• Network: HBO
  • Series Premiere Date: Jan 29, 2012
  • Season #: 1 , 2
User Score
7.2

Generally favorable reviews- based on 32 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 25 out of 32
  2. Negative: 5 out of 32

Review this tv show

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jan 29, 2012
    10
    I don't like horseracing. It's boring, in my opinion. I loved Luck. Brilliant cast, brilliant writing and cinematography. I saw the pilot a while back so that's why I'm reviewing now. I definiely recommend it to everyone. People who like horseracing and to those who don't.
  2. Feb 8, 2012
    10
    Okay, here's what we can conclude from the reviews of "Luck." Critics are getting dumber. If a TV series doesn't make every little thing clear at first glance, they get mad and call it "impenetrable." Had they reviewed "Hamlet" in 1601, they would have complained about the "impenetrability" of the ghost. Critics also seem to believe that narrative momentum trumps all other dramatic qualities. If the plot doesn't flat-out gallop like a speed horse running wire to wire (sorry), then the show fails. Alessandra Stanley of the New York Times writes that "Luck," like "Treme" (!) sacrifices excitement to "lofty intentions and a certain snobbery," by which she means the effort to create a rich and vibrant sense of place. If that's snobbery, then call me Thurston P. Howell III, because I enjoy the sense of being immersed in a new culture or subculture, and few shows do that well. As for users, we fall into two categories. Those literate enough to write reviews celebrate "Luck" and understand it much more deeply than the critics. Those who have strong opinions but don't express them in words are much less enthusiastic, putting "Luck" behind "Spartacus: Vengeance" in the user polls. I suspect that the critics and the numbers-only users are more alike than different and that, if Metacritic really wanted to offer viewers a useful index of quality, it would publish three numbers: the critics' average, the user-raters' average, and the user-reviewers' average. A long shot, I know. Anyway, "Luck" is superb, a smoldering masterpiece in which, like gamblers studying their environment for signs, viewers accept that their knowledge will always be partial because the underlying reality is mysterious and immense. That is why many of the characters are so circumspect, their acting so restrained, and it's a good--no, a great--thing. The opening credits tell viewers exactly what to expect and how to approach it, from the banked fire of Massive Attack's theme song to the subtle sequence of images: some partial, some barely focused, many deceptively simple. Pay attention. Be patient. Don't assume a fire is dead just because you don't see flame. Oh, and because everyone else is confessing, I DO love horse-racing and could handicap like a champ when I still had my baby fat. "Luck" doesn't get every detail of racing right, but it gets what matters, and it is one of a very few shows today that rise to the level of art. Expand
  3. Jan 30, 2012
    10
    Quirky, understated, and original, like nothing else I've seen in a while. I'd watch it just for the gorgeous shots of the horses (and I am not a horse-racing fan at all). This drew me in, in a big way.
  4. Feb 2, 2012
    9
    The beauty of a great drama is it takes at topic I'm not particularly interested in (aka horse racing) and makes it seem fascinating. This show is worth watching for the cinematography alone.
  5. Feb 1, 2012
    10
    The caliber of all the names involved with this show is amazing. Shows like this give me hope for tv in general as an entertainment medium. The cinematography was outstanding. The acting second to none. The story and depth of the characters is compelling leaves you wanting more. I could easily see this becoming my favorite show.
  6. Mar 26, 2012
    10
    Having already been a huge Miltch fan, I went in with high hopes. I was not disappointed. Fantastic cast, remarkable writing, captivating story. Having just watched the season1 finale, I'm left wanting more. Can't wait for season 2.
  7. Mar 5, 2012
    10
    It's complex, and it takes a few viewings to figure out just what is going on and to understand the different story lines. In other words, it isn't dumbed down and it doesn't even begin to throw the obvious in your face. The cast is fabulous, the production values are great, and there are truly beautiful scenes at the track. I love it.
Metascore
75

Generally favorable reviews - based on 29 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 23 out of 29
  2. Negative: 0 out of 29
  1. Reviewed by: Roger Catlin
    Jan 31, 2012
    80
    What keeps these threads tight and advances the action is the input of Michael Mann, who directed the pilot and set the tone for the rest of the nine-episode first season.
  2. Reviewed by: Ken Tucker
    Jan 30, 2012
    91
    I suspect Luck will need its own kind of good fortune to persuade HBO Subscribers to get on its wavelength--to go with the undulating rhythm of its storytelling. But it's worth the effort. [3/10 Feb 2012, p.104]
  3. Reviewed by: Rob Owen
    Jan 30, 2012
    70
    Viewers who appreciate slow-moving stories set in gritty, somewhat sleazy environments with characters of questionable morals are most likely to be rewarded by betting on Luck.