This show is gonna be good as shit.

Great cast, new subject matter(for HBO) + Milch, so you know there's gonna be more than enough cocksuckers and motherfuckers.

I'm liking the degenerates so far, lol

I agree - I enjoyed the Pilot, there's plenty to chew on with the current decline of race tracks/bringing in the slots issue (at least that's how it is NJ) and there's a large supply of interesting, idiosyncratic characters. I only hope that it isn't bogged down by beautiful yet incomprehensible bullshit, ala John from Cincy.

...the degenerates story i sorta understood...and i think Hoffman's story will be about revenge which i'm always down to watch play out....the rest of that shit confused the shit outta me..maybe i was too sleepy tryin to watch...

..good direction, great camera work, and most of all:

great cast

you can tell they did their homework.

i've heard rumblings that the pilot was difficult to follow for some, but that's the world of horse racing in general. so many layers, so many characters, and more than enough drama to hold your interest.

*the initial convo btwn farina & hoffman (in the car) was redundant. there's a much better way to establish presence, hierarchy, and position without handin' it to the viewer in one take.

as with any series, the pacing will be crucial but this cast should be able to hold it down.


..and miles to go before i sleep...

..dustin hoffman might be one of the best at it

dude always appears so unassuming that you kinda forget that he can be the biggest prick in the world when push comes to shove.

kinda surprised more people are talkin' about this show...


..and miles to go before i sleep...

....BIG TROUBLE IN LITTLE CHINA show up?

I'm lovin' this show.

thank you.


http://theyesyesyalls.com
http://facebook.com/theyesyesyalls
http://reverbnation.com/theyesyesyalls
http://twitter.com/shamelessplug

After two episodes, I'm in. I think Hoffman could end up being the best lead on an HBO show since Gandolfini.

I like the dialogue, I like the hard-boiled mood, I like how believable the seedy characters and locations seem, and I like the skill with which they've filmed the horse races.

I'm not 100% sold yet, but I'm looking forward to riding this one out and seeing where they go with it...

it's horrible.

for serious, though -- the scene in the 1st episode where it seemed to me there was something about a jockey being told to run his horse slow, but he was saying he was going to ignore the order?

-- who was he talking to?
-- who was issuing this nebulous order?
-- was I actually understanding the dialogue because everything was drowning from inside jargon?
-- was there any kind of resolution to that scene within the episode? (I watched it, and I seriously don't know, I was so lost and tuned out by the end)

this is just one example of basically my entire experience watching the show. this is the first episode. I shouldn't be so horribly lost. pretty much the ONLY thing I understand about it are the jockeys, because they're dressed like jockeys, and horses, because I know what horses are. everything else about it was utter trash.

gave the second episode fifteen minutes, further backwards progress in my understanding happened, and now I'm refusing to watch a minute more. don't let the foolish fans hide behind "America just doesn't like horses." actually, it's just a terrible show.

but I couldn't even tell you what Dustin Hoffman's character's role in the show is, except that he's Dustin Hoffman. I've been able to glean that Nick Nolte is a horse owner or horse breeder or something, but mainly just because all his scenes are in stables and he acts like owns the horses. the show did NOTHING to explain to me, the viewer, about its esoteric, niche subject.

that's NOT a failing by me, the viewer. that's a failing of the show. and the proof is in the pudding, the show is a bomb when measured by "chatter," despite having completely bankable names on it. like I was EXCITED to sit down and watch the show, and had been so thoroughly and aggressively confused by it, that any goodwill the beautiful camerawork built up in me was lost within 60m.

I *am* that dude that has told countless people about the Wire "make sure you watch past the first few episodes, it picks up (and turns into the greatest show ever made), I promise," but if you go back and watch those episodes, the narrative and dialogue was at least providing some exposition for the viewer to be able to navigate into this subculture of crime. Luck didn't do that AT ALL that I saw, and it was frustrating.

They're still delving into character's backgrounds which is ok with me. I'm not trying to convince you to like it or even give it another shot. I just find the "I don't get it so it sucks" sentiment funny. As well as labeling it a failure already because of the lack of "chatter". It already got renewed for a 2nd season so they must be doing something right so far.

and I think "chatter" is a completely useful tool in measuring the impact of something in pop culture, and I know I'm not alone in it. marketers increasingly want to reach "influencers," who in turn will do their marketing for them.

