Am I Missing Something?

This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

Watch something else. There are very few redeeming qualities to this film.

It is interesting even when nothing much happens, which is for most of its 3-hour running time. Read full review

Blonde girl Leslie buys a lottery ticket and forgets her driver's license at the convenient store. Ben Keller (Colin Hanks) is a bumbling accountant who's in love with the firm's secretary Lucy St. Martin (Ari Graynor). She quits after an affair with the boss goes sour. Ben has known Lucy since childhood but she couldn't care less until he wins the $36 million lottery. His mother Pauline (Ann-Margret) found the ticket and cashed it in. Detective Harold Waylon (Jeffrey Tambor) is investigating a series of missing blonde women.This is a black comedy that doesn't quite get to being funny. The black part is all there. The comedy part tries to be there. Ari Graynor is trying so hard. Colin Hanks is more or less the straight man. He has the persona of a bunny rabbit with a butcher's knife. Director Gil Cates Jr. isn't able to pull it off. He's not a particularly good director or a guy who does comedy. This doesn't working.

This film is on the cutting edge of a new genre...or maybe not so new...self-indulgent Brat Cinema....the character of the main characters and the writing could be straight from the mouths of grade 8 boys...with more than a little 'nasty girl' thrown in. It is adolescent in the extreme....in a more deft writer's hands the premise could have created some interesting and original film-making. I feel sorry for the actors who were convincing, considering what lines they had to deliver. It made annoying watching and mostly not all that funny. I agree with a previous reviewer that the trailer was far better than the actually cinematic reality.

I can't and I won't do an effort to explain this awful movie. It's plain horrible! Beyond ugly! Someone said amoral.That's right,amoral and extremely awful! Boring! Terribly boring! I don't understand how someone could spent money in making this movie! What a waste of resources! I watched all of it waiting for a good part that could justified the effort. But there wasn't any!My advice? Do yourself a favor. Don't watch this movie!It has nothing valuable. Not even a beautiful view of anything. They show some very brief seconds of Hawaii,apparently, but you won't notice.Colin Hanks? I liked The Good Guys very much. But I never enjoyed any other thing he was in. But this Lucky just made the top of all.I will have nightmares with this movie. I swear! I'm not bluffing!Now excuse me,but I need to watch something very good stuff before going to bed or I won't be able to get asleep! I hated it!

Very rarely do I have any desire to post a review. I've seen it, I know what I think, and usually someone else has said everything that needs to be said. Not so with "Lucky."This film shocked me with its amorality. And I liked it.Before I watched this, I thought, perhaps, that it would be akin to "Dexter" - a serial killer that the viewer is asked to empathize with, maybe forgive, and perhaps even root for. I mean, what else could I expect from what the synopsis seems to suggest is a serial killer rom-com. I was wrong. No one in this film is asking for forgiveness. No one in this film seems to even imagine that a universal or objective morality exists which would pass judgement.This is one of the only, if not the only, film I have seen that exemplifies rationally self- interested actors carrying on their affairs as though no religious or societal morality existed or, at the least, was valid. Even in the films based on Ayn Rand's fiction (a person who championed "the virtue of selfishness" and fought against religion and collectivism/humanism), there was always a wink or a nod when some character violated the Judeo-Christian-humanist morality. The same can be said of most of the horror and "shock" films - the shock and horror are usually caused by reactions to the violation of societal norms. Here, there is nothing. One previous reviewer implied the film was boring. I wouldn't go so far, though I would accept "anti-climatic." Indeed, amorality is certainly that. If one starts from a place where killing and kissing are of equal objective moral value - none whatsoever - then it stands to reason that neither occurrence has any higher meaning.In "Lucky", the lack of regard for morality, as understood by the majority of the populace, is not obvious. It isn't a clear part of the plot. It isn't relied upon to engender fear or revulsion. I almost didn't notice it until near the end of the film. It is as if the film was made entirely by people unaware that such a concept as "objective morality" even existed. Of course it wasn't. If for no other reason than that, "Lucky" deserves praise.