Boy oh boy have I seen worse. Valiant attempt by the actors. Lame but cute.
5 Reviews
At Best, Only Mildly Engaging, With Humorous Moments Overwhelmed By An Abundance Of Triteness.
rsoonsa31 October 2010
This not unexpectedly little-known film is fabricated in quite the wrong way, with efforts by its co-leads to make something special of its flabby script being murdered by tepid direction, bringing a result that its occasional bright moments are halted soon after they appear, an especial shame as its romantically connected co-principals are fundamentally quite highly skilled players. Chris Murdoch (Timothy Daly) and his business partner Jeff Simon (Michael Garin), having left successful employment with a commercial real estate firm in order to found their own company, are soon financially stiffened, and nearing bankruptcy. When an opportunity arises for them to bid for the construction of a new facility for housing a large corporation, Reed and Reed, they enthusiastically prepare a contract proposal, and the corporation's C.E.O., William Reed (Kevin McCarthy), offers them encouragement; however, their status becomes muddled after Chris falls in love with Jennifer (Haviland Morris), who happens to be William's daughter, upon whom he dotes. Additionally, William's brother Arthur (David Doyle), the other of the two corporate titular Reeds, is identifying reasons to offer the pending lucrative contract to more seasoned individuals who are representing Chris and Jeff's former employer. A possible ray of hope for the young partners is enjoyed when Chris and Jennifer become lovers. Unfortunately, Jennifer, who works at a nearby Long Island marine research center, is soon disenchanted with Chris after he outlines his plan to construct condominiums near the site of the research center. During this same period that Chris and Jennifer are frolicking, Jeff has begun an affair with LuAnn (Shelley Fabares), William Reed's wife, highly inconvenient as this liaison of the loins is known to Arthur and also to the principal competitors who are vying with Chris and Jeff for the sought-after contract. Further, the young entrepreneurs may have their chance of prosperity stopped by all of these romantic shenanigans, and their very existence reduced to a state of penury. In quaint fashion, the scenario has the entire imbroglio being clarified by a tennis match between the Reeds held at their private club! Essentially a romantic melodrama, the film's foremost acting contributions are turned in by Daly and Morris, who diligently work at creating their roles; as well as from veterans McCarthy and Fabares, who do their best with feebly written dialogue. Clichés abound, and the soundtrack's selected musical recordings are generally obtrusive, while the film's direction is by the numbers. In sum, there is precious little of merit to be seen here, although whenever the camera's eye focuses upon Daly the action becomes a bit more interesting.
Oh, it was from Hemdale! So that explains it.
FeverDog18 February 2004
Did they ever distribute a hit movie? They had a few good movies out there in the '80s (like MIRACLE MILE, RIVER'S EDGE, and SHAG), but nothing that resembled a box office hit.
Why? Could their release schedule be a reason? Or their lack of marketing?
Take LOVE OR MONEY. It hit theatres in early January 1990, smack in the middle of Oscar season. I was working in a theatre then, and this movie was plopped on one of our (five) screens with no fanfare, advertisement, or advance screenings. Nobody knew what the hell it was. Patrons who asked about it were met with shrugged shoulders and a recommendation for BACK TO THE FUTURE II (our big movie at the time). Maybe I saw some of it on break; I don't remember (but for some reason I recall a question mark at the end of the title). As a result, the LOVE OR MONEY house was deserted for seven days, until it was booted out the next weekend for GLORY.
I have never seen LOVE OR MONEY in a video store, or on HBO, or on TBS, or even on a third-rate UHF station at three in the morning. And judging by the dearth of comments here, neither has anyone else. But at least I've heard of it, and can differentiate it from that lame, similarly-titled Michael J. Fox movie that came out a few years later.
Why? Could their release schedule be a reason? Or their lack of marketing?
Take LOVE OR MONEY. It hit theatres in early January 1990, smack in the middle of Oscar season. I was working in a theatre then, and this movie was plopped on one of our (five) screens with no fanfare, advertisement, or advance screenings. Nobody knew what the hell it was. Patrons who asked about it were met with shrugged shoulders and a recommendation for BACK TO THE FUTURE II (our big movie at the time). Maybe I saw some of it on break; I don't remember (but for some reason I recall a question mark at the end of the title). As a result, the LOVE OR MONEY house was deserted for seven days, until it was booted out the next weekend for GLORY.
I have never seen LOVE OR MONEY in a video store, or on HBO, or on TBS, or even on a third-rate UHF station at three in the morning. And judging by the dearth of comments here, neither has anyone else. But at least I've heard of it, and can differentiate it from that lame, similarly-titled Michael J. Fox movie that came out a few years later.