I would hope that any SMART marketing organization would be keeping close tabs on social media metrics, and I would say Luck has completely and totally failed that litmus after two episodes. look at another show like Treme, which HBO has doggedly stuck by, but at this point the only feedback I hear from sources I trust on that is "I've tried so damn hard to like it, but I'm slowly coming to the realization it's just not that good." I know it's early to start staking out positions, but it seems to me Luck is headed for the same fate.

and I normally don't put too much time into trashing things just for the sake of trashing. I jumped in here mainly to respond to the comment "why so quiet?" to which I reply "well, I'm quiet because I didn't understand it, which means I have nothing to say (except I think, for the same reason, the show is destined to fail)."

If you watched more than 15 minutes of the second episode, you would know more about Hoffman's character (why he went to jail, what he's up to right now business-wise, etc.).

The pilot was definitely tough to follow (especially the beginning), but I personally kind of liked feeling immersed in characters' world. I actually only made it 30 minutes through the first time I tried to watch it (started it too late - I was dozing off), but then the next day I rewatched the whole episode and enjoyed it more, and immediately watched the second episode, which I also enjoyed. Some more tangible character development is already taking place in the E2, especially with respect to the four gambling partners.

I'm not saying it's going to be good - it could definitely end up sucking - but I'm looking forward to seeing where the take it. Out of Mad Men, Sopranos, the Wire and Deadwood, I've never really enjoyed the first episode or two, so I'll give this the benefit of the doubt for the time being.

It hasnt really had that OH SHIT HBO moment yet but I could see that coming in the next episode or 2 and then from there I could see it being great

:o/

http://www.tmz.com/2012/03/13/luck-horse-dies-set-hbo/

Acting's been top notch.

Last episode where dude in the wheelchair got on prozac was the first time I cared about any of the degenerate squad. Happy to see the story unfolding.


http://twitter.com/collazo
http://www.reverbnation.com/livesociety

too many horses died.

>too many horses died.

too soon?

This sucks

err, wait .. wrong forum?

That show was beating a dead horse for years.

>That show was beating a dead horse for years.

Ahahahaaaa. Like the idiom, but it really happened. Hahaa. Oh, ohohohoooo.

Fuck hopefully they change their mind

http://www.imdb.com/news/ni24440567/

The title was never meant to be quite this ironic.

HBO has elected to cancel production on Luck following the death of a third horse on the racetrack drama series.

The network released this statement:

“It is with heartbreak that executive producers David Milch and Michael Mann together with HBO have decided to cease all future production on the series Luck. Safety is always of paramount concern. We maintained the highest safety standards throughout production, higher in fact than any protocols existing in horseracing anywhere with many fewer incidents than occur in racing or than befall horses normally in barns at night or pastures. »

Could never get past how unlikeable every single character was on the show and how totally horrible the entire race culture is.

Bring back Brain Games.

>totally horrible the entire race culture is.

This is the second Milch show in a row to bite the dust after just one season. I wonder how long we'll have to wait to hear about his Faulkner adaptations.

Wasn't for everyone so I doubted it's longevity, but it really captured life at the track in my opinion. Was slow and you needed to know the vernacular which turned people away besides the horse deaths.

When I read the first swipe above about horses dying, I was telling people the show probably wouldn't last. Didn't think it'd be over this soon, though.

I, for one, was enjoying the show. It wasn't great or anything, but it was pretty good television.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x7mk1v_it-s-always-sunny-in-philadelphia-p_fun

Show picked up the pace big time tonight.

the musical spots are just beautiful.....really plays well with the scenes...great performances too....anyways...cool show..sad to see it go so soon.

LOL

http://www.vulture.com/2012/03/michael-mann-david-milch-interview-luck-horses-cancellation.html?mid=twitter_vulture

oday at 4:45 PM
10Comments

The Vulture Transcript: Michael Mann and David Milch Open Up About the Cancellation of Luck

By Matt Zoller Seitz

Facebook
Twitter
ShareThis Counter
Email

HBO's racetrack drama Luck was one of the most anticipated new shows of the season: a collaboration between two pop-culture juggernauts, writer-producer David Milch (NYPD Blue, Deadwood) and moviemaker and TV producer Michael Mann (Miami Vice, Heat). But the program was plagued by early press reports that Milch and Mann were at each other's throats during the shooting of the Mann-directed pilot, and animal-rights groups condemned the production when two injured horses had to be put down. When the series finally debuted, it was met with underwhelming viewership, and then, last week, while shooting season two, the production was permanently shut down after a third horse died on set. Now, for the first time since the show's end, Milch and Mann together address the horse fatalities, the cancellation, and the rumors of ego clashes on set, and Milch handicaps whether or not those long-discussed Deadwood reunion movies will ever happen.

