The Luckiest Man in America

The Luckiest Man In America is apparently based on a true person although I never heard of him. The movie is categorized as a thriller but it isn't, it's basically a drama which is normally not my favourite genre but this one was actually a good movie. The cast was very well chosen. Paul Walter Hauser has one of those faces to play a weirdo, like he did before in the excellent movie Richard Jewell and the great series Black Bird. This time he plays the contestant in a game show, again a character that can be qualified as weird. Good acting from the entire cast and an easy and pleasant story to follow.

This film is a dramatization of a game show scandal from the 70s.

A con artist, played by Paul Walter Hauser, appears on the game show Press Your Luck and shocks the audience and producers with his winning streak. This ultimately leads to backstage turmoil and cheating revelations.

We've seen this before in the gold standard "Quiz Show" and more recently "Perfect Bid." This failed to keep me as interested as those two compelling films did.

I think the problem lies in Hauser's portrayal. The character's affect is so odd and off putting that it's a wonder he was chosen for the show to begin with let alone have an entire audience rooting for him. To be fair, I don't know what the real man was like, but I expected a professional con man to be more smooth. The relationship with his daughter and ex wife was also underdeveloped and gave little insight into the man behind the madness.

It's mildly entertaining at best. I saw it at my local theater at the one showing they had but this is an absolute wait for streaming kind of film.

The Luckiest Man in America was a fascinating watch for me, especially because it's based on a true story I hadn't heard before. It follows a man who managed to con his way onto a game show and ended up getting incredibly lucky while on it. I was completely unfamiliar with the real-life event or the man at the center of it, which made the film all the more intriguing.

What really grabbed my attention was how quickly the story pulled me in. It's one of those movies where, as soon as it ends, you immediately want to Google the real events to find out what actually happened. And in this case, there's a surprising amount of additional bizarre and fascinating information about the guy that didn't make it into the film.

As for the movie itself, I'd call it a solid one-time watch. It presents an unusual slice of 1980s history in an entertaining way. It's not necessarily a film you'd revisit, but it succeeds in shining a light on a quirky, forgotten moment in pop culture. You watch it, think "Well, that was interesting," and move on-now I'm a little more informed about one of the oddest stories to come out of the game show world.

Saw this at a TIFF screening last night, theatre completely sold out. The film itself is a pretty nice 90-minute film mostly sitting on one set. While the film does have a really strong premise, it most definetly loses its steam in the latter acts due to its lack of understanding of where to go. I really adored Paul Walter Hauser in this, but his character felt severly underwritten- it sorta seemed like he was many things for a long time and yet, he just turned out to be a normal pretty intelligent man. They kept alluding to something big was going to happen at the end with a twist, but it never comes, leaving an odd sour taste in my mouth as the credits rolled. But its still a very enjoyable casual wednesday night watch.

Luckiest Man in America is a textbook case of wasted potential. You've got a talented cast firing on all cylinders-delivering nuanced, emotionally sharp performances that deserved way better material. But the story? It drags like a flat tire on a cross-country road trip.

The pacing is glacial, the plot feels like it's searching for meaning in all the wrong places, and by the halfway mark, you're not wondering what happens next-you're wondering how much longer you have to sit through it. It's less "luckiest man in America" and more "audience stuck in narrative limbo."

To be fair, the performances alone kept this from dropping into total disaster territory. But great acting can only do so much when the story they're trapped in is meandering, repetitive, and about as gripping as a lukewarm cup of decaf.

Verdict: Strong cast, weak script. If you're watching for the actors, sure-just don't expect them to save the movie from itself.