Finder's Fee (2001) User Reviews

Great Film... Confusing Plot Twist

[joe-1429 · 7/10 · 22 January 2006]

This was a great movie, for what it was. 10/10 as far as first time directors doing a film on a 1 million dollar budget.

The rest of the message is a SPOLER ----------

The ONLY thing that keeps me from absolutely loving this movie is that I don't understand the plot twist at all, or how it's even possible, and I've been racking my brain to figure it out, so I'm hoping someone knows.

How is it possible for there to be a second Avery Phillips? Obviously the first was a fake, or the second one was... but unlike The Sixth Sense for example, you can look back and see where you MIGHT have picked up on it.. twists are easy if you don't have anything in the story that gives it away the second or third time you watch it.

If he left this message for Avery's brother in law, then how in the hell did someone else hear it? He didn't say he had a winning lottery ticket in it, just that he found the poor guy's wallet. I highly doubt someone showed up JUST for the wallet, and knew about the winning ticket. Therefore, who would know that Avery lost his wallet, that he picked the winning numbers, and that the ticket was even in the wallet? He mentioned that he bought it from the same store, the same numbers, from the same guy, until this last time it wasn't the same guy who punched the numbers... maybe it was the same guy, and that was James Earl Jones.. who would know about the ticket, but how on earth would he know Tepper had it? The brother in law might have known, and he could have been the brother in law.. but if that's the case, then how did the REAL Avery Phillips show up at the end... why would his brother in law plan to steal it, but still give him the message and the address to Teppers? The fake Avery also had to know about the parking tickets as well. How on earth would he know that? The police couldn't have been in on it, or that would just be stupid, and I want this movie to be great not stupid. They could have just busted in, and made up a phony charge and got the ticket outright... why come all the way down just to seal up the building? And another poster commented about Forrester knowing it wasn't the right ticket.

So if someone can tell me what I'm missing, and if there REALLY is a good explanation, the movie will be 11 out of 10 for me... otherwise anyone can make a surprise ending if they didn't give any clues, or even made it POSSIBLE.

Hope someone knows. Thanks.

I want to believe, but don't know how

[suchenwi · 6/10 · 25 January 2009]

A movie set almost completely in a New York apartment. Some younger and some older people are having a party, in a twisty plot over a mystery and many lies. That was Rope (1948), directed by Alfred Hitchcock.

Now back to Finder's Fee. While not every twist and turn had equal plausibility, I enjoyed the suspense and suspicions coming from all sides. Interesting actors, nicely quick pace. And then..

(Spoilers ahead) .. the final plot twist shocked me, and made me feel very frustrated. How can a scene of some 20 seconds ruin 90 minutes of well-done movie? Instead of the "Who done it?" question of many other movies, I started to rack my brain with "How could they do it?"

A loses his wallet with the 6m ticket. B finds it, leaves a recorded message for C. Then D appears, claims to be A and seems to know a lot but shows no credentials, gets the wallet, but with not the right ticket... In the end, D leaves with the right one, and shortly later A appears and wants his wallet.

My only theory is that D and A both heard the recorded message, which gave B's full address. But did both know the ticket was winning? Somehow, I'm still puzzled... I miss a closure that normally THE END should bring.

Enjoyable movie.

[stuart-smith729 · 7/10 · 15 December 2020]

Simple plot for this, man find a wallet calls the number inside and leaves his contact details. He gets nosey and checks the wallet, inside there is a lottery ticket and upon checking its the winner.

His friends turn up for a game of poker then the man he left a message for turns up for his wallet. At this point there is a police emergency where nobody can leave the building, and at this point the story kicks off.

There is a twist in the last seconds which I liked. The movie could easily have been 30mins long as the final 15mins were the main part however its a nice easygoing thriller.

Very interesting find

[bagdaddy21 · 2 June 2005]

I was looking through the On Demand on my digital cable and found this and it seemed interesting. I thought it may be very contrived and formulaic but interesting, and what the hell-I was bored. I was drawn into it instantly and cringed as it became more and more intense. I almost just wanted to turn it off and just say to myself-- he got the ticket and everything worked out. As he(Tepper) kept hiding his ticket and sympathy went back and forth between Avery and everyone else I wasn't sure what the good guy was.

