Film: Lucky Number Slevin

[goatofthenever]

Overall I'd say this movie was pretty good, not good; pretty good.
The directing was good, I'd say the thing that let it down was the script, not that it was bad it just had some problems. I had higher expectations because I love Gangster NO. 1 by the same directed, Paul McGuigan.

With the characters; Bruce Willis' is cool, but Lucky Liu's was pretty annoying at times. All of the characters, but mostly hartnett's would chime in with sarcastic taunts that would almost make it seem like a spoof of itself. Unfortunatly this took away from the premise of the movie.

The plot had a decent start too it, despite the fact it was quite obvious. A lot of it, more as the movie progessed, seemed as they just hammered parts in to make it fit. They just didn't make much sense, the writer should have spent a little more time on his story.

Spoiler: Lucky Number Slevin

The worst part is the whole story just seemed so pointless. If they were such badass killers why go through such an intricate ruse? Couldn't they have just killed them to begin with? The entire plot was negated by the fact Goodkat ended up just killing the bodyguards at the end anyways. He could have done that at the begging and saved us all a lot of time.

A movie worth watching, but not worse spending much money on. As I said A better movie to watch of Paul McGuigan's is Gangster No. 1.

 

[Banquo]

let's get a poll up in here.

 

[sn0wburt0n]

i really liked this movie. way better than i had expected. i would have only given it 4 stars had lucy liu's fine ass not been in it.

 

[4EverTweakin]

Though this thread seems a bit out of date, I couldn't agree more with the "Goat". However I did ingest an 8th of caps before watching this one on the big screen, that alone gave it 4 stars out of its sober, (1).

 

[ego_loss]

I felt cheated by this movie.

It had a LOT of potential, but the ending was way fucking lame and WAY fucking contrived. "good cat" and "bad dog" must have been pshycics to know that shit would have gone exactly to plan.

Good dialogue, decent characters, and up until the end... decent plot. I give it a 5 out of 10.

 

[tambourine-man]

"Contrived" is the correct word. The marketing of this film just didn't give an accurate impression of what I ended up seeing. I agree with the sentiments above, the whole 'ruse' seemed completely pointless in the end... but I suppose any film starring Bruce Willis and Josh Hartnett has to be something special if it's to overcome the obvious hinderance of employing two unbelievably rubbish actors.

2 stars.

 

[L2R]

^ahem ...sin city?

anyways, i agree completely with tambo and goat. Saw this, entitled "the wrong man" in australia today and found it rather stupid. As mentioned a completely redundant ruse seems only there to provide opprtunity for the characters to grand stand with nonesensical masturbatory lines.

2/5 for liu eye candy

 

[Doc_Rocksbay]

I liked it, but the ending was, as stated above, "Crap"
Still better than the last few flix I've seen as of recent

 

[L2R]

I can't believe some people are so pussy starved that they actually gave the film extra points because she has a nice ass.

I was being facetious. Besides, i was talking about her breasts

I think a film needs to have a limit on flashbacks. A nice chunk of this film is patronising retellings of things we've already seen.

 

[geetered]

I liked it; very hard too understand

 

[jiggaboo]

yeh really enjoyed this movie although yes the ending was a tad stupid, im gonna run next time a guy in a wheel chair starts talking about the kansas city shuffle to me

 

[Swerlz]

I like the movie, i especially enjoyed the ending

 

[Diego Blunt]

i saw this advertised before i left aus as "the wrong man" and thought it looked like the 'the next sin city' (i.e fucken awesome) but then saw it on the plane as 'lucky number slevin' ... and was somewhat dissapointed. i held high hopes and the 'shell' was good, but it really didn't have much substance to it. lol, probably agree re: excuse to 'grandstand with nonsensical masturbatory lines' ... all slick, no flick.

 

[Benefit]

I thought this movie was thoroughly entertaining. It might look like a Tarantino-Guy Ritchie knockoff, but that's alright with me because it's an engaging style.

What's not to like about badass assassins killing the shit out of people?



Sure there were a couple stupid parts and the plot verges on nonsensicality, but movies aren't supposed to be reality; if you're filming reality then you've got yerself a documentary, not a movie.

The acting is pretty good. I can't even imagine how the producers shuffled salaries to pull this cast.

J. Ralph comes through with a pretty neat score.

Go see it! There are definitely worse ways to spend 2 hours.

 

[TheDeceased]

Far from perfect but still pretty entertaining in a violent, loopy, meaningless sort of way.

 

[Devo_]

Well good film tbh.
The end just totally got me.
Very well made.

 

[His Name Is Frank]

I concur. I liked how it gradually became a darker movie as it neared the end. I thought the ending was great.

 

[toa$t]

the dialogue made this movie for me.

 

[tennmile]

I saw this in the theater 2+ years ago and if I can remember plot, characters, dialogue from 2 + years ago it means something. Unfortunately in this case the something is total disappointment . I don't expect much from 'stiff, monotoned' Josh Hartnett but the others actors were unable to rise above weak material, too contrived plot turns and deliberate pacing. I liked Stanley Tucci. cannot recommend.

Rent "In Bruges"...

 

[toa$t]

I liked in bruges too, for a lot of the same reasons that I liked lucky number slevin