Unofficial Tilt review post...anyone else have a problem with...

[Gramps]

It's super-cheesy, and it's creators seem smart enough to know that and that's what type of show they've made (i.e. on purpose). I don't think they're trying to make anything more than a completely over-the-top poker soap opera with some violence and sex thrown in there (it is a mainstream American audience after all - that always sells best).

It is what it is, and as far as guilty pleasures go, I think it's entertaining. I'll certainly be quoting many lines from it in jest (or flipping up the nuts "Matador style").

Please don't take that last statement out of context...

Oh yeah, and didn't Jennifer Harmon used to play in her dad's home poker games at like 12 and take everyone's money (or win her Dad's money back)? Maybe that's where they got that story-line from.

[andyfox]

Your D+ is charitable. Everybody apparently went to "cool" acting school. The scenes are so dark: could ESPN pay for some decent lighting? The music was obnoxious. One more shot of Vegas in time lapse photography and they could put the show on the Discovery Channel.

At least they didn't let T.J. speak. That aside, an F.

[Boopotts]

This show was pre-destined to suck. Anyone who's gotten a feel for ESPN's scripted progamming had to know this show had no chance at all. Still, I agree that it was worse than I thought it would be.

What a joke. High limit players looking for vengeance, Biff and Buffy flitting around town with loads of poker-playin' talent and five figure bankrolls---puleeeze. If someone wanted to make a decent poker show, it should be a) low budget, b) center around the action in an illegal card room, and c) spend a little time exploring the debilitating effects of gambling on the gambler's family and friends. Sorry, but you can't have a show like this without showing the ramifications of this kind of lifestyle-- no way. It just isn't honest. When I was playing full time in the social clubs in Denver I knew all kinds of guys who lost EVERYTHING-- their jobs, their cars, their families-- just because they couldn't stay away from the flop. Pretending that this dynamic doesn't exist results in an imcomplete illustration of the gambling lifestyle.

[wuwei]

[ QUOTE ]
The thing is, for that scene to make sense, you'd have to do some serious background on it, so it's at least in the neighborhood of believable. That's probably not even possible. But to just cut to it and it's a 12-year-old in a big cash game? Um, WTF?

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps I'm giving them too much credit, but surely each of the back stories on why these folks hate the matador will be further developed? However, I'm not sure I'll still be watching when they do.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go relieve myself.

[Boopotts]

This show would have been 10x better if these three kids had been busted by the Matador in a straight-up honest game, and were now looking to 'take him down' (whatever that means) because they were embarrassed they lost. Instead we get this cheating crap, which so far as I can tell adds nothing meaningful to the story.

Also, kudos to you for calling out the scene with the 12 yr. old girl. Going all in for 7 grand with the second nut on a straightened out board? I don't think so.

We also need to mention that obscenely lame scene where the lead character 'sees' the set of 6's that his opponent's holding.

Jesus Christ-- thinking about it now somehow makes it even worse. I mean, it was bad at the time, but in retrospect I don't think I really appreciated how terrible it was.

[Tuds75]

How about in a satellite tournament with what looks to be close to 100 entries the 3 main characters all happen to be the last 3 left playing.

Also how little was the buy-in for satellite to only give out one seat. I mean 100 people x $100 each = $10,000
or in WPT fashion 100 people x $250 = $25,000

If the buy-in was so low why was the black guy getting so upset. He could obviously afford if (he just won a couple thousand from the bros at the strip club). Plus he has the "skill'z'" to get to every final table he could win any satellite he entered.

IF WE CAN NOTICE THESE MISTAKES COULDN'T THE PRODUCERS?

[Punker]

I'd have more of a problem watching a show about a bunch of grinders waiting for group 1-3 hands and playing limit hold'em against bad players. You may feel differently. Tape your next live session and see how entertaining it is.

No offense to everyone who hated it, but what did you really expect?

[Boopotts]

I'm really not all that impressed with someone who calls with the boss full on the river when a guy bets the nut flush. You call him down with seven-high and win, that's one thing. But there's nothing very special about dragging a pot with Q's full of sevens

[Moyer]

One thing I didn't like was that none of the featured "good" players even played straight. They were all hustling. I just hope the general public doesn't perceive this to be an ordinary occurance among top players.

I also have trouble believing that an owner of a Vegas casino would put himself at risk for a cheating poker player.

The cop thing was really confusing to me too. Why would he play w/ all that money, then go look at the tape when he lost? Really messed up.

Another weird thing was that every hand shown down seemed like something rediculous. 34s, 10-6os, etc. I realize it's no limit, be come on.

For what it's worth, I enjoyed Rounders and I still watch it occasionally. Tilt was just too much. I may try to see one more episode, but I doubt it will improve.

[Moyer]

On the plus side, the strip club scene looked an awful lot like Cheetah's. So at least part of the show was accurate. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]