For Richer or Poorer (1997)

reviewed by
James Berardinelli


FOR RICHER OR POORER
A Film Review by James Berardinelli
RATING: ** OUT OF ****
United States, 1997
U.S. Release Date: 12/12/97 (wide)
Running Length: 1:56
MPAA Classification: PG-13 (Profanity, implied sex)
Theatrical Aspect Ratio: 2.35:1

Cast: Tim Allen, Kirstie Alley, Jay O. Sanders, Megan Cavanaugh, Wayne Knight, Michael Lerner, Larry Miller Director: Bryan Spicer Producers: Bill, Jonathan, and Sid Sheinberg Screenplay: Jana Howington and Steve LuKanic Cinematography: Buzz Feitshans IV Music: Randy Edelman U.S. Distributor: Universal Pictures

The winter holiday season box office sweepstakes is on, with Paramount opening TITANIC, Fox weighing in with GREAT EXPECTATIONS and HOME ALONE 3, Warner Brothers sending out THE POSTMAN, Dreamworks releasing AMISTAD and MOUSEHUNT, Miramax debuting JACKIE BROWN and GOOD WILL HUNTING, Disney blinding us with MR. MAGOO, and Columbia/TriStar showing AS GOOD AS IT GETS. So what "prestige title" is Universal contributing to the mix? How about FOR RICHER OR POORER, Tim Allen's latest dud. If ever a motion picture was destined for oblivion, this is it. No major studio stands to make less money during December 1997.

As comedies go, FOR RICHER OR POORER isn't absolutely terrible (it's better than HOME ALONE 3, for example), but neither is it particularly laudable. All things considered, it's a pretty generic offering. A few of the gags are capable of generating chuckles, but most are shockingly unfunny. There's little or no genuine character development, and everyone on screen represents one form or another of stereotype. The script is, to put it mildly, uninspired. I see at least a dozen movies like this every year, and, by the time it comes to assemble my year-end retrospective, I find it difficult to distinguish one from another.

Creatively, this is Tim Allen's second motion picture failure of the year (the other was JUNGLE2JUNGLE). Likewise, it's director Bryan Spicer's second straight bad outing (following hot on the heels of Bottom-10 contender MCHALE'S NAVY). Together, these two talents definitely don't make magic. In fact, they're hard pressed to make many laughs. Worse still, FOR RICHER OR POORER clocks in at an unbearably long 116 minutes. There's no way that a light, essentially-pointless comedy should be this long. Cut about 30 minutes off the running time, and it might be a shade more bearable.

A better name for FOR RICHER OR POORER would probably be WITLESS, since it seems designed as a takeoff on the Harrison Ford thriller, WITNESS. The basic premise has Brad and Caroline Sexton (Tim Allen and Kirstie Alley), an ultra-rich couple on the verge of a divorce, being forced to flee from their New York City penthouse when the IRS discovers some irregularities in their tax returns. It seems that their accountant (Wayne Knight) has absconded with $5 million, and left the Sextons holding the bag. Now, an overzealous IRS agent (Larry Miller) wants to put them behind bars or shoot them -- whichever is most expedient. Their flight from the law takes them to Intercourse, Pennsylvania -- Amish country. By pretending to be visitors from the Midwest, they find refuge with one family. The rest of the film follows them as they grow to appreciate the simple way of life, and, in the process, fall in love again with each other.

While Allen is merely bland, Kirstie Alley is downright irritating. The actress appears stuck in CHEERS mode. This is a television performance on the big screen, and its limitations show. No one else in the cast does much to eclipse her, however. Wayne Knight and Michael Lerner have small parts. Jay O. Sanders and Megan Cavanaugh, playing the Amish couple the Sextons live with, have a little more screen time, but their roles, like their performances, are largely forgettable.

Most of the film's limited humor comes as a result of Allen, who occasionally displays an aptitude for physical comedy. There's also a mildly amusing gag concerning an old man who arrives at 4:45 am each morning to get everyone up for the day's work. Larry Miller is supposed to be funny, but I never found myself laughing at his uptight, tough guy routine. Other than that meager fare, there's not much mirth to be found in FOR RICHER OR POORER, and, since the drama is insubstantial and irritating, that means the movie doesn't have a lot to offer. Universal should have kept this one under wraps until Christmas was over.

Copyright 1997 James Berardinelli
- James Berardinelli
e-mail: berardin@mail.cybernex.net

Now with more than 1300 reviews... The ReelViews web site: http://movie-reviews.colossus.net/

"No art passes our conscience in the way film does, and goes directly to our feelings, deep down into the dark rooms of our souls"

- Ingmar Bergman

The review above was posted to the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due to ASCII to HTML conversion.

Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews