As I type this, this movie sits at #83 on the all-time greatest movies list. Almost makes me guilty for only giving it a 7 and possibly dropping it to 84, but to be honest it wasn't the greatest movie I've ever seen. But it also wasn't the worst.
Paul Newman and Robert Redford are two confidence men ("con men" or "grifters") in the 1930s who cheat at cards. They cheat at cards against a wealthy New York City man and then sucker him in for what is called a "long con" or "big con". (If you like the character "Sawyer" from "Lost", this is probably your movie.) The whole second half of the movie is this long con: and will they pull it off? You won't know until the end, because the mafia and the FBI are both trying to kill them. And sometimes happy endings happen when the cops win and the cheaters lose. So don't bet on any horses until you know the score.
Anyway, it's a good film. Some parts are hard to follow in my opinion, but in a twisted sense this makes sense -- if they are conning the other cons, surely we the audience should be getting conned, too. It would be shoddy con work to let in ANYBODY, even the audience. And the acting is of course perfect because it's Newman and Redford. But also the guy from My Favorite Martian (Walston) and James Earl Jones' father. So, that's good.
They claim the music really makes the film. I disagree. The music is appropriate, but not because it matches the 1940s. Because it matches the cards used to separate the different scenes (which, by the way, I think was a great idea). To cut a review short that isn't going anywhere, this film is recommended. Not highly recommended. Not "top 100 films of all time" recommended. But you might want to see it anyway.
12 out of 19 found this helpful