Lucky Bastard

I've seen a lot of gay films, and many of them have been just okay. This one, however, was just plain bad.

There is absolutely no way any sensible person would give a meth addict $200. There is no way any sensible person would claim to have fallen in love with someone he picked up in a convenience store (especially someone in a supposed committed relationship). There is no way any sensible person would then allow that meth addict to say, "I'm yours, but you don't own me. I can fool around with whoever I want."

The implausibilities in the story are the film's major weakness. The bad acting would run a close second. The guy who plays Denny is all smirk and swagger, looking like the love child of Sting and Neil Patrick Harris. He is a complete douchebag with no redeeming qualities whatsoever. What does Rusty know about him that causes him to fall in love? That he's HIV+. And that's about it. Some argued in their review that Denny is somehow damaged and Rusty feels the need to "fix" him in the same way he restores old houses. I don't buy that at all; if that was the intent of the writer/director, it should have been set up a hell of a lot better in the early part of the film.

The actor playing Rusty is wooden and bland. At no time do we see the torture he is supposed to be suffering that leads him into this destructive relationship with Denny (which is really an extended one- night stand).

I could go on and on, but it would be as pointless as this piece of crap film.

The score, by William V. Malpede, alternates between haunting and intense. It's fantastic, and by far the only redeeming aspect of this film.

After watching about half the film I kept thinking that an educated, intelligent, successful person would never so easily hook up with some guy he had a chance encounter with at a liquor store, let alone almost immediately claim that he "really loved" the guy. And, if that wasn't sufficiently incredible, he certainly wouldn't stick around once the guy started hitting on him for money for drugs, followed by making a scene at a bar proclaiming that "you don't own me" and "I'll do whatever I want."

I even checked in this forum at that point to see what others thought about the plausibility of all this … and initially agreed 100% with a reviewer who wrote several lines beginning with "There is absolutely no way any sensible person would …" and who concluded "The implausibilities in the story are the film's major weakness." That's exactly what I felt too.

But I gave it some further thought and watched the rest of the movie … with a bit of fast-forwarding. There are a lot of people, intelligent or not, educated or not, sophisticated or not, who sometimes do totally irrational things when driven by infatuation or, more bluntly, by lust. It may imply a degree of vulnerability but people who seem to have their act together can still be vulnerable as well.

I doubt at this point in life I'd be so easily drawn into doing something so stupid, but then opportunities to be irrational with someone as sexy as the character Denny don't come my way … for reasons other than my sensible, world-weary personality.

Real people do incredibly stupid things when it comes to sex. If they're lucky, they're not too badly hurt by the experiences and they do return to making sensible choices … as was the case with Rusty.

Quite often people in movies do things that we would never do and act in a way that seems irrational to us, but most of us know real people who do such things. The news often reports on famous, supposedly well-respected, sensible people who do incredibly reckless things because of sex. We may even look back on our own lives and recall some amazingly implausible things we did … because of sex.

Nonetheless, even after accepting Rusty's illogical behavior as realistic for some emotionally fragile people and also noting that the two main characters in the movie are definitely easy on the eyes, it is still by no means a great movie. There was never any sense of Rusty being driven by his infatuation for Denny, we were just told that he really loved him and had to believe that was what was making him act foolishly. Neither the story nor the acting helped to make us understand why Rusty did what he did.

Viewers and critics have a hate-on for this film that baffles me. "Lucky Bastard" is a solid, well-told story about a man who, professionally and personally, is simply stuck. Given the opportunity to escape the pressures to move forward to which his business partner and his boyfriend each subject him, Rusty leaps at it when it appears in the form of Denny, a deeply damaged hustler and meth addict. The appeal of trying to fix Denny parallels Rusty's enjoyment of restoring old houses, Denny's emotional damage being comparable to the damage that perfectionist Rusty deals with in his work.

The principal actors handle the material well, although Timothy Cole as Rusty's business partner is the weakest member of the cast. The film is far more introspective than writer/director Everett Lewis's previous work. Lewis drew upon his own experience being in a relationship with a meth addict and much of the dialog, notably Denny's monologue on how he became involved with drugs and sex work, came from life. The result is a film that feels intimate and real. My one complaint is that it feels like there is a scene missing between Denny's final angry outburst and Rusty's sending him packing. Rusty's emotional transition feels abrupt and unmotivated. That one flaw should not dissuade anyone from seeing the film.

My final take on the title is that a Lucky Bastard is one never to have met and become entangled with a crack addict. The manipulation of educated, successful Rusty, which comes by every single word out of Denny the drug addict's mouth, seems to be remembered verbatim. Rusty's susceptibility comes in part from his being a decent guy who does not expect others to lie. Al Green sang about a kind-hearted woman who revives a poor half-frozen snake. When the snake bites her in return, he brushes aside her betrayal by reminding her that she knew what he was when she warmed him to her bosom.

Life's too short to watch bad movies, and this is one I found myself compelled to watch completely. The actors are all capable and believable in the many layers they must weave. The production values won't make you cringe, and the script manages to show a lot in a brief time, without wasting any. The music is unusually good, which is why I'm on line to find out more about it (found it as Amazon mp3 downloads). You don't need to suspend disbelief to enjoy this film. Instead, let this film lead you out of whatever naiveté insists we'd never misstep in the path of an addicted conman without conscience. Here's where you can glimpse how fallible such a belief makes you.

This was an excellent film that I didn't expect to watch. I thought I'd give it a try, as I have with many other gay-themed films, and turn it off in 15 minutes. But I couldn't. It is a very remarkable character-driven story. Other reviewers here have pointed out that the characters are at times unlikable or that their actions don't make sense. To that I would respond...that's life. And this film was extremely life-like. Certainly, there's some moments of weakness, but the dialog is very well-written and delivered. Dale Dymkoski in particular is captivating. His character is quite unlikable. At different points in the film, you want him gone, and yet your heart breaks for him. That's a great performance. The character growth in this story is something that's rare to see in any film, particularly one on this budget. Story-wise, everything comes full-circle.

As an aside, it irks me to read in some reviews that people were observed to "walk out of the theater." That's a cliché here on IMDb. Every time I read that, I know the review cannot be trusted. It's not a reaction I would expect at a film festival. I'm a lover of film, and I've never seen people leave a theater en-mass, especially one like this. Reviewers should post their review without relying on on others to back up their point of view. People that walk out of a theater do not lend credibility to a review, as they can't review something they didn't bother to watch. And maybe they were just getting snacks.