User reviews

First off, it's not like the pain killer shows from Netflix and Hulu, different drug. Secondly, I don't understand why people are hating on the movie. Story line is great, acting is great and it's an interesting story based on true events. Not sure what else you really need in a film to make it at a bare minimum enjoyable.

Saw a review said "it's not cool for a kid to start a forest fire." As that statement is true, the movie didn't make it cool n it's literally 7seconds of the film. Or someone else was comparing it to a Scorsese film? Lol I guess having music and interesting story makes that true? People are so sensitive and just can't enjoy a movie.

I found the movie to be very watchable & more realistic than given credit for in other reviews. It's easy to dislike a character whose behavior is unprincipled & likely to harm others, as in the case of all the main players in this film. But in doing so, you ignore the fact that people are complex, usually not all good or all bad. Circumstances can dictate behavior & should be taken into account. Liza Drake wasn't a bad person. She was a smart, desperate person looking for a way out of her dead end job & seized an opportunity that looked promising initially. Pete was more comfortable behaving unscrupulously. I think both Emily Blunt & Chris Evans brought their characters to life in a realistic way. I also feel like Liza Drake was a good mother. The reviewer who was offended by Liza's response to her daughter's fire starting was a minor incident in the story. I found the movie to be quite interesting, as well as a decent portrayal of the pharmaceutical industry. You can't ignore the headlines of the last several years.

Pain Hustlers is an opioid rendition of the Wolf of Wall Street by the way of The Big Short which means it's a really entertaining true story with a clear purpose but it's also really hard to deny that it took the safest and most boring approach to telling such an important story, drowning out the more serious aspects in favour of something more generic.

Emily Blunt is great, the film wants you to genuinely care about her despite the flaws and it's her skill that actually makes that happen. Chris Evans continues to get as far away from Captain America as humanly possible with another undemanding yet enjoyable irredeemable asshole.

It's so nice to see director David Yates finally break free of the Harry Potter franchise with something so different, even if the newfound style here is derivative and remains fairly desaturated. The needle drops are used the right amount, they work well even if some of them are incredibly obvious song choices.

Considering there are now more than 75 reviews on the movie, I'll keep it brief.

Emily Blunt, Chris Evans, Andy Garcia, Catherine O'Hara and all the actors turn in strong performances. It's really their acting that made the story engaging and effective. Especially considering the big pharma genre of drama movies has been milked a lot lately. Blunt is a stand-out here, bringing emotion to every scene she's in.

You'll get high drama, a little suspense, a few laughs and feel a connection with at least one of the main characters. You will likely also feel some anger... and compassion for Emily Blunt's character and her daughter.

It's a bit longer than I felt it should've been but it will keep you interested to see how it all comes to a head at the end. If you've got a couple hours and are looking for a dramatic story about the corruption of the pharmaceutical industry, this movie is worth the watch. A move has to be almost life-changing for me to rate it 8, 9, or10, but in my book, this one is a solid 7.

Carried by a typically strong Blunt performance, Pain Hustlers is both watchable and eye-opening, even though its dramatic impulses do kind of cancel each other out.

Directed by David Yates, who has spent most of the last two decades helming "Harry Potter" movies and prequels and might not be the best fit for this material, Pain Hustlers aims to be a fast-paced, raucous, blunt and slick work a la "The Wolf of Wall Street" and "The Big Short," but winds up caught between the worlds of breezy satire and hard truth. Emily Blunt and Chris Evans are fabulous but you'll be hard-pressed to remember anything else by the time the credits are done rolling.

But the movie does succeed in unpacking the raw grift and exploitation of the pharma sales business, and the wider dysfunction of the American health care and legal systems that allows it to go unchecked. So a thumbs up on that part.

My Rating: 6.5/10.

Give me Emily Blunt and Chris Evans plus an interesting story, I'd probably watch it!

Is this film going to change cinema forever? No.