What were your reactions when you heard that a third horse had a fatal accident and had to be euthanized?
Michael Mann: It’s a sinking feeling. And the first thing you need to ask is, you know, what happened? It’s been reported that the horse was being led by a groom, he was being walked back to his stall, was frazzled by something, reared back and lost his footing and hit his head when he fell, and that resulted in heavy bleeding.
David Milch: There was a terrible ordinariness to what happened to that horse. And it’s in the rhythm and texture of life as lived at the track that those things happen. The sickening feeling that comes to you when you hear something like that knowing that what is going to attach itself to that fact isn’t properly germane to it at all. And I’m sure that the feeling came very quickly to Michael, the way that it did to me, was the foreknowledge of what was about to ensue.

There had been two previous horse deaths during the making of season one. Did you originally think that you would be able to resume production after the suspension that followed the third death, as you had after the first two? And if so, did it have you thinking of any changes you could make to lessen the chances of it happening a fourth time?
Mann: No. For both of us who work in media, we understand the reality of it, and there’s certain physics. I mean, three horses is three too many, and when this third one went ... It’s a very common act, to have died. You know, you knew that this was unsustainable, that the fact of it is just going to make it … I don’t know if we could individually articulate it. You felt sort of the resounding sense of, you know, "This can’t work." It’s like trying to negotiate with gravity. Because of the media attention as well as the fact of it, it just becomes an impossibility.
Milch: To answer your question directly, Matt, there was absolutely nothing that we thought of doing differently in the aftermath of that third incident. You would have to not lead a horse from its barn to the racetracks. You would interfere with the most fundamental processes of a horse's life in order to preclude that possibility.
Mann: A groom has the horse on a tether and in a stable area, behind the track where there are I don’t know how many hundreds of horses led by grooms every day. And whether it’s a rabbit or whatever, the horse startles. And so in terms of things we’ve done differently, to amplify what David’s talking about, there’s nothing … We had the strictest protocols in place anywhere in the world in terms of how these horses were cared for: the tests that they were put through, how they’d be allowed to work for us. No racetrack has stricter protocols than we imposed in our care of the horses — and, by the way, by people whose entire life is about caring for horses. If you spend your life caring for horses, it’s not because you don’t like horses. It’s because you love horses. That’s why you do it.

Could you respond to accusations by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and other groups that the horses used on Luck were too unhealthy, or too old to have been subjected to the rigors of weekly TV production? That they were sometimes pushed too hard, or that they were doped up to make it through production and hit deadlines?
Mann: It’s not true. We adhered strictly to guidelines. The horses we selected were thoroughbreds who were slow and sturdy, meaning that if they were too fast, then they weren't were right for us. And if these horses who were probably — David can speak to this better than I can — who were a little beyond their racing life … A lot of these horses, by the way, if they weren’t being cared for by us, the way they were being cared for would rather poor.
Milch: Just to pursue this a little bit, I was embarrassed for PETA when I read some of their statements, the savage ignorance of the realities of what we were doing ... They talked about 5-year olds being too old to race. A 5-year-old is in the absolute prime of his racing life! They that the horses were found to have been medicated at necropsy . Well, of course they were medicated at necropsy. They’d been medicated in the aftermath of being injured! This was beyond irresponsibility, the distortion that took place in order to make those accusations.

