Lucky You

email this story
read comments (26)
post a comment

I've been kept out of Spider-Man 3 press screenings (I plan on catching it commercially on Saturday in Manhattan), but last night I finally saw Lucky You, the Eric Bana-Drew Barrymore-Robert Duvall poker movie that's being thrown up against the Sam Rami behemoth as a kind of sacrificial lamb. Warner Bros. is calling it counter-programming, but they're basically dumping it. But I can say without question that it's a pretty good film, and by no stretch is it any kind of burn.

If I'd seen Spider-Man 3 by now I could write that Lucky You is a wiser, richer, smarter movie, and that it's much more layered and interesting and recognizably human. But I haven't so I can't. But if David Poland and Todd McCarthy's Spider-Man 3 reviews are anything to go by, Lucky You is the film to catch this weekend if you're looking for something that's reasonably satisfying and in many ways engrossing. It is even moderately touching and lightly amusing at times.

I know, I know...who needs adjectives like "reasonably": and "moderately," right? 97% of the moviegoers out there don't want a cool seasoned-atmosphere ride in casinos of Las Vegas this weekend -- they want to be smothered in CG by way of a $270 million African elephant engineered by Sony that they know deep down is going to trample them and leave them unfulfilled. Go figure.

I'm no exceptiion. If I'd had a chance to see the IMAX screening of Spider-Man 3 last night, I would have gone -- I admit it. But I'm glad I didn't because I know without really knowing that I saw a better film.

Lucky You is an absorbing, smartly written, welterweight romantic drama about a crafty gambler named Huck Cheever (Bana) who hates his father, L.C. Cheever (Duvall), and is there fore strolling around the casinos in a state of emotional retardation, and therefore in a weakened state in terms of knowing himself and playing the game in a state of full-alert readiness.

As Duvall tells him at one point, "You live your life the way you play cards, and your play cards the way you should live your life." Or something close to that.

Huck meets and falls in love with a nice girl named Billie (Barrymore), but spends part of the movie betraying her or letting her down, and the rest of the time screw- ing up and getting knocked back and always glaring at Duvall when they face each other at the poker table, but he eventually comes to a kind of emotional epiphany -- a place where he feels settled or least less conflicted.

That, more or less, is the story, and if there's a problem with the third-act resolution it's that it seems to come a little too easily as far as the Bana-Duvall conflict is concerned. But the deep Vegas-ness of this movie is what counts, and that's a result of the craft and the finely-tuned polish that comes with any Hanson film. It's layered with tangy atmosphere, thought-out older-guy dialogue, engaging performances (Bana's best since Black Hawk Down) and an aura of believability that gets you early on.

Lucky You has at least two great scenes -- a bargaining-marketing duel in a pawn shop between Bana and Phyllis Somerville (Little Children), and a kind of emotional showdown between Bana and Duvall in a Vegas luncheonette.

Plus it has an assortment of amusing wiseguy characters (including a geeky gambler who's been implanted with a pair of fake boobs as part of a bet) and a keen sense of mathematical engagement. Like any realistic poker flick it holds your attention by making you into a player -- before you know it you're doing your best to count cards and read faces and factor the odds and decide whether to raise or check or fold.

As gambling movies go, Lucky You is almost (and sometimes is) on the level of Robert Altman's California Split. It felt as satisfying as John Dahl's Rounders, and it's a hell of lot better (for my money) than The Cincinatti Kid. I'm giving it a solid 8...okay, an 8.5.

Bana is no longer an accursed actor whose presence invites or guarantees financial failure. Not that anyone expects Lucky You to make any real money, but Bana's Huck Cheever performance is...I'm not going to quite say masterful or revelatory, but I quite enjoyed his company and especially his poker intelligence from the get-go.

Principal photography on this hard-luck movie wrapped almost two years ago, and the final tab is something like $50 million bucks. It doesn't feel like $50 million -- more like $25 or $30 million, tops. It obviously tested in the toilet or Warner Bros. wouldn't have paid for extra shooting (which I think happened late last year or the previous summer -- nobody will tell me when.) Lucky You was supposed to come out 9.8.06, then 10.27.06 and then 3.16.07. And now it's being thrown to the wolves this weekend. A baahing little lamb tethered to an iron post.