I started to realize there weren't any good guys and liked it more because it was more like real life than many movies out today. THe twist ending at the end was great and the acting was superb. It was no Big Kahuna or Glengarry Glen Ross like someone else mentioned, but it was good for what it was. I look forward to see what else Jeff Probst has up his sleeve. It was enjoyable-- that is what the critics need to remember-- if it keeps you watching until the end to see what happens it did its job.

Pleasantely Surprised

[mihart-m · 7/10 · 29 December 2007]

With Jeff Probst as director, I didn't have high expectations. The premise sounded interesting so I thought I would give it a go.

Happily, this movie was much more than I expected. Enough for me to write my first movie review. And look for the next movie by Probst. I would recommend this to anyone and glad to have it in my collection.

The premise of a young man, who is shown to be thoughtful and caring , who finds a wallet containing a winning lottery ticket and the turmoil within that ensues. The plot was realistic, set in real time, with what I consider to some very real decisions and choices by real characters. There were some good plot turns that weren't expected which is always a nice treat keeping the movie moving - I never thought "ok lets move on".

These were real characters, in which I could see a lot of my friends in. They were quickly set up and I found that great. The lead character, Tepper, was well acted by Erik Palladino, in which you could relate to his turmoil. Matthew Lillards character was obnoxious - a little over the top, but well acted. He definitely could have been toned down. I felt that he was given too much camera time and not enough to Ryan Renyolds character. Quigley should have been more developed - it was as though he was thrown into the cast at the last minute - possibly to give the movie a little more "star power".

The movie is not perfect, but then there never is. Most of the holes that others pointed out, I felt were mainly due to bad choices by the characters. As in real life, we make bad decisions at the time or someone else may see that we made a bad decision. These weren't flaws where you say "that is impossible". Personally I found this movie to be thought provoking, and many of the reviews over-analyzed it, missing the point.

NOTE: I personally like the "redial" scene, as it made me think - it wasn't in my face like a country song.

If I had to pick 1 thing I didn't like...it was probably the twist at the end. I like a subtle clue or 2 where you say at some point in the movie, "I wonder if".

A movie that could of been a short & sweet gem but instead was a drawn-out forced anxiety trip.

[Healing_Process · 6/10 · 10 November 2021]

In the movie a man named Tepper finds a wallet on the street in the rain with no connection to the owner (Avery Phillips) except a number to the name Viktor in which he calls to leave a message. Avery Shows up to get his wallet, makes sure everything is in order except the audience is to assume he knows the lottery ticket is wrong after Tepper switches a losing one with the winning one in Avery's wallet before returning it. After this, Avery asks to use the mans phone and starts to overstay his welcome while he is having a guys night out. The movie is then an hour of unnecessary, unanswered, over-the-top, small deception, forced tension as Tepper tries to get this man out of his apartment and hide the fact he has a winning lottery ticket from his friends.

The movie then begins to not make sense as Ryan Reynolds figures out that (Avery) uses his daughters birthday as the 3 numbers for the lottery ticket everytime with the smallest bit of onscreen information. (We don't really find out how he knew the winning numbers or why he knew his.) This is where it gets hectic and people starting breathing down each others neck because almost all the friends are in some kind of debt or financial trouble and want the money or at least split it.

But with some sleight of hand and a call-in with the police. Tepper tells the officer the true story of what is going on and gives the police officer the winning lottery ticket and tells him to make sure it is given to Avery Phillips (The rightful owner). After everyone leaves the apartment and its only Tepper and Avery left he shows him he still has the winning lottery ticket and he lied in front of everyone and the police officer to finally give it back to the rightful owner in peace. 5 minutes after Avery leaves. A knock on the door of the apartment is the REAL Avery Philips and the man we are to assume that left the apartment was actually Viktor.

But this is the part that really doesn't make sense. Why would he call Viktor, Viktor show up as Avery Phillips to claim the winning lottery ticket, and then the Real Avery Phillips know Tepper called Viktor (his Brother-in-law). Did Viktor just tell Avery Phillips real quick, "hey I'm going down to this guys apartment for some fun, Ohhh, and someone left a message on my phone for me, but its actually for you". Ending didn't make any sense.

Not as good as cracked up to be.

[RMG · 6/10 · 14 December 2003]

I totally disagree with the first commenter. ALL of the characters in this movie are annoying to the extreme. There isn't one sympathetic character except for Avery in the surprise at the end.

(At one point in the show the exasperated lead character shouts out some garbage to his doting timid neighbour lady but even though I replayed the scene multiple times I could NOT make out the words that so abruptly stop everyone in their tracks. Only by turning on the sub-titles could I figure out what he said -- how the other characters involved in their own worlds figured out what he said is beyond me. More care towards the enunciation and editing of the dialogue would have helped ESPECIALLY since this was a KEY moment in the plot.)

This show is an interesting attempt at exploring human greed, selfishness, guilt and the ability to lie/conceal using a poker game as the vehicle for moving the story. Everybody is bluffing, everybody is lying, and nobody is likeable. Friends cheat friends, strangers cheat strangers, out-of-place violence ensues and a gruff crooked cop pops up throughout the show.

The secondary story of the lead character coming to grips with his feelings for his girlfriend was worked in partly as an excuse for his "antsy" behaviour during the poker game and partly to reveal that this guy is on the knife edge, teetering on which side to fall on. Does he love this girl or not? Her ultra demure and insecure attitude to their relationship is reflected in the lead's inability to make a commitment.

*** SPOILER ALERT ***





Why the surprise ending tacked on at the end? Can you say CHEESE?

So now I guess the moral of the story is that even though you struggle with your conscious and your good side eventually wins, life throws everyone for a loop to steal and make a mockery of any good deeds you do. So what is the point? Better to be selfish and take it while you can before someone takes you to the cleaners. SICK SICK SICK

Who the #)$@ is Raymond??!

[Rogue-32 · 3/10 · 26 July 2004]

Finder's Fee has an exceedingly decent premise at its heart, but the writer (and we know who HE is) doesn't have the skill to pull it off; there are plotholes and contrivances galore, the stupidest one being the way the cops show up to 'seal off' the building - we're never actually given a reason why this happens, just some odd line from Forster about someone named "Raymond getting stuck" somewhere. I truly have no clue who "Raymond" is. This horrendously bad plot device could have been easily explained by writing in something about how, say, they were looking for someone who had supposedly escaped from custody into the building.

I was thinking at one point that the cops (if indeed they WERE cops) were in on it with James Earl Jones' character (to keep him in the building so he could get the lottery ticket back), but that doesn't really hold water because near the end --POSSIBLE SPOILER -- when Tepper gives Forster's character the ticket, Forster would have known it wasn't the right ticket (he would have KNOWN the winning 3 numbers from James Earl Jones' character). So he would have come back for the RIGHT ticket after checking it, blah blah blah. -- END OF POSSIBLE SPOILER

I hate when movies do this to you, when a film is just not well-written enough to truly hold up but yet you're sucked in because it's written just well enough to keep your attention. This could have been a really decent movie if the writer had put some genuine thought into it. Three words: details, details, details.

One Location, yet It Stays Fresh!

[ardentayu · 8/10 · 4 January 2008]

Despite the fact that this movie takes place in one location, it does not drag or get boring - that in and of itself is a HUGE accomplishment! I thought the story was great how it put the main character into a sticky situation. All the characters had distinct personalities, which kept their conversations entertaining. The psychological suspense was strong. It's a movie wrought with tension. I applaud an indie filmmaker (Jeff Probst) for pulling off a good movie on a budget that is tiny compared to the studio budgets.

If you liked it, watch the director's commentary. Jeff Probst is very open about the process and how this film came into fruition (before he got his Survivor gig, by the way).