David, you’re a longtime racing aficionado and a horse owner, and Michael, I know you used horses during the production of The Last of the Mohicans. How have you both responded to news articles and editorials suggesting that it’s not worth risking the lives of horses to make art — or for that matter, that racing itself is cruel and ought to be banned?
Mann: I don’t want to speak to whether racing is cruel or not or ought to be banned. There was a good piece in the New York Times that seemed accurate. The Huffington Post had something on March 17 that was fairly accurate. There’s been a lot of press things in the last day or two about seventeen horses dying at Aqueduct since the beginning of this year. By the way, we had 2,500 horse runs on our show, and when we say a "race," we run that horse for about a quarter of the track. Then that horse must rest for 25 minutes. This is the mandated call that we adhere to. And then a horse could run another quarter and then he’s done for the day. We had one horse who broke down, of the 2,500 horse runs. He had cooled down to a light gallop or a canter and threw a shoe*, and the shoe hit the horse behind him in the chest, causing him to stumble and then roll over. And then we tried for about an hour and a half to rouse that horse until we realized that the horse had broken his shoulder. That’s not to say that three horses dying is just part of the reality of making of a show. Three horses dying is three horses too many. David, do you wanna answer that?
Milch: I would just say that you’re coming up against certain deep, fundamental biological truths: that any living thing is subject to the laws of mortality, and that there was nothing that was done with any of these horses that was unnatural, nothing that was other than what they had evolved to do. , there’s a kind of moral and emotional fastidiousness that is entailed, which at a certain point becomes absurd. Organic matter depends upon the appropriation and consumption of other organic matter. There are just truths that obtain whether we find them pleasant or not. The kind of flinching from any form of art or experience that PETA seems to advocate is ultimately life-hating.

One of the strains of criticism, and this is a very specific one, is not that it is immoral to use horses for entertainment per se, but that this specific show, which contains one or two races in every single episode, was qualitatively different from other entertainment that uses horses. We’re not talking about, you know, a stand-alone Western.
Mann: It's different in the sense that our show happens to be about racehorses. The differences between a racehorse, or a quarter horse, or a warhorse or any other kind of horse are .

How so?
Mann: Well, are more delicate, and they’re more spirited. They wanna go. They wanna race. They want to run. And Dave knows a lot more about how thoroughbred racehorses are bred than I do.
Milch: It’s in their nature, Matt, and it fulfills the deepest movements of their spirit. To say that these animals are subjected to something unnatural … You know, it’s embarrassingly stupid.

How much of the show had been shot when the plug got pulled?
Mann: We'd shot the first episode of the second season. We were into the first few days of the second episode.

Will we ever see that episode?
Mann: The first episode? Possibly, we’re not sure.

The title of the show was Luck. Every subplot and scene was to some degree about characters responding to sudden shifts in fortune and inexplicable events and random tragedy. Has this series of events, climaxing in cancellation, made either of you look at the show's themes in a new or different light?
Milch: I think that it’s all part of it, isn’t it, Matt?
Mann: There are some accusations that were made about the care of the horses, as David said, irresponsible, wholesale fabrications. The people who were involved in the care of these horses, the trainers and everybody, are devastated by accusations as well as the cancellation. We have a lot of working men and women who are not called "Hollywood," whatever that means. They’re carpenters, they’re camera assistants, they’re prop men, they’re nice folks, they’re good hardworking people who loved the show, loved being on the show, thrilled to be part of the crew, loved the horses, and were absolutely heartbroken at each one of these events, and heartbroken at the show having to be canceled, and are undergoing hardship, and some of them are on the street. And that’s really where a lot of our attention has gone.

David, this is your third HBO drama after Deadwood and John From Cincinnati to be canceled before its full arc could be played out. In at least two of those cases, Deadwood and Luck, there were external forces at play, apart from ratings or audience response. What, if anything does the gambler-philosopher in you make of all that?
Milch: Well … Next hand!

After the pilot there were reports of rancor, followed by a working arrangement that gave you, David, control of the writing, and you, Michael, control of the filmmaking. Is this an accurate description? And if so, how did that collaboration work?
Mann: I’ve always felt that — full disclosure and candor up front — that’s the way you do things, and that’s the way of a successful product, and that’s the way you add a successful outcome to an artistic endeavor. And we talked about it, if I’m gonna direct this , here’s how I’m gonna do it, and everybody signed on, and that’s what we did. After , I showed it to David. After we saw the pilot — and we both liked the pilot a lot — the two of us were together in my office, and I said, "Okay, looking forward to the series, and to where I’m not the director but we’re partners as co-executive producers, how should we work together?" And David said, "Shame on us if we can’t figure out a way to work together, because I like what you do, you like what I do." And so that’s when we decided that, as an understanding between the two of us, that David has to be the captain of the show. David has to be the captain of the show, and of everything having to do with the writing. Period. I was captain of the show for the telling of the stories and so on, for directors and casting the guest stars and the new characters, for the editing and the mixing, the music selection — all of that other stuff that had to do with the telling of the stories that David wrote. It was our understanding and our agreement that this is the way we were gonna work. And it worked!
Milch: I was gonna say, was there a process of adjustment? There absolutely was. And did we make it? Yes, we absolutely did. And did we collaborate effectively thereafter? I think absolutely, that was the case. It was as satisfactory a working relationship as I’ve ever had.

