A MAN IN FULL Netflix Ending Explained
Vložit
- čas přidán 1. 06. 2024
- I review, breakdown and explain A Man In Full. I discuss the Netflix show which stars Jeff Daniels as Charlie Croker as he looks to go against the banks over the debt that he owes. I react to the ending, explain the characters such as Raymond, Conrad and Roger and compare the story to the 1998 novel of the same name.
00:00 Intro
00:41 A Man In Full Breakdown
05:35 A Man In Full Review
08:29 Outro
Subscribe for more videos like this!
FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA:
letterboxd.com/BrainPilot/
/ brainpilot_
/ brainpilot_
If you enjoyed the video make sure to give it a like and comment. If there is anything you'd like to see in these videos leave a comment down below and don't forget to subscribe.
I'll see you next time.
Music: Emmit Fenn - Allegro
#AManInFull #AManInFullNetflix #AManInFullReview #AManInFullEnding #AManInFullEndingExplained - Zábava
What did you think of A Man In Full? Let me know your thoughts below!
It was quite an enjoyable watch, but all i could think when watching it was...
Who am i supposed to be routing for...?
The main character was a prick, but that main guy from the bank who was going after him was literally an insufferable douche bag, and a bigger prick that Croker. & Raymond wasn't exactly the protagonist either. Good acting, writing etc, but just needed a moral centre of some sort.
I did enjoy the watch, it just didn't have an actual protagonist that you want to get behind.
Wait, Wait, I thought when his knee was still moving at the end, it was hinting at how the bank owned his knee as Raymond's boss said to Charlie... this is a stretch, but did that mean that the bank kind of killed Charlie? His new knee was still being tested, so I assumed if there was a sequel then it would be how the bank killed him by letting him get a knee that had technology that had no credibility. Like I said, it's a stretch assumption but one to consider right?
It's also a must-watch if you liked The Comey Rule and The Newsroom, Jeff D. has so much range, I also thought the whole time Charlie had ties to the judge and was gonna get Conrad out through some old boy crap, but I'm glad they left that to his attorney who just went ape s*** in the last courtroom scene.
Piss on this hot garbage pandering to the social commentary... Couldn't last one episode😂😂😂
How can you say it was the only good thing. Who got Conrad a lawyer?? Who put up his bond? He made a promise to Jill and kept it. What angle did he have for doing any of that. I think you’ve missed a lot of the show in terms of the main character. He was self centred, driven and perhaps ruthless but behind closed doors he showed he actually cared about the people who worked for him. There aren’t many employers who during a crises would send their lawyer to help someone else and with all the financial issues he was facing he still managed to put up the bond even after his plane was taken. To say the only good thing he did was right at the end of the 6th episode means you weren’t paying attention
Exactly. He had different versions, and I admired the kind part more.
I like how vindictive the two at the bank were. They painted the main character as a villain but the show didn't really show the main character to be this gigantic capitalist pig effectively enough for me
Guy owes over a billion dollars that he’s squandered. How much more villainous did he need to be for you to realize he was the villain? Did he need to twirl a mustache for you?
Here to understand Drake
Same 💀
😂
Ayo rs😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
😂😂😂
Unfortunate… What I mean to say is 6 very sad, twisted, and unfortunate episodes for the 69 God himself. Who executively directed this movie?
Grabbed my attention right away, made me feel I was watching something similar to "house of cards" Sadly, I started losing interest on the main character by episode 4-5.
Side stories kept me watching till the end.
Yeah that's a shame! I think the story with Conrad and Roger was more interesting than the main one
I’m happy they didn’t do a side tangent of Roger and Conrad’s wife developing feelings for each other cause for a very brief second, I thought it was going that way. Cheers to no lazy writing!
I was really thinking this would happen and I was so happy when it didnt
Was so glad that didn't happen too. Would have been too derivative
The acting was OUTRAGEOUSLY outstanding. Definitely worth the watch for the acting, but the storyline is a bit weak. The one gripe I have about the show is there is NO ONE to cheer for. Not one of the main characters, MAYBE the assistant, is likeable. Roger comes close, but he sold his soul vs working for someone else or even being a community leader for change. Conrad, how many hotheads do we know in our lives, and we just end up saying, "wow, sorry, but he probably brought that on himself." On and on, but those are story quips. The acting does make it a good tier 2 watch, if you have exhausted your WATCHLIST.
Yeah the performances were great, but the story just felt a bit thin and like there wasn't really much on the line at all. I never felt the weight of the consequences etc. It all just felt like it was just happening and I didn't really care for the outcome!
I think the feeling that I couldn't root for any of the main characters is what I liked a lot. There were a lot of human decisions, not heroical one's. It actually made me root for them all equally, while despising them at the same time.
I thought Diane Lane was great! I cheered for her, especially when she told Charlie to F off!
Did anyone see the ending the way I did? His hi-tech knee electrocuted him and caused his hand contractions and his coronary. You could hear the knee buzzing while this was going on. I checked the NETFLIX website and it just said that he had a coronary. It didn't mention the knee short circuiting.