If you are looking for an indie film with some humor, psychological suspense, and good acting, check out this film.

Despite having the necessary elements for success, the film falls flat

[kevin_robbins · 6/10 · 8 December 2023]

I recently viewed Finder Fee (2001) on Tubi. The storyline follows a man who finds a wallet and brings it home with him on cards night with the boys. He calls a number he finds inside the wallet so the owner can come pick it up. When the owner arrives he asks if he can join the card game. What seems like an innocent night gets intense and possible deadly quick.

Directed by Jeff Probst (Survivor), the film features James Earl Jones (Star Wars), Ryan Reynolds (Deadpool), Erik Palladino (U-571), Matthew Lillard (Scream), Frances Bay (Happy Gilmore), and Robert Forster (Jackie Brown).

Despite having the necessary elements for success, the film falls flat, with the cast delivering uneven performances-Jones and Lillard stand out while Reynolds is underutilized, and Palladino misses the mark. The storyline has moments of realism, accompanied by good twists, intense sequences, and a standout "bop on the head" moment. The ending, while fitting, solidifies the film as mediocre.

In conclusion, Finder Fee has some compelling elements but falls short of being good. I'd give it a 5.5/10 and suggest watching it once for its unique moments and assembled lol cast.

Loved the suspense but ...

[d-maarhan · 3/10 · 24 September 2007]

Hi guys! I watched finders fee (in German Bloddy Numbers; don't know why they changed an English into an English title; whatever this is just a problem of the German version and doesn't get into the vote)

Well a friend of mine recommended this movie. He said it was quite good so I had to watch it by myself.

First of all I liked the minimalastic set situation. It is very nice if a film works only with one location ... and it did. The suspense was good. I always asked myself how the guy while handle this tricky situation. It worked, the film entartained me was not boring ... (didn't like the actors but ... OK).

But then the great final: Avery was not Avery but his brother-in-law Victor (who was called by the main person at the beginning). And thats the point. This doesn't work at all because Avery couldn't know his wallet was found because his brother-in-law caught up the phone call. Well, this is the worst case scenario for a thriller. The pointe fails it function so the hole plot collapse.

I give a 3 to it because of the entertainment it brought to me during the time I watched it ...

Ticket to happiness

[jotix100 · 8/10 · 22 July 2004]

Jeff Probst tight, unassuming film was a rare find. Saw it on cable, and since this is an indie film, one has to take one's hat to the director for having made the movie.

The question that came to my mind is what would anyone do with the possibility of sudden wealth, one that is achieved by ill gotten means. The question, plays havoc with Tepper, who knows what he has in his possession. His friends have no clue to what's really happening and why is the stranger, Avery, allowed to stay and participate in the card game.

Tepper made a mistake at the beginning of the film when he notifies about his finding. He lives to regret it, but ultimately, his own sense of decency when all goes haywire around him, takes hold of him and he does the right thing, or does he?

The cast was very good. The action seems, at times, like a filmed stage play, but the performances by all save the film from being boring or losing the audience's interest. Erik Palladino is quite good as Tepper, the man with a conscience. Mathew Lillard, as Fish, is never dull. Ryan Reynolds and Dash Mihok round up the quartet of friends that meet for a card game.

James Earl Jones is at times mysterious and a figure of pity because we all know what he must be going through, but then again, he had been playing with the quartet of friends and with the viewer.

Good job by Jeff Probst.

"Yes, I will destroy him."

[drewnes · 5/10 · 30 May 2021]

Don't know what I expected from this. I guess I expected nothing, but I can say that halfway through I was wondering if I should even finish it, but it does pickup around that point. Good cast with a surprising ending, but still a little cheesy.

'Finder's Fee' is a Mamet-like conundrum.