John Horn reported in the L.A. Times this morning that "some half-dozen different cuts [of the film] have failed to wow preview audiences, and the studio is now cutting back on its marketing push."

A few months ago I called Lucky You the most unloved and unwanted Curtis Han- son gambling movie in U.S. history. It is still is that, but it's a better-than- decent film, and if you can't get into a particular Spider-Man 3 show this weekend you could do a lot worse than pay to see it,

Brando home movie<< previous | next >>"Spider-Man 3" money

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on May 2, 2007 at 10:34 AM

comment #1

Rich S. says ...

No wonder they held this movie back for so long. The antagonist and the conflict are lifted straight from Kicking & Screaming. Is Mike Ditka in this one, too?

Posted by Rich S. at May 2, 2007 1:18 PM

comment #2

JD says ...

Glad to hear this is quality Hanson. Knowing Jeff's enthusiasm for Hanson's past work (particularly In Her Shoes), I was a little surprised that he'd been dissing Lucky You for so long. This seems like Hanson's return to the mood and style of something like Wonder Boys... or at least I hope that's what it is. Anyway, I'm excited that TWO interesting movies from two great filmmakers are coming out this weekend.

Posted by JD at May 2, 2007 1:21 PM

comment #3

Larry says ...

Actually, this is a film I've been looking forward to for months. Glad I won't have any trouble getting tickets.

Posted by Larry at May 2, 2007 1:38 PM

comment #4

p.Vice says ...

This actually looks like a decent date movie... gambling and Drew Barrymore for the guys, romance and Eric Bana for the ladies... too bad I don't have a girlfriend cause that bitch would be having a grand night out this weekend!!!

Posted by p.Vice at May 2, 2007 1:43 PM

comment #5

jeffmcm says ...

If only Jeff could have written without reference to Spider-Man 3. It kind of deminishes the review of what might otherwise be a nice character-study movie.

Posted by jeffmcm at May 2, 2007 1:43 PM

comment #6

lesterg says ...

"and the studio is now cutting back on its marketing push."

Is that even possible? Can they spend negative dollars on advertising?

Posted by lesterg at May 2, 2007 1:55 PM

comment #7

Craig Kennedy says ...

I really hope this one is good. Something about the trailer rubbed me the wrong way and all the delays are troubling, but I'm going.

Posted by Craig Kennedy at May 2, 2007 1:56 PM

comment #8

Jeff says ...

Actually it was originally supposed to come out in Dec. of 07 the same time as Munich. It was in EW's fall preview. I remember being excited that we would get two Curtis Hanson movies and two Eric Bana movies within a few weeks of each other.

Posted by Jeff at May 2, 2007 1:59 PM

comment #9

Mr. Gittes says ...

Jeff, you didn't like Bana's performance in Munich? I thought it was excellent, better then the movie itself. Kind of like Leo in Blood Diamond.

Posted by Mr. Gittes at May 2, 2007 2:10 PM

comment #10

jeffmcm says ...

Like everyone in Black Hawk Down, Bana didn't really do anything except be a stuntman with dialogue. Munich was a vastly better performance

Posted by jeffmcm at May 2, 2007 2:13 PM

comment #11

The Movie Man says ...

Nice words, Jeff, though the comparison to CALIFORNIA SPLIT sounds bold. I like Hanson's old school-I-don't-tether-myself-to-one-genre-and-dry-hump-it-for-my-entire-career approach, and he's made some consistently wonderful films. If I get the chance I'm going to try to support this one this weekend.

Posted by The Movie Man at May 2, 2007 2:16 PM

comment #12

actionman says ...

anything written by Eric Roth and directed by Curtis Hanson will get my money

Posted by actionman at May 2, 2007 2:41 PM

comment #13

Geoff says ...

