At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

I thought this movie was a refreshing take on a story that could be told a dozen different ways. It felt real. As many people who worked in food service can tell you, there was a lot to identify with in this story.Going from finance to being a server in a chain restaurant, there will be one huge difference: in a financial job, you don't leave the work behind at the office. Unless you own the restaurant, or have major management duties, you WILL leave it physically and mentally at the end of your shift. The main character in this film experiences that. Working double shifts (been there, done that!) is one way he can accumulate hours. But once he's out there, he's OUTTA there. This is a wonderful thing. No e-mails at 3 a.m. or phone calls at 5:30 a.m. No second-guessing a decision you made that might have you fired. No waking up in a panic because you realize you sent the wrong report to the company copy center. Sweet simple absence from the place of work, in every sense, at the end of the day. Then - it starts all over again at the next scheduled shift. Jimmy, our hero, appreciates this. Who wouldn't? It's relaxing just to see that simple balance portrayed on the screen. What other things are going on shows that the job may be simple but the financial players involved are not. You don't stray far from the ways that money corrupts. Ever. All of these things, along with Ed (Danny Glover's character) commenting on what must be really important, make this film have the ring of truth for anyone who has EVER had a job. You've had a job? Then it was 9 to 5 or it was round the clock. Take your pick, which would you like? You'll pay for your choice. This movie is about the price.

Serviceable at best. You have to wonder why some movies are made. They don't have any stars or new up-'n-comers, so to speak. They aren't that entertaining, original, or well acted. The characters are bland and blase, acting to boot, of course. However, you may have one well-known actor who's looking for a paycheck late in his career. Well, that's what you've got here, isn't it?We find out that Wall Street is shallow and all about the money. Wow! that's a shocker. We also find out that there are good people eaten up by this nastiness (of course that's what we've got here, thus the movie). And that there are spouses who will support these good people through thick and thin, and that there's minor self- revelations discovered on the down side of all that corrupt success, and we also learn that some good people without money come along and can teach us lessons, lessons that can only be found at the school of hard knocks, not in your local college library. And so on. Anything you haven't seen here before? Story, acting, dialogue, all rather average. Nothing to see here, folks. Same ol' same ol'. Just might want to get your waffles to go. Move along. Next!

Just finished watching this movie. I wanted to like it. I worked in the restaurant business for 20 years and I was excited by the premise. The first 15 minutes or so really had me going. It then promptly left me "in the weeds." The script was missing the biting loss of status for its main character. There lacked an intensity of a man putting it all on the line, as well as what the true lifestyle of restaurant employees is really like. That would make a really interesting movie.This film's intentions are good, but it is a thin veneer of morality and platitudes about making an honest living. The weak plot twist involving the restaurant owner and our hero was forgettable. James Lafferty simply cannot act. This might not be obvious for those who have never been in the service industry, but many of Jim's responses to customers were filled with repressed hostility. People who live on earned tips don't make a living that way. Someone with business acumen would have a better attitude or pick a different career. Danny Glover had nothing of substance to work with. There were some nice moments, but honestly, this was no honest look at life.

As a non-Anglo professional person, having degrees which I worked hard to obtain, throughout I also worked in restaurant service and later as a chef to support those endeavors, so the premise of the film appealed to me for several reasons. Mostly because I work in what is considered to be a cerebral, academic field now where there are times you never have any personal connection with or support for or from colleagues, as compared to the team atmosphere in good kitchens.But in kitchens/restaurants I've seen them: the "wealthy" or privileged who lost their jobs having to "slum it" in places and with people they might have been polite to when being served but never considered otherwise. They never thought of them at all beyond what they needed at the moment, as people with other goals, professions or may have been artists, writers, very creative people that needed to support themselves in the gastronomy or hospitality business.It's a fictionalized account of a memoir, a comedy/drama designed to present the main character as sympathetic, and in that I felt they succeeded.Though Jimmy's attitude was, of course, about finding a job to support his now growing family he never looked down or slighted any of the other workers. Never the dreaded and ugly superiority complex for menial tasks. Some reviewers have pointed out, however, he got it easier because of his background to be accepted and trusted in such a position. I don't disagree at all, but some films don't need overthinking.I didn't feel there was any agenda here to make him some kind of hero, though there is the reality in the US of the WMC having things easier because everything was built to support and facilitate and protect them. Sometimes though? Just watch the movie. The labels of redemption, etc.? Redemption from what? The character's statement of his background, his schooling and yes, privilege might be vexing to some but it was just the truth. If you don't like what was presented and how, help change America to where there is equality away from the century spanning oppression and privilege. Help change the presentation in film too, otherwise: face the facts. He couldn't have changed who were his parents any more than anyone else, but it is what he does with the privilege that's important. He still respected and treated others well, listened to them, tried to help. Whether it succeeded later was immaterial. We were just presented a "slice of life." Jimmy lost a big job from his own culpability then went to work in a comparatively "lesser" job from the perspective of his parents and former colleagues, but found he liked it better as it was entirely more honest. One wishes more WMC might have such an awakening and the country and world would be a better place.Danny Glover was a nice but typical mentor, but it was a far better role than many he's recently played in low budget/rating action films. Otherwise, the acting was okay in general, and nothing special about the filming or location but I liked it. Yes, there were very stereotypical portrayals of minority people that lessened the whole. That crap really isn't necessary to be comical, and it just unnecessarily brought the film down a couple of levels to maybe get a laugh or two, but I liked the main characters. They were believable. The story wasn't anything new but it was an hour and a half of likability. Also was nice to see "Beetroot McKinley" again.