I have to ask, then, whether the "process of adjustment" that you refer to includes that anecdote that Nick Nolte related to the Los Angeles Times, about you going over to Michael's editing room with a baseball bat, David.
Milch: Oh, I don’t know what that was about.
Mann: Take Nick with a grain of salt!

Where would the show have gone in season two? Or had you thought that far ahead?
Mann: Totally. It was going to into a very interesting place of … Actually David should talk about it, because this is his department.
Milch: With Nostromo, Joseph Conrad said that he had wanted to write a novel about the degradation of an idea. That's what we wanted to show in the case of Dustin Hoffman’s character, Bernstein. A dream that he had had, which is an organizing principle we begin our lives with, he finally felt he had an opportunity to live that dream out.

And what would that dream be, for the benefit people reading this who haven’t seen Luck?
Milch: This is what’s kind of a tragic paradox about what’s gone on, wanted to bring back horse racing, to show it in its purity. The purity and exaltation of the experience of witnessing, and to some extent participating in, the thoroughbred’s moment of victory and defeat. And what we wanted to show as the developed was all of the permutations of that experience, as it was subjected to the lunge and thrust and pull of life as lived. And the intrusion of the casino as a metaphor for the kind of mechanization of experience in all its forms and turning experience into an article of commerce. And I might add that even morality can be used and turned into an article of commerce. We’ve experienced that at the hands of certain groups very recently. But that was gonna be the arc. Michael had built the architecture. We were right on course. It was extremely frustrating to have this sudden intrusion.
Mann: Ace had also elevated himself his origins of maybe 30 years ago. In season two, Ace was gonna find himself brought back, right to the way he had been as a man at 30 or 40 years ago, right back into those dark places, with some of the actions he was gonna be compelled to have to do.
Milch: Much of the darkness that one might feel is repressed within Ace, particularly in the power that’s there, and in his immobility and stillness, and in Dustin’s portrayal of it; the darkness that one might sense, or get a hint of. A lot of that was going to become manifest in the second year.

This show was a marquee item for HBO because of you two, Dustin Hoffman, and Nick Nolte. But it didn’t find as big an audience as some other cable dramas currently on the air. Do you have any theories as to why?
Mann: Two things. One is that it’s not just a marquee, it’s also an emotional investment for everybody at HBO. I mean, that’s the fact of it. You wanna know how much … I mean, we mourn the loss of the show. It’s fact. I betcha Michael Lombardo feels the same way about it as we do, and so do a lot of other people there at HBO.
Milch: I just had a conversation with Richard Plepler to exactly the same effect.
Mann: In terms of the numbers, it’s funny. All journalists know how a combustion engine works. Most people in media don’t know how media work. HBO is not an advertiser-based model, it’s a subscription model. So what’s significant to HBO is not necessarily the debut of an episode, it’s the cumulative numbers. Our cumulative averages were about 4.8 million per episode. And if it was strictly about how we do the day that we go out, if that was the strict criterion, then HBO would not have episode one up against the SAG awards, episode two against the Super Bowl, episode three against the Grammys, and episode five against the Academy Awards. And that was okay, by the way, to do that, because you know you’re gonna get lower numbers on your debut, and it doesn’t matter because the are gonna work … You know, a show that’s somewhat different, that’s gonna break the waves, you’re gonna have a small group of people, usually in media, who appreciate it first. And then it's on that second wave that the show has a chance. There’s no guarantee that this show would have, by the way. But it’s in that second wave . That, by the way, is the experience I had way back when with Miami Vice. Critics and the intelligentsia kind of loved the show, but we didn’t have any numbers until we started rerunning the first season.

Would you have made any sort of course corrections, any stylistic or aesthetic adjustments, to bring more people into the tent?
Mann: The storytelling was evolving, starting with episode four and then with seven, eight, nine — the last three. And somewhat by design. It was all as David designed it. And David, Eric Roth, and I would sit together and kick ideas around, and David would make the final determination . But as it had been designed, everything that began in the first episode and the middle episodes was all driven, all vectored, to a major conclusion in episode nine, which was also a little bit of a cliff-hanger. I think you’ve seen episode nine, so you know what I’m talking about.

