User reviews

I cant understand the low IMDb rating for what is a very funny film with two great stars in Richard Pryor and John Candy. Even though its a re-make and very much of its time (the 1980's) there is till plenty of entertainment to be had. Some of the areas of the film are still very relevant if you really could vote for none of the above isn't that a better vote than many of todays politicians? In tone this film is very similar to another 80's comedy - Trading Places, although this is the slightly lesser film it's still very enjoyable with plenty of comedy highlights. Pryor is outstanding and with the talented John Candy in support the film certainly doesn't lack laughs. There is even a message attached in places about the perils of greed and money but the ending feels quite abrupt and it would be nice to see the other characters re-action to the outcome.

8/10 - A bright and breezy comedy.

When people think of the long legacy of Richard Pryor as a comedian, this film may not be at the top of the list. He has achieved greater heights personally and professionally elsewhere. Many Pryor fans may have skipped over this one altogether with a catalog of films to choose from that include luminaries from "Car Wash" to "Stir Crazy" to "Harlem Nights." That's unfortunate really, because as comedic performances go, Pryor strikes pure gold in this unheralded film. His manic energy, his sheer frustration with the impossibility of his dilemma (spend 30 million dollars until you are dead broke and not have a single penny or asset left at the end, in order to inherit three HUNDRED million) and the fact that he channels so much believability into what would otherwise be absurd are highly laudable. With an excellent supporting cast that included the likes of John Candy and Jerry Orbach, it's hard to imagine anyone too jaded to enjoy this film. It's ridiculous and over the top, to be sure, but it's also supremely funny in a way much more pretentious comedies can't touch. Pryor breathes life into the film and the film glows as a result. Whether it's on your personal "best comedy" list or not, it's not a film you can easily excuse not watching whether a Pryor fan or not. From third rate baseball playing bum, to toast of the town millionaire, back to a bum again before a highly rewarding ending comedically and emotionally, "Brewster's Millions" pulls off the best trick of all - it makes the viewer feel like a million bucks for having watched it.

Montgomery Brewster (Richard Pryor) is a down and out baseball player in the lower leagues along with his best friend Spike Nolan (John Candy). Out of the blue he inherits 30 Million Dollars that he must spend in 30 Days and have nothing to show for it, so he can get his real inheritance of 300 Million Dollars; oh yes and he he can't tell anyone why he has to waste all this money.

This excellent and hilarious story is played out brilliantly by Pryor and Candy, and it takes us on a spending spree that has its up and downs for poor Mr Brewster. Because of the nature of the movies theme, Brewsters millions is quite firmly rooted in the 80's when it was made, but it still entertains with ease and is well worth watching.

7/10

This movie is consistent with it's humor throughout. So many 80s films start out with an original idea but seem to lose site of it halfway through as it becomes a love story. Not this film, Brewster is trying to spend that money right up until the clock chimes midnight. One of my favorites by Richard Pryor. John Candy only added to it's hilarity.

While Brewster's Millions is not a perfect movie by all means, but it is a bright and breezy film that does have its heart in the right place. Also, as far as comedies go it is not one of the most defining films of the genre, but to be a good movie Brewster's Millions didn't need to be that.

As I have said already, Brewster's Millions is not a perfect film. The plot is on the predictable and simple side and I can understand why one might find it bizarre too with its concept and all though I did find it refreshing in a sense on the other side of the argument. The ending feels rather abrupt and could have been rounded off better, and also while others may be divided on whether to perceive this as a flaw, Brewster's Millions does have a theme that is firmly rooted in the 80s which may date it slightly.

However, it is nicely filmed, with striking locations and nice cinematography and editing, while the soundtrack is nicely 80s without dating the film. The film does work in its humour, the script is funny without the need to be too sophisticated and smart, while the odd situation also made me chuckle. The direction is good enough, the film is paced well and it is a good length. And although the story is quite simple, there is enough material to engage throughout, and a lot of it is to do with the fun chemistry between Richard Pryor and John Candy. Pryor I can find loud and unfunny at times, and other times where he is a lot of fun, his performance here is the latter and it does help that his character and most of the characters here are likable, while Candy really does shine. There is also a hilarious cameo from Rick Moranis and Jerry Orbach is always good value.

All in all, Brewster's Millions is a fun film with heart even if there are parts/aspects that could have done with more work. 7/10 Bethany Cox

Believe it or not, "Brewster's Millions", in which Richard Pryor plays a guy who has to spend $30 million in 30 days so that he can inherit $300 million from his late uncle (Hume Cronyn) but can't tell anyone the second part, is based on a 1902 novel. And a funny adaptation it is! Pryor plays a baseball player who prefers partying with his buddy (John Candy). Once it's time for him to start spending, he goes all out. I will say that this isn't the best work for either of them, but Walter Hill's movie definitely elicits its share of laughs. The best part is Brewster's mayoral campaign: he's the most truthful candidate of all time (or at least the most realistic).

