The Banker is based on real events, but the film takes significant creative liberties with the facts
The Banker, released by Apple TV+ in 2020, tells the story of Bernard Garrett Sr. and Joe Morris, two Black businessmen who posed as janitors and chauffeurs to secure loans in the 1950s and 1960s. The film is rooted in actual history—both men were real, and they did use deception to navigate a banking system that refused to lend to Black borrowers. However, the movie compresses timelines, invents scenes, and simplifies the legal and financial details in ways that change how the story feels and what it emphasizes.
The core premise is true: Garrett and Morris, unable to obtain financing through normal channels because of their race, created fictional white intermediaries to front their business deals. They succeeded in building real estate and business empires this way. But the film's version of events—including specific conversations, the exact sequence of deals, and the motivations of key characters—is largely dramatized rather than documented.
Key Takeaways
- Bernard Garrett Sr. and Joe Morris were real businessmen who used deception to secure loans in a segregated banking system during the 1950s and 1960s.
- The film compresses decades of activity into a shorter narrative and invents scenes that never happened, including specific confrontations and dialogue.
- The movie downplays the legal risks Garrett and Morris actually faced and omits some of their real business ventures entirely.
- Historical records show Garrett and Morris were more cautious and methodical than the film portrays, and their partnership ended differently than depicted.
What the film got right about Bernard Garrett and Joe Morris
Bernard Garrett Sr. did exist and was a pioneering Black businessman in Los Angeles. He did work in real estate and finance during a period when banks routinely denied loans to Black applicants, even those with strong credit and collateral. Joe Morris was also real—a businessman and Garrett's associate in various ventures. Both men did use intermediaries and deception to access capital that the banking system would not otherwise grant them.
The historical record confirms that Garrett and Morris operated during the 1950s and 1960s, a time when redlining—the practice of denying services to certain areas based on race—was legal and widespread. Banks in many regions simply would not lend to Black borrowers or in Black neighborhoods, regardless of creditworthiness. This part of the film's backdrop is accurate and reflects a real barrier that Black entrepreneurs faced.
Garrett did eventually become successful and built substantial wealth through real estate and other business interests. He was known in Los Angeles business circles and was involved in legitimate ventures. The film's central idea—that a talented businessman had to resort to deception because the system was rigged against him—captures something true about the era and Garrett's actual experience.
Where the film departs from documented history
The movie invents or significantly alters many specific events. For example, the film shows Garrett and Morris meeting a white banker named Matt Steiner (played by Samuel L. Jackson) who becomes their mentor and partner. While Garrett and Morris did work with white intermediaries, the character of Steiner and his relationship with them as portrayed in the film is largely fictional. There is no historical record of a banker by that name playing the role shown in the movie.
The film also compresses and rearranges the timeline of their activities. Real estate deals that took place over years are shown happening in months. Conversations and confrontations that appear in the script have no documented basis. The movie includes scenes of Garrett and Morris posing as janitors and chauffeurs, but the extent and specifics of these deceptions, as shown on screen, are dramatized rather than sourced from historical records.
The ending of the film suggests a particular resolution to Garrett and Morris's partnership and legal troubles. The actual outcome of their activities, including what happened to their businesses and whether they faced prosecution, differs from what the movie shows. Garrett's later life and business dealings are also simplified or omitted entirely.
The film's portrayal of the banking system and segregation
The Banker does accurately reflect the reality of segregated banking in mid-20th-century America. Banks did deny loans based on race, and this was not illegal at the time. The frustration and ingenuity that Garrett and Morris display in response to this system ring true to the historical period. The film captures the absurdity of a system that would lend money to a white man with no track record but not to a Black man with proven success.
However, the film sometimes oversimplifies the mechanics of how banking discrimination worked. It presents the problem and solution in dramatic terms that make for good cinema but gloss over the complexity of how Garrett and Morris actually navigated the system. The movie also does not deeply explore the legal risks they took or the consequences they might have faced if caught.
Why filmmakers change true stories
Films based on true events almost always alter facts for narrative purposes. A movie has two hours; real life unfolds over decades with many false starts, boring stretches, and unclear outcomes. Filmmakers compress, invent, and rearrange to create a story with clear stakes, a defined arc, and emotional payoff. This is standard practice and does not necessarily make a film dishonest—it makes it a film rather than a documentary.
The Banker's changes serve specific dramatic purposes: they create a clearer villain, a more defined partnership, and a more satisfying resolution than the messier historical record provides. Whether those changes are justified depends on what you think a film owes to the truth. Some viewers feel that taking liberties with a story about real people and real injustice is acceptable if the film's overall message is true. Others believe that specific facts matter and that inventing scenes or characters crosses a line.
How to find the real history behind the film
If you want to learn what actually happened to Bernard Garrett Sr. and Joe Morris, historical sources are limited but available. Garrett's story has been covered in business history articles and in books about Black entrepreneurship and real estate in California. Some of this material is academic and may require access through a library or university database.
The most direct approach is to search for "Bernard Garrett" and "Joe Morris" in historical archives, newspaper databases, and business history publications. The Los Angeles Public Library and the California State Library both hold materials related to Black business history in the region. Documentaries and podcasts about segregation-era banking and Black entrepreneurship sometimes cover Garrett's story with more historical detail than the film provides.
Be aware that the historical record itself is incomplete. Because much of Garrett and Morris's work involved deception and operated in gray areas of the law, not everything they did was documented in ways that survive today. This gap in the record is partly why filmmakers have room to invent—and partly why it is difficult to say with certainty what happened in every case.
Frequently Asked Questions
Did Bernard Garrett and Joe Morris actually go to jail?
The film shows legal consequences for their deception, but the historical record on whether they were actually prosecuted is unclear. What is known is that their activities were risky and could have resulted in fraud charges. The movie's portrayal of the legal outcome is not confirmed by available historical sources.
Was there really a white banker named Matt Steiner who helped them?
No. Matt Steiner is a fictional character created for the film. Garrett and Morris did work with white intermediaries and partners, but the specific character and his relationship with them as shown in the movie is invented. The film uses this character to represent the role that sympathetic white allies played, but the character himself is not based on a documented person.
How much of the movie is actually true?
The broad strokes are true: Garrett and Morris were real men, they did use deception to access capital in a segregated banking system, and they did succeed in building wealth. Specific scenes, dialogue, timelines, and some key characters are dramatized or invented. The film captures the spirit of their story more accurately than it captures the details.
Did redlining really prevent Black people from getting bank loans?
Yes. Redlining was a legal practice in which banks refused to lend in certain neighborhoods or to certain groups based on race. It was widespread in the 1950s and 1960s and was not made illegal until 1968. Garrett and Morris's need to use deception was a direct result of this system.
Where can I learn more about the real history?
Search for "Bernard Garrett" in historical databases and business history publications. The Los Angeles Public Library and California State Library hold materials on Black business history in the region. Books about segregation-era banking and redlining often mention Garrett's story, though detailed accounts are limited because much of the historical record is incomplete.