PUNTUACIÓN EN IMDb
5,4/10
2,1 mil
TU PUNTUACIÓN
Arruinado y endeudado, un vaquero honesto se ve envuelto en asuntos turbios con un ranchero corrupto.Arruinado y endeudado, un vaquero honesto se ve envuelto en asuntos turbios con un ranchero corrupto.Arruinado y endeudado, un vaquero honesto se ve envuelto en asuntos turbios con un ranchero corrupto.
- Dirección
- Guión
- Reparto principal
Gregory Sierra
- Chavarin
- (as Gregg Sierra)
Bruce Davis Bayne
- Bank Customer
- (sin acreditar)
Poupée Bocar
- Girl in Bar
- (sin acreditar)
Richard Farnsworth
- Man
- (sin acreditar)
Ken Freehill
- Bank Customer
- (sin acreditar)
Terrence Malick
- Worksman
- (sin acreditar)
Reseñas destacadas
Stuart Rosenberg directed this meandering film that stars Paul Newman as Jim Kane, a near-broke cowboy who is approached by a shady rancher(played by Strother Martin) to go into Mexico to buy him some cattle and bring it back. Though suspicious, Jim needs the money, so takes a chance and accepts the job. While there, he meets up with old friend Leonard(played by Lee Marvin) who is also in need of money, so they team up to collect the cattle, but their suspicions are confirmed when the deal goes awry, placing them in a tough situation... Thoroughly blah film coasts along on its star power, which is considerable, though film never amounts to much and is largely unmemorable.
Down-on-his-luck Arizona cowboy takes a job herding cattle through part of Mexico. Adaptation of J.P.S. Brown's novel "Jim Kane" is oddly benign, certainly not a strong acting vehicle for Paul Newman, who is likable but curiously dopey throughout, nor Lee Marvin as Newman's equally half-witted cattle-broker pal. Eccentric ambiance abounds (this is no "Hud"), yet director Stuart Rosenberg gives the picture a scruffy charm in a light lower key. The plot is too skimpy for these characters to truly come alive, but it's a pleasant enough throwaway. Screenplay by future filmmaker Terrence Malick, from an original treatment by John Gay. ** from ****
The above line of dialog is all you need to know about the abbreviated mental capacity of the two lead characters played by Paul Newman and Lee Marvin, and why they were such losers trying to be important cattle brokers in Mexico, and of course failing miserably. The Summary quote above was just one of Marvin's many bright ideas that went nowhere.
Newman and Marvin were terrific here, but two other stars in this comedy, to me, were Marvin's great old '60's red Buick convertible and, of course, the terrific Strother Martin, whose hilarious line of "wait, wait, wait" in this film was almost as effective as his very famous one in Cool Hand Luke and his less famous one in Butch Cassidy of, "yes, there are plenty of jobs don't you want to know why?" He was the best at memorable lines, and he had some of the best ones in many of Newman's films over the years. Wayne Rogers(MASH) was in it too, playing a cattle buying middleman who was just about as dumb as the star characters.
This film was very entertaining in the very funny and goofy way Newman and Marvin played off each other with their lines, both thinking they were so clever when they were really just abject loser dopes. Newman's character was actually a good and simple guy underneath it all but he was just too dumb to breath out, and Marvin's sleazy small time crook and deal negotiator character thought he was so clever but was actually laughable in his incompetency. "Spies are everywhere", he said as he grossly overestimated his importance to the world, which was next to nothing.
Reminded me a lot of old Laurel and Hardy film stories, where great plans always came to nothing after much useless, but hilarious, activity.
Very entertaining film and a lot better than its rating for the very funny interplay of these 3 terrific actors.
Newman and Marvin were terrific here, but two other stars in this comedy, to me, were Marvin's great old '60's red Buick convertible and, of course, the terrific Strother Martin, whose hilarious line of "wait, wait, wait" in this film was almost as effective as his very famous one in Cool Hand Luke and his less famous one in Butch Cassidy of, "yes, there are plenty of jobs don't you want to know why?" He was the best at memorable lines, and he had some of the best ones in many of Newman's films over the years. Wayne Rogers(MASH) was in it too, playing a cattle buying middleman who was just about as dumb as the star characters.
