Simon_peters

A disappointment to see Paul Newman wasting his time on this feeble film, his penultimate appearance on the big screen. The plot is based on a ludicrous premise, and, despite Newman's best efforts, the unlikelihood of the situation demands a complete suspension of disbelief. The direction is sloppy, and Linda Fiorentino, interestingly also in her penultimate film appearance, is left high and dry so that the subtlety of performance she is capable of is reduced to hammy over-acting. There is no evidence from this production that Dermot Mulroney is capable of a subtle performance, but all three actors suffer from being saddled with leaden dialogue, and poor staging by the director.

The film runs to 1 hour 29 minutes and it feels as though the editor had to hold scenes longer than necessary to make up the length. Overall a thin little film with little to recommend it.

If you want to see Newman at his best there is a huge choice, which doesn't include Where the Money is. Linda Fiorentino for her performance in the 1994 film The Last Seduction, won the New York Film Critics Circle Award for Best Actress, the London Film Critics' Circle Award for Actress of the Year, and she was nominated for the BAFTA Award for Best Actress in a Leading Role. For both leads one can only say, with regret, how the mighty are fallen.

When they are digging the hole in the street in the City of London, Harry Baird, playing Gill, calls Leo Farrel 'Neil', which is the actor's name (Neil McCarthy) instead of Leo, or Binky, the name of the character.

The missing Nausea sequence was included in the version shown on the British TV channel 'Taking Pictures'. It's an amusing interjection, with very little in common with the rest of the film. The film is a genuine period piece, and worth watching, despite Laurence Harvey's exuberant performance with its range of accents.