Lucky Luke (1991)

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

Lucky Luke is one of the comedy westerns that Terence Hill made after his earlier pairings with Bud Spencer. It's a standard enough comedy, gently spoofing western conventions and a good family feature given that there's no sex, violence, or bad language in sight. The film itself sees Hill as a gunslinger who arrives in town and becomes sheriff, setting him on a collision course with some conventional bad guys.The movie was shot in Las Vegas with a handful of American stars among the Italian players. The story is apparently based on a popular comic strip and the script was written by a couple of comedians. It's far from the funniest thing that Hill ever made but it is about average for the genre. Hill's talking horse was my favourite character. The delightful climax openly spoofs the ending duel in THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY to good effect, any fans of the star will enjoy it all the way through.

This has to be one of the worst movies I've ever seen!For a start "Lucky Luke" didn't look remotely like Luke from the comics, Luke has dark hair, the clothing was all incorrect! How hard could it have been for them to have at least used the correct colours for Lukes clothes? What about his cigarette? Lucky Luke doesn't even stop smoking when he talks!Then we have the Dalton brothers, only Avril was any good, Joe was terrible, he ought to have been throwing continuous tantrums, the actor also has a completely "un-Joe" like build.I nearly keeled over when I saw the Indian's sending smoke signals, never mind the Indians themselves who didn't sound remotely like Indians.Overall this movie was terribly produced.

This movie is very bad. The only reason I rented it was because I know someone in it. And by the way, it WAS filmed in the United States (it was filmed here in New Mexico). I think this is supposed to be a comedy, but it was only stupid. Since Terrance Hill directed it too, he has himself in almost every shot. Long, long shots of him just riding a horse or walking or a long look into the camera. This is just a waste of time.

In the 60s, Clint Eastwood rose to fame starring in a series of Spaghetti Westerns as the "Man With No Name" Observing their success, a young Italian actor changed his name to Terence Hill and started cranking out his own version of the wild west. They called him "Trinity" and over time, the Trinity series acquired a cult following. Trinity was an affable, absolutely filthy (although clean shaven) drifter who wandered the Wild West with a smile on his face, fearing nothing. He WAS the fastest gun in the West. If they didn't back down after seeing his dazzling gun play, he set them up for somebody else. Trinity didn't say much, never swore, and never killed anybody. With dubbed English and hoakey fist fights, these films were absolutely stupid! Henry Fonda co-starred in one of the films. Looking a bit older, Terence has ditched the filthy clothes and changed his characters name. Even so, except for the talking horse, it's still a "Trinity" classic. This film strays from the original series in that it was filmed in the US (New Mexico) and utilizes a mostly American cast. Also, they actually spent some money on the soundtrack. Roger Miller wrote and performed the "Ballad of Lucky Luke".A lot of fun and laughs. This film demonstrates that it IS possible to have humor without sexual innuendoes, foul language, or off color jokes. Disney could learn something here...