Michael Mann and creator David Milch got along so badly during the making of the pilot that Mann banned Milch from the set for the rest of the season, something Milch resented a lot because he loves watching the actors work up close. See more »
All-stars on all sides transport us to an exciting, sad world in style.
LUCK is fast and stylish. Michael Mann is exec. producer of LUCK and director of the first episode. Mann is the writer/director of "Heat" and LUCK has the same pace and style.
There is plenty of insider chatter here. The kind of dialogue that is second nature to the people associated with horse racing but that leaves the rest of us a bit dizzy. LUCK is the clash of very different characters and it gives Mann as much contrast as the cinematography that has become his signature. Washed up gamblers, hungry employee's, wealthy owners and the people one step from financial ruin or rejuvenation are painted in different colors of neon or grays as success and/or slime in all its forms contrast with the strength, beauty and earthiness of the central characters: Horses, fodder for the justification of so much excitement and sadness.
LUCK is a convergence of who's who at Santa Anita. I'm grateful that so many deserving thespians wanted in on this project. I'm sure they know much about their peers but their on-screen "history" with each other is believable. Can the script justify the talent? So far, yes. The writing seems to have as much good teeth as its all-star cast - pay attention and hold on.
This premier reminds me of "Mad Men" on AMC, a channel I ALSO got for free for the first 3 (enjoyable) episodes. I did not bite on AMC but LUCK is making a good argument for HBO.
I'm certain the language will soak in with the rest of the story but I have the inside on "bug", as the agent calls the young Jockey. "Bug" is a moniker used for substitute jockey's. Any rookie that replaces an expected rider is noted on a racing program with an asterisk and an asterisk looks like a bug (the definition is courtesy of David Milch).
22 of 31 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?