The executives who formally give Brewster the money reminded me very much of the Dukes in "Trading Places". As it is, one of them is played by a man who seems to have spent much of his career playing bombastic executives: David White, aka Larry Tate on "Bewitched". He went from playing an executive in "The Apartment", to playing the boss of a man married to a witch, to playing an executive who gives $30 million to a rule-trashing cool dude. What a country indeed!

Anyway, the movie is at once a parable about profligacy and also just a plain old fun comedy. Brewster is a guy who, quite simply, knows how to party. Like I said, it's not the funniest movie ever, but you definitely get some laughs out of it.

You can imagine that any movie that stars Richard Pryor and John Candy must be a funny one, and this definitely qualifies.

The plot is disarmingly (and misleadingly) simple. Montgomery Brewster (Pryor) stands to inherit a $300 million fortune from a long lost uncle (played by Hume Cronyn), whose will is videotaped. The catch? To get the money, Brewster must first spend $30 million in 30 days. An additional catch? After spending the $30 million in 30 days, Monty still isn't allowed to own anything. At first I still didn't think there would be that great a challenge, but in fact, as Monty discovers, it's hard to spend $30 million without actually purchasing anything of lasting value.

The movie progresses through Monty's spending spree on hotel rooms, parties, employees, the minor league baseball team he played for and finally his campaign to NOT be elected mayor. Other candidates spend millions to get elected; why not spend millions to convince people not to elect you? It's also interesting to see the reactions of his friends (especially Candy) to his squanderings, because another condition to the will is that he can't tell anyone what's going on.

It's really quite a lot of fun, and Pryor and Candy together make it worth watching.

7/10

I remember loving Brewster's Millions as a kid. Watching it as an adult was a different experience. It wasn't as funny as I remembered it being, it was a little slower than I recalled, and I had a lot more questions. It was still entertaining, and I like the concept, it's just not the powerhouse comedy that I once thought it was.

I genuinely liked this movie. Richard Pryor in 1985 and before is one of the finest comedians/actors. If you saw "Blue Collar" or "Stir Crazy" or that one with the blind kids on the bus, you will see what I mean. John Candy is without a doubt the funniest comedy actor after Don Knotts (my opinion of course, there are many great comedic actors). I only had one problem with this movie. For instance, when Brewsters rich uncle said that it was against the rules to buy a picasso and then turn it into firewood, how come he was able to buy a valuable stamp, and then have it canceled by mailing (in effect, devaluing it)? I guess it wouldn't matter since he could give some money away, but then why not just give it all to one person and save the time?

Brewster's Millions starring Jack Buchanan, Roscoe 'Fatty' Arbuckle, Edward Abeles, Dennis O'Keefe, and now, Richard Pryor. Yes, this is the 5th reincarnation of this story, and probably the funniest Richard Pryor movie out there, A simple story: to inherit millions, Monty (Pryor) must spend a certain amount of money in a certain amount of time without ending up with anything he didn't originally own. The idea is to teach the value of a dollar. Oh, yes, he can't tell anyone what he is doing.

So, of course, everyone thinks he's a nut. including the lovely Lonette McKee (ATL, Men of Honor), who is supposed to oversea his spending.

The film features the late John Candy (Canadian Bacon) as his BFF. If you are not familiar with his work, this is an excellent choice.

Spend $30,000,000 in 30 days in order to inherit $300,000,000. It's a pretty unlikely and totally ridiculous premise, and for me it resulted in a film that wasn't entirely successful.

I think the main problem with this film is that it didn't focus on the right areas in order to generate humour; the whole premise of Monty Brewster being able to inherit the $300,000,000 is to spend $30,000,000 without telling anyone about the deal. I personally felt that this film would have been much funnier if that would have been the area where it had focused its attention. It would have been much funnier to see everyone trying to find out why Brewster has to spend so much money so quickly and more focus on Brewster struggling to keep it a secret - it seemed odd that no-one seemed to question where the money had come from? It would have also been a lot funnier if we saw Brewster struggling more to spend his money (he seems to manage to spend the money much more easily than I anticipated). Instead, we have 90 minutes of Brewster throwing his money around, buying everyone and everything and that's pretty much it. It's funny at first, but it's a premise that stretches itself rather thin and starts to become a bit tiresome after a while.

Added to this, the film throws in a love triangle that went nowhere and wasn't particularly interesting - this also gave the film a heavy moody feel at times that it simply didn't need. They also had a pointless character who repeated everything that everyone said (thankfully he was only on screen for about 5 minutes, but it was long enough to make me mildly irritated). In many ways, this felt like a complete waste as the idea was a good one for a bit of goofy fun, but unfortunately the writers made it very much a one joke film that failed to exploit other avenues of potential that were most definitely there for the taking.