This film was very entertaining in the very funny and goofy way Newman and Marvin played off each other with their lines, both thinking they were so clever when they were really just abject loser dopes. Newman's character was actually a good and simple guy underneath it all but he was just too dumb to breath out, and Marvin's sleazy small time crook and deal negotiator character thought he was so clever but was actually laughable in his incompetency. "Spies are everywhere", he said as he grossly overestimated his importance to the world, which was next to nothing.
Reminded me a lot of old Laurel and Hardy film stories, where great plans always came to nothing after much useless, but hilarious, activity.
Very entertaining film and a lot better than its rating for the very funny interplay of these 3 terrific actors.
This film is not as bad as the previous reviewer would have you believe. It just takes a different kind of mindset to enjoy it--you have to like nonlinearality. You have to be in a relaxed, maybe even coming-down-off-a-jag state of mind to appreciate its structure.
Paul Newman, affable as always in the lead, is not placed in any of the more familiar predictable, and simplistic predicaments cited by my colleague ( though, if anything, "character study" would come the closest to describing this film).
But, instead of an "easy" situation--the kind that makes us smug to be able to identify quickly--in this picture Newman battles ineffectually against a more subtle and insidious malaise, one not often focused on in film in this manner. Its a common problem--something we all deal with at one time or another--its that type of confidence-effacing, will-sapping, ego-draining personal economic debt that for many adults never really seems to go away.
Just like the rest of us, Newman's simply got an ego that wants to assert itself--but at every turn he's being strung up by the short-and-curlies due to lack of $$. He keeps trying however. Still, we see that throughout the film, each new situation somehow gets away from him and leaves him with nothing to show for his troubles. He's just too nice a guy to come out a winner.
He always needs more money than he's got and it affects everything he does--prevents him from really enjoying what might be an otherwise pleasant life. In the end he's forced to face that:
1) his troubles are maybe never going to be conquerable,
2) there will be a lot more (of the same kind of humiliation he's undergone all throughout the movie)throughout the rest of his life, and 3) despite this, there are still some dividends in life that make things easier to bear, like having a best friend, a car that runs, or just having enough money in your pocket to get a Coke.
Its true the movie has an unsatisfying conclusion--the very human plot in this film just doesnt have a happy resolution, (coincidentally, just the way real-life problems dont work out, what a concept for a film, right?).
But the hangdog ending, just like the rest of the film, is somehow difficult to forget. It has such an unusual, low-key pace and rhythm that it really stays with you. I have seen it come up at least 4-5 times on the late show and never been displeased--its rather like seeing an old friend.
Dont dismiss it--its a movie that can cheer you up under the right circumstances.
Paul Newman, affable as always in the lead, is not placed in any of the more familiar predictable, and simplistic predicaments cited by my colleague ( though, if anything, "character study" would come the closest to describing this film).
But, instead of an "easy" situation--the kind that makes us smug to be able to identify quickly--in this picture Newman battles ineffectually against a more subtle and insidious malaise, one not often focused on in film in this manner. Its a common problem--something we all deal with at one time or another--its that type of confidence-effacing, will-sapping, ego-draining personal economic debt that for many adults never really seems to go away.
Just like the rest of us, Newman's simply got an ego that wants to assert itself--but at every turn he's being strung up by the short-and-curlies due to lack of $$. He keeps trying however. Still, we see that throughout the film, each new situation somehow gets away from him and leaves him with nothing to show for his troubles. He's just too nice a guy to come out a winner.
He always needs more money than he's got and it affects everything he does--prevents him from really enjoying what might be an otherwise pleasant life. In the end he's forced to face that:
1) his troubles are maybe never going to be conquerable,
2) there will be a lot more (of the same kind of humiliation he's undergone all throughout the movie)throughout the rest of his life, and 3) despite this, there are still some dividends in life that make things easier to bear, like having a best friend, a car that runs, or just having enough money in your pocket to get a Coke.
Its true the movie has an unsatisfying conclusion--the very human plot in this film just doesnt have a happy resolution, (coincidentally, just the way real-life problems dont work out, what a concept for a film, right?).
But the hangdog ending, just like the rest of the film, is somehow difficult to forget. It has such an unusual, low-key pace and rhythm that it really stays with you. I have seen it come up at least 4-5 times on the late show and never been displeased--its rather like seeing an old friend.
Dont dismiss it--its a movie that can cheer you up under the right circumstances.
When I read through the previous reviews for this film on IMDb, I noticed that quite a few folks thought this film was scant when it comes to script. This is absolutely the case, though at least having some excellent actors (Paul Newman and Lee Marvin) makes it watchable.
"Pocket Money" has a very simple plot. Rancher Jim Kane (Newman) is having some seriously bad luck and is broke. However, a guy with a shady reputation (Strother Martin) wants to employ him to go down into Mexico in order to buy some cattle. Once he arrives in Mexico, he meets up with his old friend Leonard (Marvin) and the two try to purchase cattle. However, LOTS of complications arise and a seemingly simple job turns sour.
"Pocket Money" is a very slow film that appears as if it was made up as the movie was being filmed. Sure, it might have had more to the script than that, but it sure didn't look like it did. But, with some actors (especially Paul Newman), I can live with this. Certainly not among the actors' best but a decent time-passer--plus you get to see Lee Marvin riding a horse while wearing a suit--and you can't see that every day.
By the way, a couple songs (including the title song) are sung by Carole King. I really don't think these fit the movie well, as her style of singing and voice seem odd in a film set in Arizona and Mexico among cattle.
"Pocket Money" has a very simple plot. Rancher Jim Kane (Newman) is having some seriously bad luck and is broke. However, a guy with a shady reputation (Strother Martin) wants to employ him to go down into Mexico in order to buy some cattle. Once he arrives in Mexico, he meets up with his old friend Leonard (Marvin) and the two try to purchase cattle. However, LOTS of complications arise and a seemingly simple job turns sour.
"Pocket Money" is a very slow film that appears as if it was made up as the movie was being filmed. Sure, it might have had more to the script than that, but it sure didn't look like it did. But, with some actors (especially Paul Newman), I can live with this. Certainly not among the actors' best but a decent time-passer--plus you get to see Lee Marvin riding a horse while wearing a suit--and you can't see that every day.
By the way, a couple songs (including the title song) are sung by Carole King. I really don't think these fit the movie well, as her style of singing and voice seem odd in a film set in Arizona and Mexico among cattle.
¿Sabías que...?
- CuriosidadesThe movie's publicity still with Paul Newman and Lee Marvin was photographed by British photographer Terry O'Neill and also appears on the jacket of O'Neill's 2003 compilation coffee-table book "Celebrity." In the book, O'Neill recounts how when he arrived on the set to shoot his publicity stills, Lee Marvin was hungover and in a foul mood. Most of the production personnel were steering clear of him. When O'Neill gingerly approached Marvin and introduced himself, Marvin asked, "Are you English?" What O'Neill didn't know at the time was that Marvin was a lifelong Anglophile--he LOVED the British. After that brief encounter, Marvin's mood changed and, according to O'Neill, he couldn't have been more cooperative for the rest of his assignment.
- PifiasJim asks Adelita if she's ever been out of the country, and she says she's only been to a Catholic school in San Antonio. Yet she has a thick, mid-Atlantic, prep-school accent, without a trace of the south or Spanish in it.
- ConexionesFeatured in Hollywood Remembers Lee Marvin (2000)
- Banda sonoraPocket Money
Written and Performed by Carole King
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y añadir a tu lista para recibir recomendaciones personalizadas
Detalles
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- 2.700.000 US$ (estimación)
- Duración1 hora 42 minutos
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugerir un cambio o añadir el contenido que falta