अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंShane Bradley, who is fixated on ideas of luck and destiny, tries to win the girl of his dreams. After their relationship falters, Shane begins to think he might be unlucky and turns to gamb... सभी पढ़ेंShane Bradley, who is fixated on ideas of luck and destiny, tries to win the girl of his dreams. After their relationship falters, Shane begins to think he might be unlucky and turns to gambling as an outlet for his obsession.Shane Bradley, who is fixated on ideas of luck and destiny, tries to win the girl of his dreams. After their relationship falters, Shane begins to think he might be unlucky and turns to gambling as an outlet for his obsession.
- पुरस्कार
- 2 जीत और कुल 1 नामांकन
Jefferson Mappin
- Bad Guy #1
- (as Jefferson Mappins)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
This movie is about swearing, smoking, drinking and gambling -- and, only incidentally, the 1972 Canada-Russia hockey series. Even if you enjoy those pursuits, I can't imagine you liking it.
Maybe it's just me, but sitting around watching a bunch of losers keep losing seemed like a waste of time. The only character of interest was played by Sarah Polley. In fact, the only reason I gave this movie any stars was because of the presence of Sarah Polley. Unfortunately, she only appeared in a few too-short scenes. Any film with Sarah Polley automatically gets three extra stars from me. Three plus zero equals . . .
The script is ludicrous and might be better titled "Deus ex Machina Madness" for the number of irritating, out-of-the-blue, bizarre plot twists.
The longer I watched "Luck" the more I wondered, "What were these people thinking?" The director/writer, the producers, the funding agencies? Even Sarah -- what convinced her to waste her talent in what I found to be a very unsatisfying, almost shallow movie?
And I'm even Canadian, for chrissake! I love the legend of the 1972 series. What a waste.
Maybe it's just me, but sitting around watching a bunch of losers keep losing seemed like a waste of time. The only character of interest was played by Sarah Polley. In fact, the only reason I gave this movie any stars was because of the presence of Sarah Polley. Unfortunately, she only appeared in a few too-short scenes. Any film with Sarah Polley automatically gets three extra stars from me. Three plus zero equals . . .
The script is ludicrous and might be better titled "Deus ex Machina Madness" for the number of irritating, out-of-the-blue, bizarre plot twists.
The longer I watched "Luck" the more I wondered, "What were these people thinking?" The director/writer, the producers, the funding agencies? Even Sarah -- what convinced her to waste her talent in what I found to be a very unsatisfying, almost shallow movie?
And I'm even Canadian, for chrissake! I love the legend of the 1972 series. What a waste.
I saw this movie only once on the island of Phuket in Thailand. It was on an English movie channel ... no one i know remembers hearing of the movie except a friend who was also in Thailand at the time. Hope to locate it online somewhere
I really liked this movie and will buy it for sure when it comes out on DVD. It was funny, touching, and then funny again all throughout the film. The performances were great, there were so many great lines and I LOVED the ending!!
It is just too bad that this fully Canadian made film had such poor publicity (a few commercials during the hockey games) and poor distribution in Canada. What is wrong with this country? We seem to only want to celebrate our talent that has made it in the USA - and totally ignore the great talent we have working up here. It is a total shame, and doesn't make things look hopeful for the mounds of aspiring actors, directors and writers that want to live and work in the industry up here.
This movie was great - and more enjoyable than a lot of the big budget Hollywood hype I've seen lately. I really really hope it finds a following on Video and DVD when it eventually gets released to this market.
It is just too bad that this fully Canadian made film had such poor publicity (a few commercials during the hockey games) and poor distribution in Canada. What is wrong with this country? We seem to only want to celebrate our talent that has made it in the USA - and totally ignore the great talent we have working up here. It is a total shame, and doesn't make things look hopeful for the mounds of aspiring actors, directors and writers that want to live and work in the industry up here.
This movie was great - and more enjoyable than a lot of the big budget Hollywood hype I've seen lately. I really really hope it finds a following on Video and DVD when it eventually gets released to this market.
10lahdidah
I saw this movie at a screening in Austin during the South by Southwest Film Festival. I have to say that, though I saw many amazing movies, this was my true favorite. The audience was completely caught up in the movie, with collective gasps and laughter in all the right places.