Blahhhhhh yuk boring
clarinetkitten6231 January 2015
By Carrie Rickey, Inquirer Movie Critic Posted: January 08, 1990
Love or Money, shelved since 1988, is the kind of painfully laugh less romantic comedy that was made more frequently when investors looking for major losses could use films as tax shelters. If only for diminishing the number of lousy movies made with sheltered money, the Tax Reform Act of 1986 was good for something.
Love or Money, the story of a young, handsome, poor, unprincipled real estate broker who falls for a young, beautiful, rich, principled marine biologist, manages to be heartless and bankrupt.
This movie is not about love or money. It is about upwardly mobile white kids who summer in the Hamptons, where they drink umbrella cocktails called ''Frontal Lobotomies" that are mixed with Midori, champagne, Paul Masson Chardonnay and Robitussin. After their libations, they flirt, play tennis and make baby-talk business deals.
The fact that the characters drink Frontal Lobotomies perhaps explains the brainlessness of the script. It took three screenwriters to write dialog on the order of "What's wrong with making money? It's a creative thing!" It took the same three people to come up with this original story idea: Money-mad boy meets Eco-sane girl; money-mad boy loses Eco-sane girl; money-mad boy gets Eco-sane girl. Like the moral of so many Hollywood movies, they don't have to choose between love and money. Without working too hard, they get bundles of both.
Charmlessly directed by former production designer Todd Hallowell, the movie has zero coherence and negative style. The film is so amateurish that it could be mistaken for a student movie.
Credit Hallowell (or his casting director), however, for hiring some amiable stage actors, such as Timothy Daly as the romantic lead and convivial pro Kevin McCarthy as the father of his beloved.
Shelley Fabares, Donna Reed's television daughter, who had a hit with ''Johnny Angel," looks terrific in the role of McCarthy's flirty wife. She also looks as though she's in need of a Frontal Lobotomy to get her through. If you go, take along a shaker of 'em.
Love or Money, shelved since 1988, is the kind of painfully laugh less romantic comedy that was made more frequently when investors looking for major losses could use films as tax shelters. If only for diminishing the number of lousy movies made with sheltered money, the Tax Reform Act of 1986 was good for something.
Love or Money, the story of a young, handsome, poor, unprincipled real estate broker who falls for a young, beautiful, rich, principled marine biologist, manages to be heartless and bankrupt.
This movie is not about love or money. It is about upwardly mobile white kids who summer in the Hamptons, where they drink umbrella cocktails called ''Frontal Lobotomies" that are mixed with Midori, champagne, Paul Masson Chardonnay and Robitussin. After their libations, they flirt, play tennis and make baby-talk business deals.
The fact that the characters drink Frontal Lobotomies perhaps explains the brainlessness of the script. It took three screenwriters to write dialog on the order of "What's wrong with making money? It's a creative thing!" It took the same three people to come up with this original story idea: Money-mad boy meets Eco-sane girl; money-mad boy loses Eco-sane girl; money-mad boy gets Eco-sane girl. Like the moral of so many Hollywood movies, they don't have to choose between love and money. Without working too hard, they get bundles of both.
Charmlessly directed by former production designer Todd Hallowell, the movie has zero coherence and negative style. The film is so amateurish that it could be mistaken for a student movie.
Credit Hallowell (or his casting director), however, for hiring some amiable stage actors, such as Timothy Daly as the romantic lead and convivial pro Kevin McCarthy as the father of his beloved.
Shelley Fabares, Donna Reed's television daughter, who had a hit with ''Johnny Angel," looks terrific in the role of McCarthy's flirty wife. She also looks as though she's in need of a Frontal Lobotomy to get her through. If you go, take along a shaker of 'em.
Nice Romantic Comedy
bhaleamau2 November 2015
I just saw "Love or Money" this morning on the ThisTV network. (Incidentally, it's not only the first time I've watched it, it's the first time I've heard of it.) Anyway, "Love or Money" is very much of its time in attitude and style. As others have said, it seems to have sat on the shelf for a year or two, then quietly released (to fulfill a contractual obligation?).
What I saw, having just found it on TV about a half-hour in, was a pleasant romantic comedy with a lot of screwball scenes (e.g., Chris holding forth on the importance of making money then stumbling into a fish tank; his girlfriend yelling at a fishmonger for selling a fish too short to spawn). It's the kind of movie that often is shown late at night or on weekend afternoons, in a word, filler. But enjoyable filler.
What I saw, having just found it on TV about a half-hour in, was a pleasant romantic comedy with a lot of screwball scenes (e.g., Chris holding forth on the importance of making money then stumbling into a fish tank; his girlfriend yelling at a fishmonger for selling a fish too short to spawn). It's the kind of movie that often is shown late at night or on weekend afternoons, in a word, filler. But enjoyable filler.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
