"The Winner" could be the "gold standard" example of a movie that cheats the audience. Enticing you in with capable actors, Rebecca DeMornay, Vincent D'Onofrio, Delray Lindo, Michael Madsen, and Billy Bob Thornton, and then giving them an absolutely worthless script to work with. This thing is so scatter shot, so talky, and so ridiculous, that describing a plot would be futile. It also might give the mistaken impression that there is one. The set up of a guy who can't lose at the casino is never explored beyond the initial idea, and there is absolutely no payoff for the long suffering audience. "The Winner" is definitely a loser. - MERK

Alex Cox will always be remembered for the astonishing one-two punch of 'Repo Man' and 'Sid and Nancy', yet his finest achievement was the daring, career-destroying 'Walker'. As if being exiled from the studio system wasn't enough, Cox then made the diabolically awful 'Straight To Hell' to seemingly bury any credibility he may have had left. 'The Winner' represents yet another oddity from Cox's years in the indie wilderness, but perhaps has the highest curio factor due to its eyebrow-raising ensemble cast. Yet what makes 'The Winner', ultimately, a loser, is in all fairness not attributed to Cox but rather its unimpressive, derivative, post-Tarantino screenplay (allegedly adapted from a play, presumably off-off-off-off Broadway). Cox and the cast struggle with its uneven tone and, despite Frank Whaley scoring in a hilariously slimy role, the unfunny nature of the script is barely able to justify the film's incessant stylistic zaniness. While it does work in small doses (an effective opening and a memorably odd ending), it simply isn't enjoyable enough to even warrant minor cult status. That said, it is at least a slight cut above the other interminable 'Pulp Fiction' clones that plagued the mid-to-late nineties. But what sort of endorsement is that?

This movie should be a about a guy who wins at the casinos all the time, which sound interesting, BUT: it isn't really bout that! OK, there is a guy in it who "they say" wins all the time, but its actually just about lot of people who have no real background, characteristic or what so ever, who want that guys money. The camera sucks big time, I had the feeling the whole movie was shot in totals, no close ups at all. Michael Madsen and the female leading role's t&a are the only things worth mentioning in this movie. oh well, she had great legs too! And Billy Bob Thornton, i actually didn't recognize him anywhere in the movie, might be someone with the same name (kidding, but I really didn't recognize him...awkward!). I'd love to write some more on this one, but it's just that there isn't anything left to...well, just the summary: AVOID IT!

A finely tuned and taut script may have been laid to waste here by careless, directoral miscues.Philip (Vincent D'Onofrio) goes on a roulette winning streak in Las Vegas and discovers some hard lessons about faithfulness and betrayal. One of the central themes -- what happens to a person when he finds himself suddenly in the grips of material and financial wealth, and just as importantly, what happens to the recipient's so-called friends and acquaintances in relation to that recipient -- is worth conveying and, as a viewer, exploring in all its nuance and implications. The script certainly seems ready to achieve that -- not to mention there's a near-all-star cast to boot -- but in the hands of director Alex Cox, all the talent (both in terms of cast and script) seems to have been for naught. Cox directs with an uneven hand so that the movie lacks the tonal consistency it deserves. He also exhibits schmaltzy tendencies that move us away from the essence of the script -- it speaks volumes that the movie, which was originally titled "A Darker Purpose" (an acclaimed play by Wendy Riss, who also wrote the screenplay) got turned into a movie titled, well, "The Winner." One can't help but wonder then what would have become of this script if it had fallen into the right director's hands.