Ri¢hie Ri¢h (1994)

Very disappointed :(

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

It was one of my favourite family films of the 90s. I watched it several times, and still couldn't get bored of it. I mainly watched it because it was starring Culkin, and I'm a huge fan of him at Home Alone. Richie Rich is one of his few good movies, and it's really a good movie for the family if you ask me. I don't understand the criticism it gets because there's nothing much wrong with the movie. The plot is very simply to understand.

I didn't absolutely hate Richie Rich, but for me it wasn't that great either. As usual, there were some good things, but some not so good things as well.THE GOOD THINGS: 1) Macaulay Culkin, personally I think he is better an actor than people give him credit for. He is one of the main reasons why I love the first two Home Alone movies so much. Here, he gives a very spirited lead performance, admittedly not as cute as he was when he was starring in underrated gems like Uncle Buck, but he shows once again what a talented actor he was.2) Jonathan Hyde as the butler comes very close to stealing the show, a very funny and sly performance. Also Edward Hermann and Christine Ebersole give humorous performances, while John Larroquette plays the villain of the piece more than adequately.3) The scenery is quite impressive, captured well by the breezy cinematography. The Biltmore estate was gorgeous.4) The soundtrack was decent, nice background music especially.5) I liked the moral the film taught; All the money in the world can't make you happy, thinking about it that is true.THE NOT SO GOOD THINGS: 1) While I liked the moral of the film, the story itself is predictable and somewhat contrived. it probably doesn't help you have seen it all before.2) The script is quite weak in general. Don't get me wrong there were some good spots like "Oh my god I look like Michael Jackson!" but the jokes are admittedly very silly and juvenile, and the scripting does fall in the danger of becoming clichéd.3) The pacing. Now I don't mind films that move fast. I do have more of a problem if the pacing is TOO fast, despite the feel good nature of the film, and its valiant attempt to rise above superficial material, the film feels a little too rushed, the ending particularly felt skimmed over.4) The characters feel rather stereotypical. Maybe that is an unfair complaint as it probably couldn't be avoided, but I couldn't help thinking yeah I recognise that type of character.Overall, definitely not a bad film, worth watching at least once, but I personally didn't find it that great. 5/10 Bethany Cox

I gave this movie a 7 on a scale of 1-10 because I took into consideration it is a kids movie and should be judged as such. When this movie came out I was 13 and of course I enjoyed it much more then as opposed to now but having watched it as a child and as an adult I do remember how much I enjoyed the film as a kid. From the harsh grade of a 4.4 average I assume people where comparing this to complex movies with great plots. Kids should not be subjected to nothing but adult theme. So when you grade the movie remember what audience it was desighned for.As a child I would have gave this movie a 7. Would you drive a metro and act as if it should perform like a porsche?

I know, "Richie Rich" is supposed to be more about making friends than about wealth, but it doesn't work. The whole thing about the cabal trying to seize his money was merely an excuse for what was basically a glorification of money. I think that there's a reason that Macaulay Culkin disappeared after this movie (although that was already coming). There are some clever lines - namely the Michael Jackson comment - but there are plenty of good movies out there, so there's NO REASON to waste your time on this. Also starring John Larroquette, Edward Herrmann, Christine Ebersole and Jonathan Hyde; they probably don't wish to include this on their resumes.