I have tremendous respect for Jessica Chastain, and to this day believe Zero Dark Thirty is highly underrated - but found Kevin Costner's Larry Bloom (Molly's father) to be far more compelling than Molly. A prickly father producing talented and jaded children is nothing new narratively speaking - but we sense Larry's pain and refrain as the movie progresses. The father who infamously forced his daughter to ski injured, was forced to refocus his condescending energy to explain to Molly her need to control men. It's clear during this final sequence this was what Sorkin was shooting at. Despite this moment of clarity I found it fairly problematic. For a fiercely independent woman trying to control men and prove her independence - it feels odd to me that three speeches from powerful men are what drive the narrative of her biopic. The first from "Player X (Michael Cera) the second from her lawyer (Idris Elba) and the third from her Dad (Costner).
Structurally, Molly's Game reminds me of the Steve Jobs film Sorkin wrote but didn't direct in 2015. Steve Jobs was also a biopic built around three formative speeches (of more accurately moments). But the shortcoming of Molly's Game is that it's protagonist despite her high stakes tables lacks the gravitas of Steve Jobs, and we can't get the same insight into Molly's motives.
The Good: Chastain, Elba, and Costner give really good performances - and Sorkin shows his talent for writing compelling dialogue as specific scenes from this film (taken in a vacuum) are absolutely brilliant.
The Bad: In a biopic, especially a narrative I think it's important that the audience either cares about the protagonist is some way, or hates them so much it's fun to root against them. Molly's Game fell awkwardly between these two cliffs, and short of what the compelling source material "could have been".