SpuffyWeb Sadly Over-hyped

Intcatinfo A Masterpiece!

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

Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

corief I too saw this movie at a young age of 14, but I had read the book first. I agree that mostly of the characters were casted wrong. For instance in the book Maria is described as a fair skinned woman with white blond hair yet Sandra Bullock played her. Being the early 1990's no network would have been prepared to handle the open gayness of Dario (no-doubtly it wasn't "PC" yet) I think they could have added a bit more violence when trying to explore Mobster actions. It would be interesting if they remade the movie now would it resemble The Sopranos in some way would it be violent and hoping they would make better casting choices?? The book was better than the movie you were able to get more involved with the character's and their story.

Shari As usual, the movie is nothing like the book. I really enjoyed the book, because you became invested in the characters. However, I did the process backwards: I saw the movie before I saw the film and liked the film. I saw it at a fairly young age, but I still liked it. Vincent Irizarry was on my mother's soap, so we had to see anything he was in. Nicolette was not the right person for Lucky I think. And Sandra Bullock as Maria? The entire purpose of the character was not what Bullock represented, but it's how I first fell in love with her and remember her to this day. However, she wasn't right for the part either. The movie was fair enough, but you could tell that NBC wasn't ready to deal with Dario's homosexuality and real mob violence. It almost had the moral appeal of an after school special. The movie should of took itself more seriously. I liked the movie, but after reading the book, the actors were all wrong for the characters.

southrenbelle73 Lucky/Chances is a good movie based on a good book. I read the books first prior to watching the movie and it does follow the book closely with a few minor chnages. Vincent Irizarry could not have made a better Gino and Nicollette Sheridan was perfect to play Lucky. The acting may have been a tad bit over-the-top, but many of Jackie Collins' books are and that's probably why the movie was done that way. I'd personally love to see a silver screen version of this book so that more details of the story could be shown (there was a lot that couldn't be shown on t.v.).

Knight Of The Cross I can't tell too much about this one. Yes it's a good movie, but not more. I've read the novel, but there isn't a big difference between book and movie. The book is little boring and in the movie plot is usual and actors' play was highly mediocre. So, this movie fits for review only once.