What I meant is that Sorkin is guaranteed to have hero, while holding second nut, throw his Jaguar keys into pot.

Wolf of Wall street is a mint film

Clearly you don't know her story. I know Molly from the illegal NYC underground games long before she was busted and in turn took down many who were associated with her. In fact the remnants of her story are still playing out in Southern California card rooms with the recent shut down of the clubs in San Diego. Her story is filled with illegal unlicensed and unregulated underground games, players losing everything, insane debt, loan sharking, gambling without giving the taxman it's cut, etc etc etc.

When Rounders came out this underground society was romanticized by the general public - and it helped the poker boom. In 2016 this underbelly is still romanticized by the active poker players and 2+2 fanboys, and there is nothing wrong with that of course, but the general movie going public and politicians do not share this same romanticism that we adore. Politicians might in fact use this movie to fight against our cause, rather than to celebrate it and help us advance our legislation agenda.

Moral of my post: be careful what you wish for, you may not like the results. Molly's book: fine, no harm done. Molly's movie made with Arron Sorkin - potential for harm.

In other news: Tinfoil prices skyrocketing due to high demand for hats.

Michael Clayton had some poker scenes, and that's a great film.

Mamet's House of Games similarly, not solely a 'poker' movie but pretty good.

This brings up an interesting point: Was Steve Jobs' life interesting to him?

When you're in the nitty gritty of his story, it was really just a load of wires and computer bases.

From the outside it seems inspiring.

Well let's have a think of what the story will be (I'm buying the book as we speak):

My money's on the character being interchangeable with Famke Janssen's character in Rounders.

Therefore, for many reasons we need Rounders 2 more than Molly's game (and Runner Runner =/= Rounders 2 for a couple of reasons (Idea: Runner Runner 2 may be a good film. What would it be called?))

1) You will change your opinion about interchangeability once you learn the story, Famke Janssen's character is far more appealing.

2) I was involved in Runner Runner, they used me as one of the four leads in the DVD's documentary featurette about the online gaming industry. With that said, I truly hope there will not be a Runner Runner part 2 - in fact I wish the movie could be buried out to sea

Audiences are hit or miss at recognising his genius

Jobs wasn't actually a hardware or software engineer. He was an extremely good marketer and probably the best ever corporate leader who consistently got world class results out of the teams he lead.

Sorkin will have to learn to write about famous people I guess.

1) That's interesting. Definitely no reason why Sorkin wouldn't be involved in a film with a protagonist who is v scummy. The fact that she's a woman is interesting for a couple of reasons, one being Hollywood sandpapers character flaws for mass consumption opportunities.

2) That's interesting you were involved. I consider myself an amateur (due to lack of income) screenwriter and I find lots of good ideas in 'bad' films ie. the blueprint to a better film if different decisions had been taken.

TBH there was nothing original or unique in Runner Runner (and ive seen it 2x in case i missed something).

How about Runner Runner 2: The Full Tilt Story? (Lets focus less on the actors. Who are the characters? Whats the story?)

Well, he can obviously write about them, but will there be actors portraying Tobey Maguire, Ben Affleck, etc.? Seems unlikely they'd play themselves (especially Maguire), and portraying current popular actors is a lot trickier than representing Steve Jobs, Billy Beane or Mark Zuckerberg.

I'm guessing they make the actors generic, sort of a entourage vibe.

inb4 2nl grinders take 50 dime loans in anticipation of a 2nd poker boom

sorkin is the greatest writer in the world, this is going to be a great picture. also a high functioning crackhead.

pretty sure robl never played in molly's game.

Aaron Sorkin Snubbed!

This is off-topic, for any movie buffs that might be interested - it looks like they have betting on the Academy Awards available over at Party for a couple of the categories ..

Guess with movies, 'entertainment' and 'art' must be two different things? Probably Star Wars made more $ than all of the nominees combined?

Everyone of those films is both more entertaining and significant art than Star Wars which is simply a mediocre mass delusion of quality.

Tom Dwan will be played by Dwayne Wade.

Any way to bet against any of those movies winning? I'm willing to bet against Carol at any odds.

Damn femke was a hottie then that trashy kind of hot where you wouldn't be ashamed to tell her what you want. Jean grey

If it's a Sorkin film, it will have a few of his staples (note: this can also serve as a drinking game):

"Don't [action] like I'm other people."

"Not for nothing, but..."

Long-take, walk-and-talk shots.

"...am/are/is really quite something."

Structural possibility #1: Story will start with an unclear tense situation in present day, go back in time, then catch itself up to original tense situation, now made clearer by the back story.

"[action], don't [action], it's entirely up to you."

"You just met me. Usually it takes people the better part of an hour to [insert negative opinion]"

Appearance, even if just a cameo, of Josh Malina. (No, really. He played a Marine in A Few Good Men, the nerdy producer Jeremy in Sports Night, Sydney's assistant in The American President, a campaign manager-turned-White House staffer in The West Wing, AND he was the showrunner for Celebrity Poker Showdown. This one is a no-brainer.)

Structural possibility #2: Story is told in voice-over narration of protagonist reading a letter to a family member.

"To say nothing of the fact..."

A main character must have a strained relationship with a now-deceased father.

"This isn't happening."

Structural possibility #3: Story crosscuts between flashbacks and present day.

"If you haven't seen [insert skill], then you haven't seen Shakespeare the way it was meant to be done."

Something, something, something — "wait for it" — something bigger.

And, of course:

"Ya think?"

Absolutely. Do you remember the poker scene in the Sports Night episode "Shoe Money Tonight"?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KCwLRCvVkY

"How do you know I don't have a big house."

"A full house...You don't have a house of any sort. You don't have a pup tent."