It's a good while away the time movie, when there's nothing better to watch. There's no great comedic points, just a humorous feel good ending film. Neither must see or avoid.

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.

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

This movie has a minor league pitcher who is down on his luck. He had made it to the big leagues once, but for all intense purposes his chances of returning are zero. Then one day fortune smiles upon him as a rich relative he knew nothing about has left him an inheritance and a little game. He can get 300 million dollars if he can spend 30 million in 30 days, of course he also had the option just to take one million if he did not want to try his luck spending all the money. Well the pitcher who is played by the late great Richard Pryor takes the challenge and begins a spending spree that on the surface would seem to be very easy. I could easily spend thirty million in 30 days, but there is a catch as at the end of the thirty days he must have only what he had at the beginning of the challenge which means he is basically going to have to rent not buy, throw lavish parties and come up with other ways to spend money without actually owning anything. That makes it a bit harder, it also does not help that he can not tell anyone about this game as it were. Hence it becomes increasingly frustrating as he gets this woman accountant to keep track of everything lecturing him about spending so much. I did not like her character at all, I would tell her mind your own business. John Candy is in this one too and he and Richard make a pretty good tandem, however they kind of leave John Candy's character out of the finale all together instead having the pain in the butt accountant. The film also suffers as this guy is getting so much unexpectedly and it is just depressing to watch someone else have that kind of good fortune knowing something like that would basically never happen to you. It has some funny moments though, but the film is just rather annoying in a lot of places too to be a good movie.