You won't be disappointed!

The Age of Commercialism

Such a frustrating disappointment

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

The movie isn't bad. But it also isn't one of the greater comedies. Still it is pretty entertaining and if you look at the cast you can see that it has a lot of talent that manages to make us laugh at a silliest joke. The beginning is actually funnier than the end. Tom Hank's ride in the ambulance with his friend was entertaining. I also found it hilarious how the woman who sold them the house told how she lost her Carlos (he was Hitler's pool boy) and Tom Hanks going to one of his child stars to lend money for the house was also a great scene. That kid, Billy Lombardo, didn't seem to have stayed in acting but he was pretty good in this movie. Then when they get the house there is pretty much just one joke: it falls apart. And they still manage to have entertaining moments when they keep on repeating it, but still it is noticeable and one wishes there was more. Still the facial expressions and physical comedy hold the movie above average.

Some people call this Tom Hanks' worst film. Nope, it was just completely ridiculous to the point that the viewer is supposed to know this kind of thing could never happen on this scale and just laugh, because we've all had these kinds of things happen on a much smaller scale.Tom Hanks and Shelley Long play a couple who have recently fallen in love and have been living in her ex-husband's New York City apartment and not thinking ahead. But then one day the ex-husband, Max (Alexander Godunov), returns and they have to leave.In a hurry to find a place to live, they buy a house for a song that looks beautiful through a disreputable agent. Although they looked at the house - never had an actual inspection mind you - and everything looked okay, things begin to fall apart the day that they move in. The front door and its entire frame fall off its hinges, the bad step on the staircase ends up with the entire stairway crashing to the floor, the bathtub falls through the floor just by filling it with water, and so on. The problems and their cost mount to the point of being way past ridiculous, and as goes the house so goes the relationship between Hanks and Long. To make matters worse, Max really wants his ex-wife back and is taking advantage of her vulnerability and deteriorating mental state.The fact is, nobody in this film but Hanks and Long play remotely likable characters. Everybody else is at best selfish and vain or incompetent, at worse dishonest, including Hanks' dad who ran off and left with his law firm's money so he could marry a girl about one third his age, leaving Hanks' character holding the bag.How will this all work out? Watch and find out. This was the only pairing of Shelley Long with Tom Hanks, and it is rather bittersweet in a kind of "A Star is Born" way, looking back. Tom Hanks had not been able to break out of farce like comedy roles such as this yet will end up getting back to back Best Actor Oscars. Long thought that this role was a stepping stone to better things after she decided to leave Cheers the following year, but she never got anything that really rose above this kind of role and was pretty much out of the movies by 1992.Highlights of the film for me - Gudonov's monologue to Hanks on the perks of being shallow and self-centered, a mouse-trap like chain reaction joke of physical comedy involving Hanks that has to be seen to be believed, and Philip Bosco as the genial and useless supervisor of the construction crew who is all smiles and has only one answer to how long it will take to fix the house - "two weeks".

A young couple struggles to repair a hopelessly dilapidated house.This is very much a classic 1980s comedy. And apparently, you can find it packaged with "The Burbs", which makes a lot of sense. Both Tom Hanks at that certainly period in his life, and both what I would call B-level comedies (whereas "Big" would be A-level).Much of the film is pretty funny, but I think it is hindered by the emotional aspect. I understand that is a part of the plot, but the way the characters react at that point is unbelievable -- even in a film full of unbelievable situations. I am also confused why the main character is an attorney. He doesn't seem very bright, and the things they have him doing seem more appropriate for an accountant.

This film tells the story of a young couple and a house. Walter is a failed showbiz agent who kills himself to work and pay the debts left by his father, who fled with the money of brokered artists. Anna is violinist and member of the orchestra directed by her ex- husband, Max, a conductor with a blonde hair only smaller than your ego. Forced to move from the apartment where they live and faced with the real estate jungle of Manhattan, they end up buying a small mansion in a deal that seems like a dream come true... a dream that will crumbling slowly, as the weaknesses of the old house are becoming evident, for madness of the two lovebirds and delight of the audience.Walter is represented by a young Tom Hanks, in a stage of his career where he made several comedies. Despite the youth, we can recognize many of the characteristics of this actor which we can see, more developed, in films of his maturity. Anna is embodied by Shelley Long, a actress particularly skilled in comedies. Joe Mantegna also has a role as Art Shirk, a quite wealthy plumber. The film was directed by David Giler and Steven Spielberg, and is the beginning of a good collaboration between Spielberg and Hanks, who will result, in the future, in some successes like "Saving Private Ryan". The jokes of context and situation prevails, as well as the hilarious grimacing of the two main actors and a fabulous (and famous) Hanks laugh, well-remembered by those who like this film. In the midst of so many good points, just one less good note: I believe the script superficially explores the comic opportunities brought about by love triangle Walter-Anna-Maestro, introducing elements of conflict very late and giving them lightly solutions at the end of the film.In the beginning, this comedy doesn't seem to have anything new or special. It's just a comedy of the eighties, a decade when this genre was very exploited and, to be honest, battered by several absolutely disastrous films. But is exactly by that, partially, why "The Money Pit" deserves to be noteworthy: because it's so good and works so well. This film, a remake of a forties comedy, is a guarantee of laughter, no matter we are watching for the first time or the hundredth time in our lives. It's a film that does't tire to review over and over again. It is always funny.