Is it a solid film, with good comedy, multi layered story, interesting characters? Yes 100%

Don't go into this film thinking its going to be a serious drama about pharmaceutical companies and the opioid crisis. You can easily tell that by the trailer. This is much more in the vein of a "Wolf of Wall Street" type of film, although not to the same level of quality of that film.

Emily Blunt is fantastic! I mean when is she not fantastic, its so easy to under appreciate great actors not doing a "cashing in a pay check" kind of performance. Which this so easily could have been. Blunt, in a strange way, gave the film a bit of heart and something to balance against the wild drug company side of the story. Even though her character is still not a great person overall, you can still feel empathy when needed.

Chris Evans is also great and yet again getting to do stuff without wearing a costume! He is a great actor but doesn't always get to show that, I hope this gets him more work with more quality directors in the future.

Overall I enjoyed the film, I knew what I was getting myself into and it didn't disappoint in the slightest. Funny, interesting, sad and has a decent ending. Its definitely a film best suited to a streaming service, you aren't missing out on the cinema experience for this. 70% out of 100!

Charasmetic leads. Though hard to watch Captain America as an ass#ole. There have been so many shows recently about the OxyContin epidemic. This one suffers because it's at the end of the line. At least it's not an 8 part series that takes forever to tell the same story. Catherine O'Hara in a non comedic role is a joy to watch., Andy Garcia ... used to be an A class actor. Seems a bit desperate to have taken on this role. Still ... it's an important lesson. The role of big chemical companies in modern society and how they prey on the vulnerable is highlighted. Which is a good thing. Not that this will change anything.

I was busting my brain to try and remember where have I seen the same pharmaceutical sales and bribes and couldn't remember. So, WOWS ("Wolf of Wall Street") it is, from the point of comparison, but it still meets with the other movie I can't seem find in my private memory lane.

Emily Blunt's character and beginning of story are more or less the same, almost until the final act of the plot, but rather different in some ways. Blunt's Liza Drake is motivated to break her poverty cycle and wants to give better life to her daughter so she hustles with a pain killer, which she believes can do good for the pain of people with cancer.

The directing of David Yates (who got his fame from directing half of "Harry Potter" films and then plunged down with directing all of "Fantastic Beasts" trilogy) is no different or special then other movies which are based on a true, ecstatic-rise from the gutters story. He is telling a story and the narrative is of his protagonist, which is also an antagonist for some of the time.

The cast is phenomenal and Blunt leads in a spectacular way. Its fun watching Evens become a swearing dick and not the polished and shiny Captain America. Andy Garcia is stoic and good and it was nice to meet, once again, Catherine O'Hara (which her face is so recognized with 90's movies, such as: "Beetlejuice" and Kevin's mom from "Home Alone").

The grade until now is not flattering and the fact it is a Netflix production, which includes two mega stars - all are pointing it is going to be a flop and a failure, but the fact I was not interested to know the time or how much time is left sets this one as a successful big N production.

Like some other posters I am at a loss to discern why this got poor reviews. It's well made, has a great cast and is a pertinent moral tale. Blunt is the star of course and she carries the film along with Chris Evans. Based on a true story it exposes the corruption in the pharmaceutical industry that fosters greed and profit over the actual health of America's citizens. Once Blunt's character, her fellow sales people and all the immoral doctors involved in prescribing pain meds get hooked on huge payouts, no one cares about the damaged lives that resulted. It's very entertaining and very sobering and justice prevails.

This movie would normally be a 6 to 7 stars movie for me but in order to counterbalance all the ridiculous 1-3 stars, I had to put a 10. Pain Hustlers has a good story to tell with great actors but is flawed in its execution. First half is better than second half and overall it felt a bit long. The interviews portion did not work for me and felt phony. I thought the cast did great though. This is Liza's story and Emily Blunt shines in the role. She is also well supported by Chris Evans, Andy Garcia, Catherine O'Hara and Chloe Coleman. Emily and Chris have great chemistry and their scenes together are the best parts of the movie. Wish Chris was given more to do though. He was great in that last scene with Emily. Overall, I still enjoyed the movie.