The movie is very well written, and the acting superb. I could not find any one flaw that stood out. It's not quite as "glossy" as a large-studio movie, but that actually works to the movie's advantage.
Luke Kirby is wonderful in his role as Shane, and Sarah Polley is great as the best friend/girl that he wants.
The movie offers great one-liners, incredibly emotional moments, and a perfect ending. I don't know if this will ever be released widely, but if you get a chance to see it I strongly encourage it.
The movie is very well written, and the acting superb. I could not find any one flaw that stood out. It's not quite as "glossy" as a large-studio movie, but that actually works to the movie's advantage.
Luke Kirby is wonderful in his role as Shane, and Sarah Polley is great as the best friend/girl that he wants.
The movie offers great one-liners, incredibly emotional moments, and a perfect ending. I don't know if this will ever be released widely, but if you get a chance to see it I strongly encourage it.
first caught snippets while flipping channels, each time watched a little more, knew i had to catch it from the start, and was just blown away when i did.
i loved the pacing, the development, the structure (especially how it starts as the Gamblers Anon meeting speech, which then catches up to itself mid-story). i loved the casting, the 4 buddies -- this is definitely "a guys movie" -- women were very secondary in the characters' lives -- that's why Shane doesn't have a clue what to do when he likes a girl. and the nerdy guy who keeps making the buzz-kill comments -- i love the way he was written into their crew. it always seemed like there was one of those guys around. and i love how the guys tell him to shut up & go away, but he keeps hanging around.
and Jed Rees! who is similarly great in Men With Brooms and the Chris Issac show -- i'm lovin' this guy more every time i see him. and he really goes for it in this one. he's got a Nicholson or Spader-like half-craziness in his characterizations -- but not sinister axe-murderer Jack, more self-destructive crazy, Canadian-crazy, half unhinged, but the worst thing he'll do is attack a table -- a Canadian crazy-Jack. love it. mesmerizing crazy eyes & face.
maybe it's cuz i lived thru that time, but it was all so real -- the first crummy house, typing in the kitchen, the ratty couch and TV, oh, and the stubbies!! props to the props peeps! and Shane's shyness around the girl. and all the twists at the end when Shane keeps losing it to this addiction of gambling, which i don't know much about, but this sure took me into that world -- how this non-gambling guy can fall so deep so quick.
and how the story is set around the '72 series -- i thought that was just great. somebody needed to do it. a real-world Shakespearian drama, and weaving all these different personalities into it.
it appears really low-budget/indi, but Real Well Done low-budget -- the way it should be.
i loved the pacing, the development, the structure (especially how it starts as the Gamblers Anon meeting speech, which then catches up to itself mid-story). i loved the casting, the 4 buddies -- this is definitely "a guys movie" -- women were very secondary in the characters' lives -- that's why Shane doesn't have a clue what to do when he likes a girl. and the nerdy guy who keeps making the buzz-kill comments -- i love the way he was written into their crew. it always seemed like there was one of those guys around. and i love how the guys tell him to shut up & go away, but he keeps hanging around.
and Jed Rees! who is similarly great in Men With Brooms and the Chris Issac show -- i'm lovin' this guy more every time i see him. and he really goes for it in this one. he's got a Nicholson or Spader-like half-craziness in his characterizations -- but not sinister axe-murderer Jack, more self-destructive crazy, Canadian-crazy, half unhinged, but the worst thing he'll do is attack a table -- a Canadian crazy-Jack. love it. mesmerizing crazy eyes & face.
maybe it's cuz i lived thru that time, but it was all so real -- the first crummy house, typing in the kitchen, the ratty couch and TV, oh, and the stubbies!! props to the props peeps! and Shane's shyness around the girl. and all the twists at the end when Shane keeps losing it to this addiction of gambling, which i don't know much about, but this sure took me into that world -- how this non-gambling guy can fall so deep so quick.
and how the story is set around the '72 series -- i thought that was just great. somebody needed to do it. a real-world Shakespearian drama, and weaving all these different personalities into it.
it appears really low-budget/indi, but Real Well Done low-budget -- the way it should be.
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
विवरण
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- CA$20,00,000(अनुमानित)
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें