Michael J. Fox, an actor beloved for his charismatic roles in films like Back to the Future, brings his signature appeal to For Love or Money. However, even Fox’s captivating on-screen presence isn’t enough to rescue this 1993 romantic comedy from a fundamentally weak script and a tangled, improbable plot. This review will explore why, despite fleeting moments of promise, For Love or Money ultimately fails to deliver a satisfying cinematic experience.
Fox is undeniably in his element as a New York City hotel concierge, effortlessly embodying boyish charm and a nonchalant, almost gleeful self-interest. The film briefly comes alive in scenes that depict the bustling world of high-end concierge services. A particular highlight is a scene set in a park, where concierges from rival hotels gather to engage in a clandestine exchange of coveted tickets to Broadway shows, major sporting events, and sold-out rock concerts. These moments offer a fascinating, albeit brief, glimpse into the unique subculture and intricate dealings of this profession.
Unfortunately, the narrative quickly descends into what can only be described as an “idiot story.” The central plot revolves around Fox’s character’s ambitious dream to build a luxury hotel and his simultaneous pursuit of a woman named Anwar, a department store employee with aspirations of becoming a singer. The already tenuous premise becomes further convoluted when Fox seeks financial backing from a wealthy venture capitalist, Higgins. In a bizarre twist, Higgins enlists Fox to secure a discreet hotel room for an extramarital rendezvous. The ensuing and utterly predictable “surprise” that Higgins’s secret girlfriend is none other than Anwar sets in motion a domino effect of increasingly implausible coincidences.
These coincidences rapidly escalate from improbable to absurd, ultimately derailing any potential for genuine engagement or enjoyment. Director Barry Sonnenfeld, who gained prominence with The Addams Family, occasionally demonstrates flashes of visual ingenuity and directorial wit in isolated scenes. These fleeting moments of cleverness, however, are ultimately overwhelmed and suffocated by the sheer weight of the poorly conceived and executed script. The film feels disjointed, a collection of loosely connected plot points that never coalesce into a cohesive or narratively satisfying whole.
In conclusion, while Michael J. Fox delivers a performance that consistently outshines the surrounding material, For Love or Money is, regrettably, a cinematic misfire. The movie’s reliance on a flimsy, illogical plot and an overabundance of contrived coincidences overshadows any redeeming qualities. Despite Fox’s undeniable charm and Sonnenfeld’s sporadic directorial sparks, this film proves to be more of a waste of time than a worthwhile investment for viewers in search of quality entertainment.
