film and have watched it three or four times. It definitely has a charm about it, with quirky Tarantino-esque dialogue (though falling short of that standard) and a nice blend of lightness and drama. The characters are likable and it moves with a pace and style that draws you in. I especially like the chemistry between the two leads.

I also have to add that Erika Christensen is a revelation here - beautiful, sexy, confident, smart. It's a shame the film didn't lead to more roles like this for her, as I genuinely thinks it's a career highlight, and I'd recommend the film just for her performance alone.

Angelic Hacker

[jjjderrick · 4/10 · 7 July 2022]

I got a random blessing from a hacker Angel who contacted me after reading my post on Reddit . This dude called Royalblade cleared my medical debt and student loans. Yes you read it right, both loans that would have cost me $88,790 and 8 more years at least to pay off. Royalblade @protonmail. Com hit me up out of the blue and told me he wanted to help as his way of messing with the system . It is my biggest blessing and my miracle .

Waste of time

[danielsimms123 · 2/10 · 13 August 2013]

One of the worst films I have ever watched.

This film gets steadily worse all the way to the worst ending ever. I think the ending was trying to be deep and meaningful but actually just made no sense, even after rewinding and watching the last scene again.

The film also randomly cuts back to the title sequence for no reasons what so ever and keeps repeating the same dialogue about paying the ATM to get money out over and over and over again.

In general the story feels very dragged out, the whole thing could be covered in about 5 minuets. The characters make little sense and the camera darting around near the end for 15 minutes is just ridiculous