Croupier
- 1998
- Tous publics
- 1h 34m
IMDb RATING
7.0/10
24K
YOUR RATING
An aspiring writer is hired as a croupier at a casino, where he realizes that his life as a croupier would make a great novel.An aspiring writer is hired as a croupier at a casino, where he realizes that his life as a croupier would make a great novel.An aspiring writer is hired as a croupier at a casino, where he realizes that his life as a croupier would make a great novel.
- Awards
- 1 win & 2 nominations total
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
"Croupier" is a British neo-noir. It has a detached character (or even better, two characters) who progressively get involved in a shadowy world from an apparently safe beginning, it has voice-overs, lots of artistic and original swearing, a depressing atmosphere and if you don't feel like lighting a cigarette with a Zippo after the movie is over, you're dead. Clive Owen gives an amazing performance as the croupier of the title, who is very conscious of his split personalities: Jack, a gambler, the writer who works in the casino to pay the bills, and Jake, a croupier, a man who enjoys watching his customers losing all his money and who makes sure he's always dealing the cards. In the end, Jack loses and Jake wins. The message is delivered in the least subtle way possible, Hell, the voice-over is practically an intellectual analysis on the movie's meaning, but it works because Jack/Jake is an amazingly engaging character and because the movie is so well directed. The crime plot, although not surprising in the least, develops itself smoothly and contains lots of unexpected sources of humor. "Croupier" is a very stylish and criminally underrated neo-noir that beats the living crap out of most of recent Hollywood releases centering about a big robbery or con. It might be heavy-handed, but it's conscious of where its strenghts lie, and Wilson is great. Why it's so criminally underrated... I don't have the faintest about.
I vaguely remembered when CROUPIER was released in 1998 . It was a heist movie directed by Mike Hodges of GET CARTER fame and it`s a movie that brought Clive Owen to everyone`s notice , but it was a movie I never got round to seeing until a few nights ago when channel 4 broadcast it.
Right away I was convinced that I was going to be watching something that was influenced by CASINO , Hodges directing style of this movie screamed at me Scorsese , Scorsese , Scorsese but after the first ten or so minutes that struck me the movie might not be going anywhere it finally finds its feet . CROUPIER might not be the most compelling movie I`ve seen all year but it is a very interesting drama as we follow Jack Manfred a wannabe writer who works in a casino .
Two things I should point out though : First of all a lot of reviews I read when the movie was originally released is that they over stated the point about this being a " heist " movie when in fact it`s more of a drama . If you`re expecting something along the lines of OCEANS ELEVEN you`re going to be disappointed . Secondly if you have no interest whatsoever in what croupiers or frustrated writers do for a living you`ll probably have little desire in watching this movie . Like I said this is mainly a drama than a crime film and I must say that Hodges has perfectly captured the rather impersonal , empty and lonely atmosphere of London very well , and seeing as Clive Owen seems really at home in a casino wearing a tuxedo he wins my nomination as the next Bond . James Bond
I did start off this review by criticising the start of this movie so I`ll finish by criticising the ending . It`s not the worst ending I`ve ever seen in a movie but I can`t help feeling cheated by the last twenty minutes which sees an unlikely plot twist of Jack visiting a morgue along with some unlikely dialogue with a policeman . We`re also treated to Jack having a telephone conversation which does seem ridiculous almost as though the screenwriter didn`t know how to finish off the screenplay along with a faintly ridiculous final scene
Right away I was convinced that I was going to be watching something that was influenced by CASINO , Hodges directing style of this movie screamed at me Scorsese , Scorsese , Scorsese but after the first ten or so minutes that struck me the movie might not be going anywhere it finally finds its feet . CROUPIER might not be the most compelling movie I`ve seen all year but it is a very interesting drama as we follow Jack Manfred a wannabe writer who works in a casino .
Two things I should point out though : First of all a lot of reviews I read when the movie was originally released is that they over stated the point about this being a " heist " movie when in fact it`s more of a drama . If you`re expecting something along the lines of OCEANS ELEVEN you`re going to be disappointed . Secondly if you have no interest whatsoever in what croupiers or frustrated writers do for a living you`ll probably have little desire in watching this movie . Like I said this is mainly a drama than a crime film and I must say that Hodges has perfectly captured the rather impersonal , empty and lonely atmosphere of London very well , and seeing as Clive Owen seems really at home in a casino wearing a tuxedo he wins my nomination as the next Bond . James Bond
I did start off this review by criticising the start of this movie so I`ll finish by criticising the ending . It`s not the worst ending I`ve ever seen in a movie but I can`t help feeling cheated by the last twenty minutes which sees an unlikely plot twist of Jack visiting a morgue along with some unlikely dialogue with a policeman . We`re also treated to Jack having a telephone conversation which does seem ridiculous almost as though the screenwriter didn`t know how to finish off the screenplay along with a faintly ridiculous final scene
An aspiring writer (Clive Owen) is hired as a croupier at a casino, where he realizes that his life as a croupier would make a great novel.