Compared to Munich, the Black Hawk Down role seems like something Bana can do in his sleep. For lack of a better word, he was just the "cool" soldier.

Posted by Geoff at May 2, 2007 2:43 PM

comment #14

tholl-yung says ...

Not as bold as this:

It doesn't seem accidental that the phrase "luck of the draw" can apply equally to cardplaying or gunslinging, or that the denouement of "Lucky You" -- a showdown between Mr. Bana's character and his nemesis, L. C., played by Robert Duvall --recalls not just the 52-card catharsis of "The Cincinnati Kid" but also the showdowns that climax many great westerns.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/29/movies/29ande.html?ex=1335499200&en=75e1e76c6eaccf3a&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

Posted by tholl-yung at May 2, 2007 2:49 PM

comment #15

Arran says ...

If I lived in the US I probably would be seeing this over the weekend to avoid the Spidey crowds. Alas, I live in New Zealand where it will probably limp on to DVD in a year. Sigh. The movie sounds like my kind of thing.

EW bitch-slapped it, mind you.

Posted by Arran at May 2, 2007 2:53 PM

comment #16

ROTC says ...

Bana's character is named "Huck," which sounds like "Hulk," which sounds like he still can't shake his cursed box-office record.

Posted by ROTC at May 2, 2007 3:22 PM

comment #17

ROTC says ...

I generally respect Jeff's opinion and taste, and this was a nicely written review, but please excuse me if I take it with a huge grain of salt.

Reality check: This isn't a throwaway actioner or horror flick. It's a character-driven drama from a highly respected director working with a well-regarded cast. Yet the studio has withheld this movie from critics because they know it's going to drop an enormous turd in their laps. Right now it's got a mere three reviews and 0% on Rotten Tomatoes. (In what many will consider an unfair comparison, Spiderman 3 is at 74%.)

Sorry, Jeff, but I suspect audiences who will rush en masse to see this weekend's CGI behemoth are probably making the overall smarter choice. And from everything I've heard, "Waitress" is the better choice for those seekiing a more intimate, character-driven alternative.

Posted by ROTC at May 2, 2007 4:05 PM

comment #18

Chris Willman says ...

I'll go see anything of Hanson's... but it is hard to imagine a less appealing trailer. (For a grown-up movie, anyway.)

Posted by Chris Willman at May 2, 2007 4:34 PM

comment #19

rr3333 says ...

Now, if they only could have gotten Bana from Seinfeld, now that would have been something.

Posted by rr3333 at May 2, 2007 4:39 PM

comment #20

tholl-yung says ...

Confession -- "The Hand That Rocks The Cradle" is almost as deeply seated in my psyche as the day I saw it. I've been wanting to see this movie since Wells called it Lucy Jew, it's so stupid, it's one of my favorite phrases.

Posted by tholl-yung at May 2, 2007 5:08 PM

comment #21

tholl-yung says ...

Lucky Jew. What the fuck is Lucy Jew? Sounds like a candy.

Posted by tholl-yung at May 2, 2007 5:10 PM

comment #22

Mike Ock says ...

Lucy Jew is the Israeli Lucy Liu.

Posted by Mike Ock at May 2, 2007 6:14 PM

comment #23

tholl-yung says ...

she's more pop tart than jujube

Posted by tholl-yung at May 2, 2007 8:16 PM

comment #24

The Winchester says ...

I've hated all teh marketing for this film, they make it look like some generic Sandra Bullcok romantic drama or some nonsense. Knowing Hanson's track record, though, I refused to believe that it was a horrible film. Glad to hear Jeff's take on it, and it's nice to hear him talking about something he actually likes (and has seen).

Posted by The Winchester at May 2, 2007 10:01 PM

comment #25

Cadavra says ...

This is a perfect example of what the industry has come to. In chasing the 14-year-old boys ("and not the smart ones"), they've pretty much turned their backs on grown-up entertainments. And when one does manage to get made, it's thrown to the wolves. Curtis is a wonderful guy and deserves better than this.

Posted by Cadavra at May 3, 2007 10:11 AM

comment #26