Lucky Number Slevin

Intellectuals who appreciate the appropriate intellectual nourishment, such as refined works of Tarkovsky or Bergman, should avoid this film like the plague, as it falls into a completely different category within Tarantino's style. We find ourselves in the realm of mass popular culture, specifically crime dramas set in New York, where two mafia clans compete with each other, filled with cynical jokes and one-liners. The screenplay is far from the best in this subgenre, and truth be told, Lucky Number Slevin is one of those films that are worth watching once, with no need to revisit them. If I had the desire and opportunity to see it again, I would mercilessly lower my percentage and star rating. However, I can recommend it for a single viewing, unless you want to dissect the nonsensically convoluted path of the protagonist's revenge. The lighthearted tone and the presence of several acting talents significantly contribute to this, particularly the seasoned genre veteran Bruce Willis. With his typically stone-faced expression and dry one-liners, he marches from one scene to another, leaving behind only the dead bodies of his enemies. Meanwhile, despite the misery of his work, the screenwriter has a few surprises up his sleeve for the audience, so even your sense of the genre game won't be left wanting. Overall impression: 75%. (08/09/2011)

The first half, full of wanna-be cool dialogue where the characters are supposed to verbally make fun of each other, is pure misery. Then the action gets going and McGuigan finally puts some edge on the overwrought story. The explanatory flashbacks are fun, but there’s no believability. Hartnett actually acts (!), Willis is stony as usual, and the rest of them sort of shuffle around, content that they have famous names, count their film awards by the metric ton, and try to look terribly above it all. Awkwardness is the impression that best describes it, and I'll probably never give it a second chance. I give it a weaker three stars. (22/10/2010)

When the third meaningless murderous scene appeared within the first quarter hour, I started to feel slightly uneasy, and when everything in its ironic spirit led to the same culminating point, I was already almost irritated. But then came what I expected couldn't possibly come. I forgot that Slevin was directed by Paul McGuigan (he definitely wouldn't be pleased to see how many people accuse him of plagiarizing Tarantino), who once played with a confused tangle when he presented me with the excellent film Pushing Tin. And he pulled off something similar here as well when he comes up with a complicated, but brilliantly made gradation that is longer than usual and gives very clear and sufficiently effective answers to all questions. At this moment, I think that the ironic detachment in the first part was actually not so unnecessary because it was balanced by a superb atmosphere and soundtrack right on the border between sarcasm and gangster themes. In the end, just under 80%, absolutely flawless Willis and above-average rest of the cast, along with excellent camera work and McGuigan, whose next work is worth waiting for. (28/11/2006)

Every movie fan since Kill Bill knows that revenge tastes best served cold. Unfortunately, I got my mouth properly scalded by McGuigan. Initially, the story is promisingly paced, narratively enjoyable and witty, with no fucking around with machine guns, and with likeable characters. But about half an hour before the end it changes its face completely, the narrative lightness is gone and the overwrought resolution with tiresome explanatory flashbacks and a numerous body count comes into play, lacking insight and thus putting McGuigan's film among this year's unoriginal, long-worn by me uselessness of the type of Running Scared. I'm just bored of all these ultra-hyper-cool Tarantino clones! Ben Kingsley can only remember his Gandhi and Itzhak Stern with a tear in his eye, his acting is awful (especially noticeable in the dialogue scene between him and Freeman), some of the holes in logic of the plot are truly remarkable, and Josh Hartnett proves that he is just a mediocre actor and simply not up to serious roles. (01/10/2006)

The film had a great cast but without much to show for it. The theme was certainly interesting, but the screenplay not so much, plus, I was shaking my head over the overcomplexity of the story, and I could not really relate to any of the characters. Maybe except for Lindsey, who kept showing up from time to time like a charming robot mouse. (17/04/2020)