My interest in gambling movies is about average, though I do find them somewhat interesting in the context of organized crime. That was not a major aspect here, though the movie was not without its unexpected death and shady characters. Lead by Clive Owen, it was a decent little story.
I also like that he was not a croupier just for the sake of being a croupier, but also had the idea of writing a book in mind. This then creates the fun of the unreliable narrator... is everything he says true, or is part of this just his fantasy of what would make for a better story?
My interest in gambling movies is about average, though I do find them somewhat interesting in the context of organized crime. That was not a major aspect here, though the movie was not without its unexpected death and shady characters. Lead by Clive Owen, it was a decent little story.
I also like that he was not a croupier just for the sake of being a croupier, but also had the idea of writing a book in mind. This then creates the fun of the unreliable narrator... is everything he says true, or is part of this just his fantasy of what would make for a better story?
CROUPIER (2000) *** Clive Owen, Gina McKee, Alex Kingston, Kate Hardie, Nicholas Ball. British director Mike Hodges returns with his trademark hands-on film noir twisting with Owen part Connery/part Gibson as a contemptuous struggling novelist who takes a job as a casino croupier with much disdain for its clientele and the razor's edge trundling of enjoying the afterhours lifestyle while struggling to maintain his identity from his story's semi-autobiographical character. Smartly written by Paul Mayersberg with its pulp fiction heart and soul on display works well until its unfortunately false ending. Owen gives a silky smooth enhancing performance of a man at odds with his life and makes it all look effortless.
Croupier is a film that shouldn't work. It doesn't have a conventional plot, doesn't seem to be about anything, (it's got gambling in it and is set inside a casino, but isn't really about gambling.) and the main character seems to have no clear desire for anything. I'm still wondering why I enjoyed it so much. Perhaps the absence of these motifs that you'd expect in any conventional film is what makes it special, I suspect that they add to it's originality, but what really makes the film work is how completely engaging the main character is made.
Jack Manfred, from his chain smoking to his dry voice-over, is completely engaging as a character, without having to go through any obvious conventionalities that would force the audience into finding him endearing. This is surely a combination of Mike Hodges directorial skill, the script and Clive Owen's acting ability.
The film is essentially a character study, with a front of a gambling film, that examines this character and his relationships with the people in his life, - his girlfriend, boss, father and colleagues, how he sees the world, and how he will cope when presented with certain situations.
It is brought to the screen with quality that demands attention and a score that heightens the atmosphere the film creates and really sets the tone.
Jack Manfred, from his chain smoking to his dry voice-over, is completely engaging as a character, without having to go through any obvious conventionalities that would force the audience into finding him endearing. This is surely a combination of Mike Hodges directorial skill, the script and Clive Owen's acting ability.
The film is essentially a character study, with a front of a gambling film, that examines this character and his relationships with the people in his life, - his girlfriend, boss, father and colleagues, how he sees the world, and how he will cope when presented with certain situations.
It is brought to the screen with quality that demands attention and a score that heightens the atmosphere the film creates and really sets the tone.
Did you know
- TriviaSat on the shelf for two years before release.
- GoofsWhen Jack has a job interview at the London casino his father recommends him for, the manager (Mr. Reynolds) at one stage asks him the current count at the Blackjack table. Jack insists it is -9, the manager insists it is -8 to which Jack confides smugly to himself "It had taken him 45 minutes but Jack now had Mr. Reynolds number. The man couldn't count." Neither Jack or Mr. Reynolds can count. The count is actually at +2.
- Alternate versionsThree versions were released: a general theatrical release, a slightly edited cut for Argentina, and a more edited one for Poland. Runtimes were, respectively, "1h 34m (94 min), 1h 34m (94 min--Argentina)", and "1h 31m (91 min--Poland).
- How long is Croupier?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- Круп'є
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Gross US & Canada
- $6,201,143
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $63,472
- Apr 23, 2000
- Gross worldwide
- $7,120,568
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content