LouHomey From my favorite movies..

Afouotos Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

Aubrey Hackett While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.

Fleur Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

SnoopyStyle Lidda (Kirsten Dunst) leaves Tulsa, Oklahoma and her mother to find her father Charlie Doyles (James Caan), a professional gambler in Vegas. She carries around a check from him. She takes store clerk Colonel (Vincent Kartheiser) along for the ride when somebody comes collecting his debt. Colonel considers himself to be a poker player. Charlie faces old nemesis Tony in high stakes poker. Charlie is in love with stripper Sugar working in Tony's club. Jimmy works for Tony to rob and then kill gamblers. Tony's nephew Frankie arrives from Italy to be the new member of the crew.This movie is very clunky. Nobody is particularly compelling. Kirsten is grumpy and Vincent is no leading man. They don't have any chemistry. James Caan is coasting on his reputation in this movie. Luis Guzmán is a passable hit-man but he's capable of much more. This is trying to be a hard-boiled crime drama and personal drama. It doesn't have the style or any good writing. It doesn't have any thrills or tension. It stumbles on and on as the audience waits for Lidda to finally meet up with Charlie.

dbholt_99 Indeed, dumb. But don't blame the writer--he had written a kick ass script before this clumsy director got involved and made him re-write it 2-3 times and sucked all the life out of it. The original script was great and had Martin Sheen set to play Charlie. The writer, fresh out of UCLA, was set to direct it. At the last minute the funding dried up and one of the actors got the script to Paul, who then took over as director. He was flush with money from a German media company. He pushed Brendan aside as director and this mess was created. Probably destroyed the confidence (and career) of a promising young writer in the process.

jhs39 Kirsten Dunst usually makes good choices, but this one ranks with her Crow movie as the worst. Absolutely dreadful drama about 18 year old girl who leaves home to meet her professional poker playing father (James Caan) who sends her birthday cards but was otherwise never a part of her life. There isn't a single moment in this disaster that rings true. Avoid at all costs.

quinnmass As a movie, the movie sucked. It sucked in the kind of dismally bad way that only the laziest of movies can. The young male romantic interest of Kirsten Dunst ranks high in the pantheon of Characters that Should Be Killed As Soon As Possible With a Blunt Instrument - he is as likeable as the Dell Guy.However, the only reason I write is to comment on the poker scene, which takes the cake for spectacular laziness. For a movie involving two characters who are supposed to be the top two greatest poker players in the world, it would be nice if the writer had actually bothered to peruse the rudimentary structure of poker games.In the scene where James Caan plays the kid at poker, Caan is playing Texas Hold'em. The kid, however, is apparently playing 5-card draw. Caan's TWO cards face down are pocket Queens. That's unfortunate for him, because the kid has FIVE cards in his hand, which contain at least trip deuces. Let's make sure we got that. In the same hand of poker, one guy is playing a completely different form of poker than the other!! HA HA HA HA HA HA. When I saw this, I sat in stunned, giggly disbelief.This is not a little error. It is unforgiveable sloppiness, especially when you bill your movie as a Vegas, gambling movie that involves the two greatest poker players in the world. It's as if a 5th grader wrote this. If it were a sports movie, it would be like one guy playing his golf shot while his opponent, a football player, tackles him. Retarded. Just like the entire surrounding movie.