For Richer or Poorer (1997)

reviewed by
E. Benjamin Kelsey


FOR RICHER OR POORER
(PG-13)
Directed by Bryan Spicer
Running Time: 114 minutes
Originally Released: December 12, 1997
Reviewed by E. Benjamin Kelsey
* (out of four)

Hey, I've got a great idea for a movie! Ok, here it is: We'll get Tim Allen to pull angry faces for about two hours or so! What's that? Sounds too boring? Ok, how about this then: We still have Tim Allen pull faces for about two hours, but half of them are angry looks and half of them are "I'm in pain!" looks! What's that? That still doesn't sound funny to you? How about if we through in some "ewwwww!" looks? Still not funny? If you answered "No, that doesn't sound funny", then (DING DING DING!) you're absolutely correct!

FOR RICHER OR POORER is a moronic farce about a rich married couple (played by Tim Allen and Kirstie Alley) who seek refuge in an Amish community after their bumbling accountant (Wayne Knight, best know as Newman on TV's "Seinfeld") gets them in trouble for tax evasion. What ensues is a badly scripted and horribly directed 114 minutes of cinema hell. What makes this all wrong is that nobody seems to have what the film needs . . . namely, talent!

Backing up, the married couple is Brad and Caroline Sexton (Allen and Alley), a popular snobby duo who seem totally in love to everyone else, but in reality are on the brink of divorce. Just as their marriage seems to be hanging from it's final thread, Brad discovers that his accountant, Bob Lachman (Knight), has been engaging in illegitimate deals in the Sexton's names. The IRS catches on, but since everything points back to the Sexton's and not Lachman, there is nothing much to do . . . except run away and join an Amish community.

First time screenwriters Jana Howington and Steve LuKanic give us a couple of chuckle-out-loud moments, and even some decent laughs here and *way* over there, but there is so much to cringe at in this horribly made film that you'll likely miss the laughs while regurgitating popcorn. Alley is absolutely unwatchable, and the chemistry between her and Allen is about as believable as my chemistry homework from tenth grade (which, I inform you, was total B.S.). Allen and Alley are in no way convincing as tycoons, nor are they very convincing as an Amish couple! This entire movie is one bad ill-conceived notion that should have been curtailed from the very beginning!

The Amish in this movie are also flimsy and unconvincing. It's such a trite, stereotypical script that I imagine the actors that were cast (noticing that they're all predominantly TV figures) were probably the only ones they could get! Bryan Spicer's directing doesn't help one bit, either. In fact, listing Spicer's filmography (which includes the first "Power Rangers" movie and the big screen adaption of MCHALE'S NAVY) is more of an insult than a résumé!

Now that I've pretty much run FOR RICHER OR POORER into the ground, I will let you in on the best thing about it. It bumped seven films up a notch on my "worst of" 1997 movie list. That's right, thanks to this film ranking at number 3 for the year's worst, six films are now not seemingly as bad, and A SMILE LIKE YOURS, previously inhabiting the number ten spot, now doesn't have to suffer the ridicule of making my bottom ten list. If you look at it in that respect, FOR RICHER OR POORER will end up making someone happy after all!

December 12, 1997

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