...you'll do far better enjoying Guy Ritchie's "Snatch" in which Brad Pitt's Mickey brings that entire Celtic sub-culture to near preternatural perfection. It's also a much better movie. I feel that Traveler wastes so much of its potential impact with lame ripoff schemes and a confusing sense of who and what the Travelers actually are. Also, setting it in America is like setting a movie about Eskimo life (not that I'm comparing Travelers to Alaskan natives by any means) in New Orleans.North Carolina?Paxton and Marky Mark are talented performers but this film, while certainly watchable, doesn't really seem to get to the point.

To satisfy one reviewer's curiosity: These people do exist, or at least clans like them exist. There is a well-known Scottish clan who are con artists, doing roofing jobs, driveway sealing, etc. that are no good. They gather yearly in Cincinnati, OH at which time the local media warn people to beware of them and their "work". Their graves are marked by rather gaudy headstones and monuments in Cincinati's Spring Grove Cemetery. The cemetery has been the resting place of prominent cincinnati families since the 19th century. I first was told of these people (perhaps the name of the clan is MacDonald) when I was shown the cemetery many years ago. Their red granite monuments stuck out like sore thumbs amongst the more sedate ones of proper Cincinnatians. As to whether an Irish clan of travellers exists, I do not know, but the Scottish clan does. As to the movie--Nice, small film. Nice work by Bill Paxton and Mark Wahlberg.

This could have been an interesting movie but it didn't live up to its promise. For one, the "traveller" culture of itinerant Irish grifters is explored very sketchily, if at all. The violent climax seems like an import from a totally different kind of movie. The only really entertaining scam was the one that Bokky and Pat pull on Jean, the bartender Bokky ends up falling for. The rest were either so simple as to be dull (the phony sealant, the trailers) or so complex you couldn't follow them (the scam involving the Turks). There are much better movies about con men; "House of Games" is probably my favorite.The acting alone makes "Traveller" worth watching. Bill Paxton is very good as Bokky, a likeable rogue with a sincere face and an awakening conscience, and he credibly conveys his growing love for Jean; his anguish when he has unwittingly put her in grave danger is palpably and painfully real. Julianne Margulies brings warmth and spunk to her potrayal of Jean, and the romantic chemistry between her and Paxton is undeniable. Mark Wahlberg, in one of his first "real" roles, projects just the right mix of boyish vulnerability, charm (in the scenes where he's romancing Kate, the clan boss's daughter), and cool-dude moxie. As the old grifter "Double D," James Gammon is a lot of fun to watch whenever he's onscreen.Unfortunately, the screenplay doesn't do enough to develop the two main characters. For instance, Bokky seems to have a good heart; yet he's been conning people for years (not even siphoning some extra cash from rich people for whom it's merely a drop in the bucket, but cheating poor and ignorant folk -- in some cases, cheating them out of their life's savings), and somehow it never bothered him until he met Jean. That doesn't make much sense. As for Pat, I think the film should have told us more about his life "on the outside." We gather that he's poor and doesn't have too many opportunities (though he's dressed nicely enough when he arrives for his father's burial), but it's still hard to understand exactly why he's so eager to be a part of the "family" and to join a lifestyle in which his choices, even about things as basic as whom to marry, will be severely restricted, or why he thinks it's so terrible that Bokky risks being excommunicated from the Travellers. (Bokky's on-the-road life certainly doesn't look like being "on top of the world" to me.) Pat's relationship with Kate is treated as an afterthought, maybe a plot device to give him a reason to come back to the Travellers camp.Because of these flaws, the character development that could have been the strongest part of this movie never really gels. The shaky plot structure, especially toward the end, compounds the problems.

Traveller doesn't really know what it wants to do. It ends up as a strange mix of road drama and romance, but whatever it's doing, it works. Paxton provides a creditable performance as the experienced Traveller, and Margulies shines in her role as Jean; their relationship is nicely understated, and well played. However, it's Wahlberg who provides the uncertainty in this movie - he doesn't really know how he is playing his character. As for the much criticised turn to violence in the finale, it is indeed unexpected, but not altogether unwelcome and it makes for an interesting climax. The film is very good, but it could so easily have been excellent.