Lucky Luke

Based on the classic characters from comic books by Morris and Goscinny , that was never meant to be an accuracy description of the existence in the Far West , but a fun satire or spoof . This amusing and funny film contains an entertaining but absurd plot , western action, crossfire , bits of campy and embarrassing humor , historical inaccuracies , and factual errors. The film deals with the famous fearless gunslinger hero from French comic books , Lucky Luke : Jean Dujardin , who is assigned by the US President to make up Daisy Town ; though , unfortunately, here doesn't appears his likeable dog . There Luke , along with his beloved speaking horse Jollie Jumper , take on dangerous gunfighters as Pat Poker , Billy the Kid : Michael Youn , and about to be hanged , being saved by Calamity Jane : Sylvie Testud and Jesse James : Melvin Poupad . Meanwhile , Luke falls in love for a beautiful girl, Belle : Alexandra Lamy .

This is an acceptable rendition packed with ridiculous situations , anachronisms , noisy action , shootouts , thrills , exaggerated characters , tongue in cheek , and lots of silly humor. Jean Dujardin is pretty well as the gunman who is ordened by the USA President to bring peace to Daisy Town where he has problems .Here Lucky suffers sad records when being a child : Mathias Sandor as young Luke , witnessed the killing of his parents . This Luke character attracted certain controversy for a gunfighter smoker ; however , considered to be one of the most popular French comic books , along with Asterix and Obelix , both of them created by Rene Goscinny . It is usually balancing among Terence Hill/Bud Spencer style movies , Lucky Luke personal drama , goofy humor , Spaghetti Western and guaranteeing gun-play , fights or stunts every few minutes. Amiable but sometimes lumbering Western satire goes on and on about the same premise , as a lot of escenes are superfluous .

The prestigious musician Bruno Coulais composes an attractive soundtrack with catching leitmotif and well conducted . Colorful and sunny cinematography by Stephane Le Parc . The motion picture was professionally directed by James Huth , though it has some flaws and gaps . He is a good writer , producer , and director who has made some decent films , such as Brice 3 , Hellphone , Serial cover , Brice de Nice and Happiness never comes alone .

Other retelling about Lucky Luke are the followings : " Lucky Luke Television series" , 8 episodes, starred and directed by Terence Hill . "Lucky Luke and the Daltons" 2004 by Philippe Haim with Til Schweiger , Ramzy Bedia , Berger , Javivi . And cartoon movie version as "Go west : a Lucky Luke adventure" 2007 ; "the new adventures of Lucky Luke" , "Ballade Del Dalton" 1978 , and "Lucky Luke the intrepid" 1971

I am an American who never really read any Lucky Luke comics. I watched this movie on the strength of its trailer, and the fact that I am an enormous fan of Goscinny's other creation, Asterix the Gaul.

Die hard Lucky Luke fans seem to dislike this movie as being untrue to the comic books, whereas people unfamiliar with the comics seem to enjoy the movie more.

I definitely fall into the latter category. I found the movie to be, generally, very pleasant, very stylish, and well-acted. From what little I know of Lucky Luke's character, I don't think the movie diverged very far from the spirit of the comics. Lucky Luke was given a back-story in the movie, and a fairly dark one, at that. It worked in the movie, I don't know how much it would have upset me, had I been a real fan of the comics.

The biggest fault I found with the movie was that the script was very weak in parts, and felt VERY rushed. I would have liked more time in the beginning of the film, to establish Daisy Town, and Luke's efforts to clean up the town. More time could have also been spent, establishing the character of the villain, Pat Poker. The movie relied on the viewer having past knowledge of many of the character, but in particular, Pat Poker had a very vague character definition.

The settings were wonderful, and the real stand-out, in my mind, was the climax of the movie, which took place in Pat Poker's hideout, It was an absolutely beautiful set, which, for me, was worth the price of admission.

I'm actually pretty surprised that this movie didn't get released in this country. It was a pretty solid action-comedy with good acting, and great style. I found that these positives made up for occasional weaknesses in the writing.

Lucky Luke is a great character. The comics are fun and funny and usually send up Westerns in amusing ways. This film is rather confusing in its tone. It is still a bit bizarre and cartoonish, with talking horses, people hiding in barrels, and Luke's ability to never miss. But then some of the thematic elements are insanely dark. It starts with the murder of Luke's parents, and at one point he considers suicide after making his first kill, something he swore he would never do. The humour can also be peculiar, such as Luke slapping a woman in the face as it's part of his tradition. That was actually the biggest laugh because it took me completely off guard. The film also has poor pacing, as there isn't one strong plot, but about 5 weak ones. It seems like a TV show edited down into a feature length film, with each segment having a clear beginning and end. Dujardin is great in the role, and gives us a likable cartoon hero that also has depth. The film looks amazing, with sweeping landscapes, brilliant costumes, and some inventive transitions and editing. I didn't laugh as much as I should, but I still enjoyed it, even if just because it had a unique tone.

The script of the first Astérix movie combined elements from a few different books and it wasn't very successful. Then came the second, which was based in a single book. This was by far the best Astérix movie. The third one was based on one of the books but had a lot of extra stuff thrown in there, and it resulted in a resounding failure. What conclusion can be drawn from this? That you should just trust Goscinny, who was a great writer, and keep your film as close as possible to his material. With this "Lucky Luke" film they picked characters and plot elements from a dozen different books, and the resulting screenplay was a huge mess.

I still enjoyed it, but I think it could have been much better.

On the bright side, the to date latest installment of Lucky Luke on the big screen can brag with great sets, customes and make-up and even some CGI one wouldn't expect from a movie that was shot on a budget of 27 million Euros (approximatly 36 million Dollars).

The obvious downside is what the movie was widely criticized for: the plot. While it has it's troubles following or even developing a story, some character traits are somewhat disregarding the comic original.

Its biggest problem still is that the movie cannot decide whether it wants to approach a western setting via emphasizing action, drama or comedy. It succeeds in neither of these approaches, leaving the audience unsatisfied. This makes it also difficult to tell which would be the appropriate audience. While the comedic reliefs are definitely hitting the sense of humor of eight year olds, the action and drama parts are far more suitable for older viewers. Or would you want your kids to see one of their comic heroes suffer a psychotic breakdown for murdering people?

The quality of acting varies both with the actors as well as in different scenes. Summed up it could be considered as adequate.

The director has some really interesting shots and angles but keeps overusing them to an extend that completely different scenes on different sets give you the feeling it was the very same scene repeated once more. Less would have been more.

If you are a die hard fan of Lucky Luke, french movies or one of the actors, it can be recommended. If you are looking for a western, a family movie or simply quality entertainment, skip this one.