Yeah, I was thinking that too. Why have him get that special robotic knee with no payoff at the end? There had to be a reason for showing it to us. Plus during the meeting the banker guys said that he knee was experimental.
It wasn't his knee it was the spasms in his hand. This was foreshadowed in an earlier episode
You the best critic out there, Thanks and keep going!
Loved the review..
Thanks!
I agree with your review and think it is fair. The performances were very good and it was not boring. But I really do not see the connection at all between Conrad's story and Roger's and Krokers. It was like they were two completely different stories. I just do not like when shows do this. It is a cheat. The Last of Us famously did this too. Stories need to be about the main plot and side stories need to add to or illuminate something about the main plot. It is of course nice and good they did a police story with racism in this, but the rest of the story was not about that. I guess you can say Conrad's story is about how hard the little guy has to fight to win vs. a billionaire, but that connection was rather thin and esoteric. I also think they did not do enough to really show how the Concourse building was really all Charlie cared about and was his pride and joy. They told us, but it never really landed enough to really have the ending pop.
But the ending sure was a surprise and I generally liked the overall theme to that story is people on top with power or money always seem to get second and third chances, it is just sleazy how it happens sometimes.
Great show didn’t like the ending but I guess they had to wrap it up dramatically
Waiting for the sympathizer episode 3&4
The book----------------------------->This series
Neither makes much sense but at least the book had actual character arcs
I agree with your assessment of the show. It was entertaining for six episodes, the acting was excellent, the entire cast was good, but the storylines and even the characters, besides Conrad and Roger, the lawyer, and Conrad's wife, weren't all that compelling or even likable, as you said and I agree, all in all, it's pretty mediocre.
No explanation needed.
what a dumb ending. it didn't fit with the plot at all. terrible way to wrap up what was a decent plot
It did have a decent plot. But that ending wasn't creative
It’s was hard! If you know what I mean😅
Raymond’s eggplant ? 😂💀
Is Conrad dead cause his leg totally moves at the end
Conrad? Croker you mean. Yes he is dead. His leg moves because of his knees
@@unclericosfootballcamp2854 , damn forgot about the knee, crazy, lol
Nothing like the book. It made no sense without Fareeq "The Cannon" Fannon.
What did Saddlebags mean?
I'd like to know that too. It seems like Charlie was a bit of a bully to Raymond in the past, but Raymond was quite an off individual anyway.
Saddlebags was in reference to Charlie's "tell" (poker term to show someone's bluffing/losing control), where Charlie had big sweat patches, looking like saddlebags.
Considering the garbage beeing produced and aired at streaming services nowadays, I think that this is a good show to watch. You can fing many things to criticize about the main plot, side-stories, but I should say the stories are very interconnected.
I have not read the novel the show is based on, but obviously the book was aimed to adress contemporain politics. The show sould not be watched by ignoring that. It shows how political issues are more or less the same.
Just few critics for Netflix: Being an internet-based service does not necessairely mean that your shows must contain plenty of nudity which does not serve any purpose in the context of story arc.
the thing that stood out to me was when they zoomed in on his ring while opening up his glass case full of gold watches, had a masonic square and compass, implying he was some type of freemason.
Not particularly bad nor good. I would not watch it again as there was nothing memorable about it. Considering the cast, I expected better.
Who requires any kind of explanation?! The ending was pretty self-explanatory. I do love how well they laid out for us that Charlie's ex wife was still very much in love with him. Her staring at the TV screen, while sitting next to Raymond, but looking all hot for Charlie as he finished that speech, her inability to forgive him and a resentment that she couldn't let go of. It's like she just hated him because she could no longer have him, and I take it that he broke her heart in the past as well by cheating, as guys like him usually do. Raymond was only ever her way of trying to get into Charlie's skin, while of course protecting her assets.
I felt the same about it. 6/10 for mine
Yeah it's a shame!
The actor who plays Raymond is the same actor who played Wendy’s schizophrenic brother in Ozark. What a chameleon! IMO, one of the best actors working today. When he is on the screen you cannot take your eyes off him. He was outstanding in man in full and more than outstanding in Ozark. I usually don’t get emotional watching TV, but his murder scene in Ozark hit me right in the gut. Not many actors can do that. and, if his junk is as impressive as shown on man in full, he’ll be a very popular actor for a long time! Lol
You should watch banshee or searxh kurt bunker he was amazing in that
How did I totally miss that..the haircut & glasses mad him look so different
That’s why he looked familiar
The show was good apart from the storyline with the secretary and her husband. That story felt forced into this series and didn't take well with me. It feels there for all of the "woke" folk.
Harry Zale’s character had the best one liners in the series.
Kendrick Won
Kudos to Charlie!
Real man!
I heard it was sexually explicit but haven’t seen the film myself
This was awful. It has very, very little to do with the novel other than a skeletal whiteboard outline. It's like comparing a pack of ramen to a 12 course gourmet French meal. Half of the book is not there. Conrad Hensley was white & there was none of this BLM nonsense. It can't be pulled off. It's like turning War & Peace into an 8 hour miniseries.