We can just see it now. The big studio meeting where the ideas for brilliant movies are formulated -- where many long, arduous hours are put in trying to come up with an idea and then write a script that's, well, picture perfect, for a lack of better words. The ideal cast is picked out -- thespians who can impart information with the most subtle gesture, look, or movement. And a director is chosen who can bring this all together into an Academy Award winning production. C'mon, you can see it now as well, can't you?
Unfortunately, the people who made this movie must have been out getting coffee and thus missed that meeting. Granted, it's doubtful "For Richer or Poorer" was ever intended to be Oscar worthy, but at least those responsible could have made a better movie. This is essentially a run- of-the-mill "fish out of water" story, where the characters find themselves in a land that's pretty much foreign to them and they must adapt to its ways. While it gets that part right, this film borrows from so many other similarly plotted movies or TV shows, such as "Witness," "Kingpin," and even "Green Acres" among others, that you half expect to see Harrison Ford or Eddie Albert walk by at any moment, pitchfork in hand.
The worst material is certainly at the beginning where Alley and Allen play the stereotypical couple who can't stand each other and bicker about how the other has ruined their rich lives. Their overacting and reacting are so horrendous and ham-filled that you expect Allen to say words like "dastardly" when he balls up and shakes his fists, and scrunches up his face. Alley does only a slight variation of her standard whiny character, but at least isn't quite as bad as Allen. Fortunately (for them and for us), the second half of the film allows the actors to tone down their characters and consequently they're much more enjoyable to watch.
Of course it's assumed that the overacting -- other than being used in an attempt to induce laughs from being so exaggerated -- is supposed to be symbolic of their frenetic, big city lifestyle and that the calm, green pastures allow their characters to settle down. Perhaps that's the case, but it's so overdone by director Bryan Spicer that it sets the wrong mood right from the start. It takes a long while after the initial obnoxiousness to start to like them and/or partially care what happens.
One can't blame Spicer too much, for his only previous directing credits -- "Mighty Morphin Power Rangers: The Movie" and "McHale's Navy" certainly weren't case studies of garnering subtle acting performances from the cast. The moment I liked best, however, didn't involve characters, but instead a flying car. Out of control, the cab that Allen's driving becomes airborne and flies toward a pond, all of course in slow motion and with the sound of a racing engine last observed in scenes from TV's "The Dukes of Hazard." The Duke brothers (and Daisy of course) would be proud.
The rest of the performances are a mixed bag. Larry Miller has a tough time trying to play the terribly written gung ho I.R.S. agent (that of course requires more overacting), while Wayne Knight (Neuman on TV's "Seinfeld") pretty much plays the same sweaty, nervous Nellie that he does in most of his appearances. Fairing a little better are Sanders and Cavanagh as the Amish couple, although they're not give much to do other than behave in what everyone assumes is the stereotypical Amish fashion.
Writers Jana Howington and Steve Lukanic have borrowed so many cliches from other similar films that this one becomes a predictable no-brainer. There's never any doubt as to whether the main characters will get back together again, or that the I.R.S. agents will eventually find them and reveal their true identities, thus ruining their new and unexpectedly happy lives. Don't forget that both cultures will teach each other something that will change the other for the better, and you'll end up with pretty much all of the usual requirements for this stereotypical plot.
The gags they've come up with are all standard fare -- Allen being dragged behind a farm animal (here it's a horse), Alley thinking things are "icky," and of course someone slipping in the mud and landing in some sort of animal excrement. Some people may find it funny, but none of it's new and most of it plays down to the absolute lowest common denominator. What surprised me the most was when the couple arrives in Intercourse, Pennsylvania (yes, there's actually a place named that). One would assume in an over the top movie like this that such a name would be a source of comic fodder, but the jokes relating to it are quite limited.
Still, the film has an inkling of charm and the second half of the film saves it from being a total disaster. Fans of Allen and Alley will probably enjoy seeing their favorite stars in some new hijinks, and the overall message that life's all about the simple things gives the film the obligatory warm, fuzzy feeling to make you feel good before you leave the theater. If you're looking for a thoughtless outing at the movies where nothing will surprise you, this film might hit the mark. On the other hand, if you're looking for something different, or at least intelligently done, chose to be the first part of the title and don't buy the tickets. We give "For Richer or Poorer" a 3 out of 10.