They spent all their money on the cast, who basically reprise previous roles but their characters are all surface mannerisms. Every frame is a,lame homage/copy of better mafia films but it looks like a student production... the videography is amateurish and the direction, self-consciously awkward. These high ratings have got to be from the crew and their families, real cinephiles wouldn't award an amateurish movie with high ratings.

Let's see, take some of the best mob movie actors David Proval (Sopranos),Paul Sorvino (Goodfellas) and a whole lot of guys who've played on The Sopranos stick them in 1973, in NYC how can you go wrong????

Well this one did, it wasn't so much that it was poorly done, its that it had no feeling whatsoever. I could have stopped watching this at any moment and felt that I missed nothing. Proval was a monster in The Sopranos, the intensity, the malevolence, in this role he plays the heavy, but so unconvincingly, it was like he called it in instead of owning the part.

Sorvino did a passable job, the rest, it was as comical as when Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia did their mafia episode. A stereotype with no depth.

I should note that I only know about the mafia from movies, so I can't verify or refute the depiction of the gangsters in "The Brooklyn Banker". Anyway, it had an interesting plot and an interesting set of characters. Still, I wish that it had done more to emphasize the era in which it was set by showing news clips from the era (Watergate, Vietnam, etc).

The movie's OK but no masterpiece. Mafia movies are OK to see every once in a while; otherwise they get repetitive. I'd say that the movie's worth seeing once.

Who ever would've imagined the son (Troy Garity) of people (Jane Fonda and Tom Hayden) trying to bring down Richard Nixon co-starring with someone (Paul Sorvino) who played a member of Nixon's cabinet (Henry Kissinger)?