Performances of the main leads (Emily Blunt and Chris Evans) were good , their chemistry was okay. Story line was also okay. Though I do get why some people would give this movie a bad ratings. However in my own opinion, I found the movie to be interesting since it was base on real life story and a good reflection on people's never-ending desires for success.

If you ask me if it's worthy to watch or not, I'd say it is. We all have various standards about what a good movie should be like, therefore I'd suggest "give it a try". If you've read terrible reviews don't mind it ,that doesn't accurately reflect the entire movie.

Liza (Emily Blunt) is broke, depressed and looking after a sick child. One day she runs into pharmaceutical company exec (Chris Evans) and takes the plunge as a sales rep selling a cancer pain relief drug to doctors. Soon she is raking in it and becomes rich and influential, but is troubled by the strategy of Evans and more particularly their boss Dr Neel (Andy Garcia) in their sales techniques.

Whilst Blunt is impressive and largely holds the film together, the overall effect is remarkably cold and flat and seems to take ages to get through its 2 hour running time. Chris Evans seems to sit at the back appearing occasionally, coming out to scream and shout a lot, whilst Garcia is actually quite good fun as the increasingly crazed, doesn't give a dam boss. Overall this could have been a sharp vicious satire on the value of money over everything else in America's prescription drug market, but instead it's a rather wasted opportunity and a somewhat uninvolving drama.

In style & content, inspired-by-truth pharma-scandal drama "Pain Hustlers" feels like it's been made many times before. Struggling single-mum Emily Blunt (daughter of Catherine O'Hara) takes a low-level sales job in Chris Evans, Andy Garcia, Amit Shah & Jay Duplass' small pain-drug company, which she saves from closure, then turns into a massive overnight success via dubious, immoral & ultimately illegal methods of 'recruiting' doctors to write scripts & bump up prescriptions. It's polished (by fine blockbuster director David Yates) but the Wells Tower screenplay and Blunt & Evans performances are tired. Big Pharma sucks - ok Hollywood, we got the memo, enough.

...which makes it less appealing since most knows how this'll go; cast saves it but barely, "Pain is Pain" is just about it and barely grazed at the root of it which I suppose is "Greed is Greed"; the less is more approach didn't work for me there but ok, a must-see and a very light 6, for the cast, who truly delivers but it ain't no John Grisham or some other Dark Waters or better yet : Erin Brockovich, comparing that to Wolf of Wall Street though, no, not really, the product those guys sell is just air and consequences are more or less psychological or what happens to people when they "just" lose everything because others placed bets on their Company, but this story is how thru a sleezy system, people who swore The Oath to do no harm actually ruin your health and/or kill you.

It's one of those movies that you finish and after an hour you don't remember it anymore, but hey, I feel like this isn't bad. It's somewhat cliché but at least in my experience it didn't become boring, it entertains you watching how they scale the business illegally and little by little they see the consequences, and at the same time there are funny lines that I feel make it not a movie so serious.

In terms of photography the film had very good scenes, in the color grade I feel that it was something very normal and I would dare say "basic (?)". I thought the editing (texts on screen, sfx) was great, good point there.

Both Emily and Chris did their jobs excellently.

Note to self: I hope Chris gets a better agent, I'd like to see him do something more impactful since his Marvel era is over. It would be cool to see him doing something like Robert Downey Jr. In Oppenheimer.

I was entertained by this movie, which should be one of the higher compliments you can give a piece of media. The acting was decent, the story was curious enough and pacing left me hooked.

I have seen people call it a wolf of wall street clone. Accurate description to be fair. It is just done to death, cautionary tales with rapid rise to success and last minute redemptions. Wolf of wall street did it best with very raw performances and spot on humor. Here you wont find very little of either. While Emily blunt gave her best, she is just very one dimensional and not very interesting. Same for Chris. Still all the same, if you do not like to read and just want to get some idea of the corrupt pharma world this can be your fix.

7(10)

This movie is polarising, no question about it. The subject is controversial. Fentanyl. Big pharma. Doctors and scripts.

