mack-royal murky and not terribly clever. Tim Curry and Forrest Whitaker couldn't save it. With a world full of movies to choose from... despite the alluring title... don't bother Now the silly IMDb program is telling me I need ten lines or my review won't appear. Isn't THAT special. Not only that I can't use junk words. Back to the movies. It is not a very good movie. Your time is better spent elsewhere. IMDb. I'm in IMDb. That should tell you something. Ever since it became dead cheap and technically EASY to make a movie, all sorts of trash has turned up.So, get your friends, get a camera and have at it. Your efforts will probably be a lot sadder than Four Dogs Playing Go Fish. It is not easy to make a good movie. Believe me. It's not even easy to write a good, short review and leave it at that. Such is life. Reminds me, Ned Kelly with Orlando Bloom and whatsisname was great. He's barely dead and already I can't remember Heath Ledger's name. Also, see him in Casanova.. really good.

NightCrawler92 I don't know much about movies in general, and I don't understand what "film noir" is. The only thing I can say about this film is that the first scenes in Argentina were very poorly done, it was obvious that they didn't film it here. I was really upset when I saw those people speaking mexican in the Buenos Aires port. The rest of the film was too predictable for me.I give it a 3 out of 10.

sibisi73 A stylish thriller, with one major let-down: the whole premise is just so unbelievable that you really need to be able to suspend your disbelief for this one. Four young art thieves, and their mentor (a surprisingly good, but underused Tim Curry), steal a priceless statue from an Argentinian millionaire, (a surprisingly good, but underused ex-James Bond, George Lazenby!) and ship it back to the States on a cargo ship. Recipient of the said statue hears that it isn't on the ship, and promises to kill all five if it isn't delivered - or make them pay $1 million. So, what would you do? Wait and see if it turns up, do a runner and leave the country? Or build up some elaborate insurance scam whereby one of you has to kill another one, so the rest of the gang can claim $1 million insurance? They opt for the latter, and all reality goes out of the window. It's a shame, because the four 'friends' are good together, and there are some genuine thrilling moments. Its pretensions to film noir are justified an only a few occasions, and the 'twist' ending doesn't really make up for the plotholes.That said, certainly worth a look.

PabloGT There is one thing I dislike the most about certain movies, and this is when they pretend to be smart, well-made, and to be something, while they indeed lack details, arguments, script, and the acting capacity of its stars is not even considered. This is all about "Four Dogs Playing Poker". At a certain moment you feel that you left your brain somewhere else, because you can't believe what you are seeing. One can be mislead, though. You see big names, i.e., Tim Curry, Forrest Whitaker, playing small roles, and you immediately presume that you are in front of a piece-of-art that has convinced those big names to work almost for free just to help a young and gifted director. I don't want to judge their intentions, but I can tell that the only good thing about "Four Dogs Playing Poker" is that keep you all the time filling up all the details that are missing. I don't want to tell you what details are missing, I prefer that you rent the movie, see it when you have nothing to do, and challenge your brain to find out all those things that make no sense at all. If the movie wanted to play a little bit serious, it should have joked about the stupid idea of its main characters, and show how unproductive it was at the end. That would have at least save the day. In a scale of 1 to 10, let not be so hard on them, let's give a 3+.