Lush

great characters, great setting and a very different kind of story-- funny and very tender too. I especially like the scenes with Campbell Scott and Laurel Hollomon from L word. The guy who plays the caddy is very funny, don't know where I hav seen him. Watched this with a friend who is from the south and said this was very close to the real south not the Hollywood version. I like movies that take you someplace new and this does it, makes you feel like you are there and not rushed. Only problem I had was with the dog, why? But overall just a different and interesting story with good actors. This will stay with you long after it's over. Like I said, rent this!

If ever I have seen a worse movie, I can't remember it. While browsing around a Video Store one day, my girlfriend picked this up out of the

bargain bin for about five bucks because she said that it looked like

it would be interesting and how could you go wrong for five dollars etc. All very well and good I suppose....but less than half an hour into this mess my girlfriend could stand it no more, and I had to literally force myself to sit there and watch this train wreck of a

movie. I would tell you about the acting, but there is no acting in this film....it's like watching pictures on a post card. I would tell you about the plot....but if I could do that, it would mean that I made sense out of this mess and would definitely be in need of some real help! There is no redeeming qualities in this film, and if you see it in the bargain bin on DVD, take it up to the clerk, chastise them for improper labeling, then have the clerk stick a Frisbee sticker on it.

I'm not quite sure why I rented the "Lush" DVD. I suppose a big part of it was its New Orleans setting. However, except for a few location shots, including One Shell Square building, the French Quarter, and a St Charles Avenue streetcar, the bulk of the filming was done in Baton Rouge and a couple of golf courses there. It is not possible to write a narrative of "Lush." There's a washed-up pro golfer who drinks too much and lands in a Little Rock jail when he tries to bribe a cop with a $50 bill. There's a New Orleans lawyer who makes feeble attempts at suicide after telling various people that he has a life insurance policy with them as beneficiary. A couple of goofballs who work for him. Two sisters who take turns romancing the golfer after he gets back to New Orleans. The white dog that shows up in various places. In the end the golfer and the younger sister end up together, and he is managing a putt-putt establishment.

The writing and acting are good in spots, but uneven at best. Overall I found it mildly entertaining, but could not recommend it. The DVD is simple, ProLogic sound, no extras. "Lush" is quirky, it has fans, but most would be turned off by it. I see it has one "10" vote on the IMDb, a woman over 45, must be the director's mother! :-)

I loved this movie -- not your typical indie. Don't be fooled by the DVD artwork this is not a thriller! it's weird and funny with a romantic feel.

This is the real New Orleans; offbeat characters and way too much booze. JAred Haris is particularly good as the suicidal lawyer. Laurel Holloman and LAura Linney are fun as sisters on the prowl.

If you like your movies to take unexpected turns this is for you.

Also, how can you go wrong with Plastic Bertrand in the opening credits.

French punk rules!

I need to respond first to the creative lambasting that precedes my comments. Not only are you dead wrong, but it is precisely this kind of facile dismissal that holds back American film. This is an experimental European independent film masked in American gloss, and it is this quality that is both the virtue and the marketing difficulty of the film. Had my fellow reviewers seen a low production value version of the same film, they would have hailed it as the second coming and fiercely emailed their friends about the literary and film references within it. They would have known right away to expect a twisted plot line, fragmented exposition of the characters, and a constantly shifting understanding of the film's sense with each subsequent scene. The film project that a film like this represents is to make work that is both complex and mainstream, rather than to corral the good stuff in the "experimental" corner. But this kind of film project needs an audience willing to constantly update their visual acuity. If you remember, Godard was not always the crowned king he is today. When he was making his 1960's films he was making seemingly casual films out of a very serious understanding of the potential of film and received similarly frustrated responses. The difference, of course, between a filmmaker working in France in the 1960's and one working in America today is that you need much much much more money to get your projects done, so it might take a little longer for the film project to happen, but it will.