On a positive note, there were some laughs to be found here and there - the funniest scene in the film was probably the scene where Brewster's uncle is reading his terms of the Will to Brewster. Pryor and Candy are both excellent comedy actors and they were both very good here (although I did think that they both 'overacted' at times). There was some good here, but not enough to justify investing 95 minutes of your life watching this. It's a film that I'd only recommend to die hard fans of either Pryor or Candy.

A fun and feel good kind of film, a trip back to a childhood film, pulled off greatly by the comedy great Richard Pryor.

Richard Pryor stars as a minor-league baseball pitcher in New Jersey who gets an inheritance, but the inheritance has a large catch. Pryor will inherit $300 million in 30 days if he can spend $30 million in that time, but he must have nothing of value after that time period. A really smart idea that works due to the comedic talents of Pryor more than anything else. His uncanny ability to portray highly sympathetic characters is also very important here. John Candy shines as Pryor's best friend. A nice little film that toes the line on being something really special. It does not quite reach high levels, but it does come close and overall it is an entertaining and noble work. 3.5 out of 5 stars.

Its hard to believe that both comedy actors from this 1985 film have both passed on in the last 20 years and its quite sad watching the film knowing this specially when you see the high energy performances from both Richard Pryor and John Candy. Brewster's Millions is a fun and engaging lightweight comedy from the summer of 1985 which tells the story of Monty Brewster a down on his luck baseball player that dreams of fame and fortune. He then unexpectedly receives an inheritance of 300 million but only if he can spend 30 million in 30 days and not show anything for it. This is the fifth film version of Monty Brewster, actually six if you count Miss Brewster's Millions, same story, different gender).

Overall, the film is entertaining, nothing more, nothing less. It is also a nice introduction in allowing today's younger generation see the great man himself Richard Pryor and what a great talent he was.

Watched this many a time as a kid, until it popped up on Netflix recently. I like this more for the nostalgia than anything else. Far from a perfect comedy but I still find the premise interesting enough to watch with your typical antagonists in toe for good measure. Just lacked closure like others may have mentioned.

A few days after seeing the 1945 Brewster's Millions, I finally watched the remake that was released 40 years later. It starred Richard Pryor as Monty Brewster, here a minor league baseball player who sees film of his late grandpa (Hume Cronyn) who tells him the conditions of his will. John Candy is Pryor's baseball buddy, Lonette McKee-who previously co-starred with him in Which Way is Up?-is his accountant, Candy's "SCTV" co-star Rick Moranis is someone who likes to repeat whatever someone next to him says, and David White-who I remember as Larry Tate on "Bewitched"-is one of the executers of the will. This wasn't as funny as the previous version I watched but I still had some good laughs watching Pryor, Candy, Moranis, and some of the changes in some scenes. So on that note, this version of Brewster's Millions is worth a look.

"Brewster's Millions" is a fun film starring the late Richard Pryor (See No Evil, Hear No Evil,Harlem Nights) as Monty Brewster and the late John Candy (The Great Outdoors, Delirious) as Spike Nolan. Monty Brewster has a chance to inherit over 300 million dollars from his late great uncle. However, Brewster has only 30 days to spend 30 million dollars without accumulating assets. He must also avoid telling those around him the underlying reasons for his behavior. The film hints at this difficulty shown through Spike Nolan doing what he can as a caring and true friend to help Brewster increase his financial fortune. Naturally, Nolan is shown being justifiably confused when he notices Brewster's discomfort when his income rises. The part where Brewster decides to go into politics is humorously entertaining.

John Candy is actually youthful and exuberant in this too. Rick Moranis has a cameo too. Great to watch. "Brewster's Millions" is a lot better than so many other comedies today, and I wouldn't be surprised if it gets dusted from the vaults again by Hollywood... I actually think director Walter Hill (48 Hours) did a good job. This really holds up well through the years.

Overall rating: 8 out of 10.

I enjoyed myself throughout the film but still the movie felt empty and the ending lackluster. I just want to know how others responded to his 300 million dollars inheritance afterwards.

An enjoyable enough film, which Richard Prior does as well as anybody could with. But it is nowhere near as good as it felt as a child or that it could have been.

The plot and the rules of the challenge are an absolute mess and endless list of inconsistencies. He was told that he was not allowed to buy somebody a diamond ring say, or have assets but then spent most of the film buying gifts and items which could be constituted as an asset.

The more that the film went on, the more daft that the premise became. When he was dishing out salaries he could have made each one bigger to spend more money.

My second favorite adaptation of this story behind the 1945 version starring Dennis O'Keefe. That being said, it's not big on laughs. It's more pleasant to watch than funny. Pryor and Candy are likable stars. The rest of the cast is good, too. It's just that for a comedy it doesn't try very hard to make you laugh. Also I kept getting distracted trying to see if all the ways Brewster spends the money are within the rules defined early in the film. I know I know I'm a nerd. Anyway gripes aside I do like this movie. I can put it on and watch it any time. Just go into it knowing what to expect.