UNLIMITED STREAMING
WITH PRIME VIDEO
TRY 30-DAY TRIAL
Home > Drama >

Money for Nothing

Money for Nothing (1993)

September. 10,1993
|
5.7
|
R
| Drama Comedy Crime

When unemployed dockworker Joey Coyle finds $1.2 million that fell off of an armored car, he decides to do the logical thing: take the money and run. After all, he says, finders keepers. He turns to his ex-girlfriend Monica, who works in an investment firm, for advice, before turning to the mob for help laundering the money. While Joey makes plans to leave the country, however, a detective is following his ever-warmer trail in order to recover the cash.

...

Watch Trailer

Cast

Reviews

GetPapa
1993/09/10

Far from Perfect, Far from Terrible

More
XoWizIama
1993/09/11

Excellent adaptation.

More
Plustown
1993/09/12

A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

More
Aryana
1993/09/13

Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

More
SnoopyStyle
1993/09/14

In Philadelphia, Joey Coyle (John Cusack) can't even get a day's work at the docks from his brother Billy (James Gandolfini). While Kenny Kozlowski (Michael Rapaport) is driving him home, they find $1.2 million that fell off of an armored truck bound for Trump's casino. Kenny refuses to take any of the money. Joey asks his ex-girlfriend Monica Russo (Debi Mazar) who works in investments to help. He goes to bookie Dino Palladino (Benicio Del Toro) who takes him to Vincente Goldoni (Maury Chaykin) to launder the money. Detective Laurenzi (Michael Madsen) is investigating the case.John Cusack is not dumb enough for this to be funny. This character is an idiot. He can't even do basic math under duress. I've never bought Cusack playing an idiot. It would work better if Joey is played by a comedian who does stupid well. Don't get me wrong. I like Cusack and I like this movie ... to some extent. Joey is such an idiot that it would be a great black comedy if the movie is cast right.

More
Superunknovvn
1993/09/15

"Money For Nothing" is a watchable little movie, but nothing spectacular. How could it be really, when it's based on a premise that's not particularly interesting in the first place? A guy finds some money and the police is looking for the money. There you go.The real reason to watch this is the amazing cast, which wasn't very well known yet in 1993 when this movie was made. Michael Madsen, Benicio Del Toro, Philip Seymour Hoffman and James Gandolfini all in one movie, that's really a treat. The shining light, however, is the leading star himself. This may not be John Cusack's best movie, but it may very well be his best performance."Money For Nothing" suffers a bit from the fact that it can't decide whether it wants to be a drama, a crime story or a comedy. Still, it makes for an enjoyable viewing. Catch it, if it's on TV.

More
Mickey Knox
1993/09/16

What would you do if you'd accidentally find 1.2 million dollars? Take it, although it's illegal and the whole police will be on your trail? Or return it, get a 20.000 dollars reward, but live patiently, with no problems? That's the theme of the movie and the lucky guy that finds the money is John Cusack. Worth to watch, but still too simple plot (it's a theme that could've lead to great situations), predictable ending, poor acting and not tensed at all. Vote: 5 out of 10.

More
AKS-6
1993/09/17

"Money for Nothing" is a pretty good film based upon a true story (although I guess everyone already knows that the person the film is based upon, Joey Coyle, committed suicide before this film's release). The talents of John Cusack and Philip Seymour Hoffman in one and the same film is really, really interesting. Both of them are among the best actors today and even though Hoffman has a very small part he is still memorable. But the film doesn't seem to know if it's a comedy or a drama and this is not so good. Sometimes it work, but it doesn't work in this film. It's not a bad film, but it could definitely have been better. (5/10)

More