Pocket Money

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 ****

Throughout this thoroughly confused movie, I kept waiting for the point to become clear. Is it an innocent cowboy against the the corrupt cattle barons movie? Is it a buddy movie? A character study? What's the point?

Paul Newman seems to be playing a slightly retarded rancher, with an accent that is neither consistent nor believable. Lee Marvin plays the only character that is at least interesting, even though it's not at all clear just what his purpose in the movie is. Strother Martin is just painful to watch.

Mexicans may want to avoid this movie. It contains enough slurs to keep the producers in law suits for a decade if it had been produced in the more politically correct 90's.

It was a struggle to stay awake through this movie. I sure hope the book was better.

Caught this one on American Movie Classics, thinking that a Lee Marvin / Paul Newman pairing couldn't be all bad. Indeed, it wasn't all bad, but it was no great success either. A premise with possibilities for interesting developments never seems to play out in a fruitful manner. The Marvin / Newman interaction is indeed the main redeeming factor of the film, along with evocative cinematography, but ultimately the movie never seems to go anywhere in particular, and indeed it does not end - it just all of a sudden stops. I have rarely seen such an abrupt and unsatisfying conclusion - all of a sudden we are seeing the closing credits and wondering "what happened?" Unfortunately, this can only be recommended to diehard fans of Lee Marvin &/or Paul Newman. (Incidentally, "Maltin's" remark that Marvin's car is "the damnedest thing you'll ever see" indicates he was not alive in 1960, the model year this particular Buick was a common sight on the roads of America)

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.

Seems like a lot of wasted potential. Paul Newman and Lee Marvin have some decent chemistry between their characters, and Strother Martin and Wayne Rogers are OK. A young Hector Elizondo is a long way from the manager of the Beverly Wilshire Regency. Carole King does nice work on the theme song. The cinematography looks very nice, and the direction is unobtrusive. But there is simply no there there. The film has a plot that seems to be heading somewhere, but just sort of fizzles out with no closure, no climax, and no denouement. I wonder if the source novel was this unsatisfying. It would be really hard to recommend anyone to watch this film.