Hit Or Miss? A Flashback Review Of Lucky You

23rd January 2018

Some directors have earned the right to make movies about pretty much anything they want, and it’s fair to say that Curtis Hanson fell into this bracket after he made the truly incredible spectacle of L.A. Confidential. His career since may not quite have reached the awe-inspiring heights that this movie did, but he did manage to gross over $242 million worldwide at the box office by directing a movie (8 Mile) that many thought was solely an attempt to cash in on Eminem’s early popularity. When he passed away at the age of just 71, these successes meant that he was regarded as a highly respected director, and one who was arguably more of a critical success than a commercial one.

From Success to Flop

Evidence of this latter assertion can be seen in his failure to reap the sort of financial reward that the critical acclaim hinted at the movie deserving when it came to his follow-up to L.A. Confidential, Wonder Boys. The movie is listed as one of the movie bombs of the year for 2000 and had to be re-released after a disastrous ad campaign that saw the movie sink next to its Oscar-nominated rivals and a fairly creepy poster that presented Michael Douglas as nothing short of a terrifying character! Critical response offered a stark contrast to its commercial response, with the movie earning an 81% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes and a decent 7.4 IMDB rating.

Director of Vegas-centric film “Lucky You”, Curtis Hanson, dead at 71. https://t.co/DdziAY1VS3 pic.twitter.com/tudCxmG7MO

— Matt Guillermo (@MattGNews) September 21, 2016

Caption: Curtis Hanson directing Lucky You

Wonder Boys may have hit the mark critically if not commercially, but the one that arguably got away even more, failing to showcase the skills of Curtis, was Lucky You. With Curtis having been born in Nevada, where draw poker (as opposed to stud poker) enjoyed such early popularity in its history, it seemed only right that he should return to his home state to create a movie, and it seemed fitting that the subject matter would revolve around the thrills, triumphs, and exhilaration that Las Vegas holds in its palm, especially for those pursuing the dream of winning big.

Why Didn’t Lucky You Strike It Lucky?

Bizarrely, the movie is actually claimed to be both too authentic and not authentic enough. Some claim that the movie used poker stars like Daniel Negreanu (the biggest live tournament poker winner in history) in the action simply, in a slightly desperate move, to give it an air of authenticity from a visual perspective, whilst others claim that they were there to add a serious depth of understanding and insights into the world of poker to help ensure that the research undertaken before shooting wasn’t wasted by poor actors not knowing how to behave during complex poker hands.

Indeed, while some might have claimed at the time that an online player winning the event was a bit of a strange twist at the end, the fact remains that a 2003 WSOP event was actually won by a player who had qualified by playing online, proving that the finale wasn’t too far-fetched at all, highlighting instead that poker movies had started to wake up to a changing landscape where people could emerge from nowhere to be big stars.

#TBT Premiere Of “Lucky You” at the Tribeca Film Festival (2007) #ericbana @EricBana67 pic.twitter.com/TYTVzFmGRf

— Eric Bana Network (@ericbananetwork) April 13, 2017

Caption: Eric Bana promoting the film

The real-life story of Moneymaker winning is told on his own site. However, perhaps the most interesting aspect to the movie is the disdain held by pro poker players towards these emerging individuals. Nowadays, things have changed; anyone can become a serious success by starting to play poker online. Indeed, the forms of poker played in the movie, including the final poker hand that happens to be a Texas Hold ‘Em game, can all be played online with operators including one of the main sponsors traditionally of the WSOP, 888poker, an online poker site with 10 million registered users, with a brand similar to the sort that Jason Keyes, the winner at the end of the film, would have used to achieve victory. While Keyes would probably have primarily indulged in the famous Texan variant of poker, the fictitious Jason Keyes would nowadays be able to enjoy a wider range of games if playing online, including quicker variants that get players instantly involved, with one of the newest versions, Flopomania, seeing betting skip straight to the flop, letting newer players get an idea of the card combinations that can occur and getting the chance to raise and fold faster than just betting on the possible outcome of their pocket cards. Perhaps this wouldn’t make for the best, most in-depth on-screen action, but the evolution of the game is still a point of interest.

Timehop bringing in the best of memories😂 Throwback to when I dealt to @CMONEYMAKER for the first time & thought he made up his last name in hopes of becoming famous! I then had to confess I had no idea who he was & get a picture taken with him! Thanks for the laughs Chris! ♥️ pic.twitter.com/2VaLs6Ir0y

— Trina (@TroubleTrina) January 12, 2018

Caption: Chris Moneymaker is still a celebrity draw for poker tournaments after his big win

In fact, perhaps the most frustrating thing for Curtis Hanson is that having spent a lot of money, time, and effort on ensuring that the sets were as authentic as possible, including recreating from scratch in a studio parts of the Bellagio, he failed to truly capture enough poker play to make the story truly engaging. With the movie also trying to discuss the changing nature of poker and how it had, in his view, lost some of its romance as it became easier to play online and more accessible on TV, Hanson arguably spent more time in the movie than was necessary lamenting what he perceived as a decline, rather than celebrating the innovation and democratic nature of the online boom. This New York Times review suggests as much in quotes from Hanson himself, but it is easy to look back in hindsight to suggest that this movie did not need to lament the end of romantic poker matches, but instead could have spent this effort on lauding the fact that poker has evolved and is more popular than ever before, with over 40 million people globally competing as regular poker players.

A Legacy or a Lost Chance?

With no mention of any sort of sequel on the books, the biggest legacy the movie truly can lay claim to is showing how poker has become so mainstream in recent years. With poker nowadays so popular that it can be played by millions at home on a daily basis, and the romance and challenge of the game very much respected around the world, the movie seems to have prematurely mourned the passing of an era that hasn’t actually passed. On the upside, it certainly showed that movies don’t just have to be about getting one over on other players or boasting that amazing, once-in-a-lifetime winning hand that changes everything, in order to be defined as a commercial poker movie.

All in all, looking back at the movie, you have to feel sad that for a film so carefully researched and with such an intriguing idea behind it, and with Hanson possessing both the skill and the budget to have done something so much better, it couldn’t have been crafted into something more enduring and successful.

Facebook

Google

Twitter

We hope you're enjoying BRWC. You should check us out on our social channels, subscribe to our newsletter, and tell your friends. BRWC is short for battleroyalewithcheese.