Yes.
Mann: But then, I’ve never made any film that I wouldn’t go back and re-edit.

And in fact, you have!
Mann: I have. Every time I've had an opportunity.
Milch: You always want high ratings, but I think that Michael spoke accurately to the strategy that HBO deployed. As for changes, I think that Dustin Hoffman’s character was in the process of deepening, and encountering — as Michael describes him — the darker impulses of his nature. But that seemed to be a natural evolution rather than a correction.

David, you have a deal in place to adapt the works of William Faulkner for HBO. And Michael, I’ve heard that you have other projects brewing in TV as well. What’s next for each of you?
Mann: I never talk about what’s next. There are some documentaries made with war photographers in conflict.
Milch: It’s a wonderful project.
Mann: It’s called Witness. are in production, and also in editing, right now.
Milch: And I’m working on the Faulkner project, and have some other irons in the fire. But it’s you know, there was a character in Deadwood, he said, "If you wanna hear God laugh, tell him your plans."

Speaking of Deadwood: David, are we ever gonna see those Deadwood movies?
Milch: No, I don’t think so. We got really close about a year ago. Never say never, but it doesn’t look that way.

* This section has been corrected after a transcription error.

The last three episodes really picked up the pace, although I really didn't mind the slow build from earlier in the season.

The music was great for the finale -- the tunes for the two races, notably -- and certain scenes reinforced my respect for horses (They scare the shit out of me, really. Far too powerful a creature. An aunt of mine had a horse, which my cousin used to ride in competitions ... and which I was always on guard around. Fuckers are huge!).

Turo was such a cool character, and I loved that exchange at the end with Nolte.

As I wrote earlier, I get why it had to end, but ...

Damn, it had potential.

Very much agree.

My favorite new show, and I looked forward to it more than any other.

At first I disliked Escalante, but he grew into a really cool character throughout the season.

I'm glad they didn't leave any cliffhangers, and hopefully they will release the blu-ray/dvd. Unlike AMC w/ Rubicon.

Yeah, I'm still mad about that.

edit: On a side note, Naomi's titties came off like a parting gift - one that I was very grateful for.

yes i contain hate.

how many more eps we have?

bc ive been into this show from the jump, and as i predicted (largely based on the "this season on luck promos, i ain't gonna lie) it's picked up! i mean i liked it back when it was slow but whatever

whats the deal?

The 1st episode of the second season was completed. And they were on the second episode when production shut down. I'm pretty sure what they had left will end up one the DVD/Blu-Ray

I really am gonna miss it. That final race was fucking masterful. The thing though that I'm gonna miss them not being able to explore more...? How fucking badass Gus is.

I know it'll suck to not see more after but oh well

is it worth watching or should I just delete it all since it's been canceled?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Sometimes I contemplate moving to a warmer place, then the lake and skyline give me a warm embrace" © Common

The season finale does a good job of acting like a series finale. Sure, there's some loose ends, but I think the show it was and the show it was becoming and the thoughts of what the show would've become are all worth experiencing. If that makes any sense.

Was he involving those guys in the racetrack/casino deal just so he could pull the rug out from under them (forcing them out of the deal with that tape of the bribe for blackmail) and rub all his profit in their faces? Or did he never actually plan to makes the racetrack/casino move just to get them trapped in a deal that would lose them money, or somehow get them in legal trouble? It also seemed like he was losing steam on the revenge plot towards the end because of old girl, and it kinda seemed like realizing his grandson was still alive put the nail in the coffin for his revenge. I'm just confused.


Gus is a fucking G too, just wanted to say that

>get them in
>legal trouble?

Alan Sepinwall: Since we're not going to see it play out, what exactly was Ace's plan in regards to Mike? The best explanation I've seen was from one of my commenters, who suggests that Ace wants Mike to steal the casino deal out from under him, and that Mike will go to prison as a result because it's crooked. Is that it?

David Milch: Yeah, that's pretty close. When you compress it, invariably you distort it. You obviously have to do what you think is appropriate, but my own preference is not to linger too much on the would have beens of this show.

I'm gonna miss this show. I know this is the stock response to a show getting cancelled, but I'd love to see an Ace and Gus movie. Maybe a prequel of sorts, leading up to Ace's arrest on cocaine charges? Hoffman and Farina were just too good