I started to watch it and at first I thought it was a documentary. It's not.

I nearly pulled out at the beginning. However, the storyline of this young woman who wanted to survive by becoming a sales rep got my attention.

Her struggles, her meteoric rise to fortune from her down on her luck situation.

Casting is very good, quite believable characters although it's perhaps a caricature of the industry and the opioid crisis ? That I don't know.

One thing is certain: the movie left me disturbed and a little agitated. Hence, not a good idea to watch this movie before going to bed.

Ah, the cinema of yesteryears! When storytelling was an art form, untainted by the garish lights of commercialism. "Pain Hustlers," however, is a modern-day tale that harks back to the days when films were more than just moving pictures; they were a mirror to society.

The film's protagonist, Liza Drake, portrayed with aching vulnerability by Emily Blunt, is a modern-day anti-heroine. Her journey from a struggling single mother to a cog in the wheel of a pharmaceutical giant is a tale as old as time, yet as fresh as the morning dew. It's a story that could have been penned by the likes of Tennessee Williams, had he been born in the era of Big Pharma.

The screenplay, penned by Wells Tower, is a labyrinthine maze of ethical dilemmas and moral quandaries. It's a story that forces us to question the very fabric of our societal norms. The film's narrative is a rollercoaster ride through the murky waters of corporate America, where the line between right and wrong is as blurred as a Monet painting.

The supporting cast, including Chris Evans and Catherine O'Hara, add layers to this already complex narrative. Evans, in particular, shines as the morally ambiguous Pete Brenner, a man whose ethical compass is as fluid as mercury.

However, the film is not without its flaws. While it attempts to tackle the opioid crisis, it sometimes veers into the realm of melodrama, losing the subtlety that could have made it a modern classic.

In conclusion, "Pain Hustlers" is a film that deserves to be watched, not just for its cinematic brilliance but for the questions it raises. It's a film that doesn't just entertain but educates, making it a must-watch in these trying times.

So, dear readers, if you're in the mood for a film that combines the storytelling prowess of the Golden Age of Hollywood with the gritty realism of modern cinema, "Pain Hustlers" is the ticket for you.

This movie was ok, but there are already two other that have been made that are a lot better, and one is way better than this one. Evidently there are going to be as many movies made about the opioid/fentanyl crisis as were made about Nazis. And slashers.

So, my gripe is not so much with the quality of the acting, storyline, or directing, or production value. It is about that I already have that T-shirt. It is definitely the same ole same ole, samey-same.

Others complained about the other show on Netflix about the opioid crisis being a cheap rip-off of Dopesick. This one is a cheaper rip off of both of those.

Dopesick is the absolute class of this genera.

Main story is a sad truth. Behind peoples agony to aliviate their pain even if it's uncurable some companies take advantage of them.

So in the mail plot we have the all time goddess Emily blunt rising from her ashes trying to deal with her problems and Mr America Chris Evans that gives her a chance to involve. The story somehow starts a bit absurd but rolls somehow interesting.

The role part is kinda sloppy but does the trick to be a whole sum in general. Andy Garcia plays a mystery role but too short for his leak, however he leaves some of his material in it.

Generally the movie is flat but with some points. The cast is steady but you feel they don't cooperate as a total. Nice movie, a bit picturescue, foggy result BUT I love blunt and I like this Chris Evans macho role. It's a 7/10 from me.

Why aren't we allowed to give half star ratings? I'm actually rating this movie 6.5 stars but I'm rounding it down to 6.

Emily Blunt carried this movie, in my opinion. She was amazing and I'm reminded once again that her American accent is impeccable. Chris Evans held his own as well and he had pretty good chemistry with Blunt which I wasn't expecting but still appreciated nonetheless.

I know it's based on true events so I won't say much about the plot except that it was a riveting movie. I cheered for Liza (Blunt's character) and rooted for her success. It was fortunate that she still had a conscience in the end and didn't let greed cloud her judgement. Watching this movie also opened my eyes to how apathetic the pharma industry can be to the suffering of the general public as long as they're making a profit.