[tccandler · 11 February 2004]

THREE STARS - 82 out of 100 - 'Finder's Fee' is a Mamet-like conundrum about a winning lottery ticket and the role it plays in a friendly weekly poker game amongst friends. Jeff Probst, of Survivor fame, wrote and directed this film on a miniscule budget of $1,000,000. He does a fantastic job for a first time filmmaker. The film moves along swiftly, never leaving time for you to check your watch. There are some really tense moments that will have your pulse racing, which is pretty impressive for a film that takes place almost entirely inside one apartment. The only thing that fails the film is the drastic overacting from some of the supporting players.

Palladino does a great job in the lead role as the young man, on the verge of proposing to his girlfriend, who finds a wallet on the rain soaked streets of New York. Inside the wallet is a winning lottery ticket worth in excess of $6,000,000. After a phone call to the only phone number in the wallet, James Earl Jones shows up to claim it.... sans the $6 mill. Both Palladino and Jones are very good here. And Carly Pope has a small role that deserves some praise.

However, what really derails the film is the performances of Matthew Lillard, Ryan Reynolds and Dash Mihok. The main culprit is Lillard, who obscenely overacts his part every chance he gets. The man is truly incapable of subtlety in any performance and it is most notable here. This is an obnoxious distraction and it overshadows the many things that are so right about this film. Reynolds and Mihok are forgivable, although they both have some truly awful moments that will make you cringe with embarrassment for them.

I am still giving the film a solid recommendation... the story is original and tense, and the screenplay is very crafty. Probst easily does enough to merit a career as a director... he should get more work in this field as soon as Mark Burnett releases him from his island-hopping duties! If only the supporting cast had not tried so hard to steal the film from Probst and the two main leads, this would have been a small treasure. As it stands, 'Finder's Fee' is a good little film that will serve as an enjoyable rental. -- Critical Mass Movie Reviews - www.tccandler.com

Normal peasants will not understand my fabulous ending masterpiece

[fernandoneves-58430 · 2/10 · 1 September 2016]

That's right look at the title. That's exactly what the producer said when he finished this movie. It's like when just made the most fabulous cake and instead putting a cherry on top of it you put a big dump.

The most messed up thing is: this producer thinks that people will still remove the top and eat the rest of it.

One last aspect is how the producer tried to cover all your rational options with aspects that have 1% of happening IN ONE SINGLE NIGHT.

«««««««««««««SPOILERS SECTION»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»

-Main actor nervous to conceal a lie? -He is getting engaged! that will do.

-Gets the wallet and leaves? -Close the building nobody gets out!

-Hello Mr officer come on In to my private property!

-Let's gamble lottery tickets because we are not all that broke to gamble real money.

• Bring me a math equation to understand how a phone call to person A Brings person B without any knowledge from A. Oh boy if I had that winning lottery ticket and asked the pope to pick it up he would have to let me know every 5 min. (oh yeah wife calls) legit!...not

But yes every possible turn that this movie takes looks so forced that hurts to watch. There is nothing natural in this film, every irrational turn this movie takes is covered up by some backup master plan that exists only inside the producers head. 15 years later somebody made me watch this and I think... how Ryan Reynolds didn't laugh at the script back then?

Thought it was Fun and Attention Getting

[mtpearlnf · 8/10 · 24 February 2006]

I thought this movie was fun and interesting, the story is simple, but the modern setting and the idea of the lottery ticket made it attention getting.

For a movie with no great effects and sounds, i could not walk away while it was on....i did not want to miss the ending twist. Yes, the movie is predictable to the point that you new there would be a grab you ending, but I like expecting that and you never know who is at the door.

The characters all had their own querkyness about them that draws you, as we can all relate to one of them. I give this movie two thumbs up and suggest everyone sit down and enjoy a simple yet interesting movie.

Truly horrible movie...

[sdiegotw · 1/10 · 13 December 2012]

If you are at all intelligent, if you like your movies to make sense, do not watch this movie. I won't spoil the ending. But it's the ending that spoils the movie. The first 85 minutes of this movie are great. The acting is excellent, and the story is interesting. It seems to really be going somewhere. But then at the end, things happen that simply cannot logically happen. And there is no supernatural or mystical element to this movie that could explain away the massive, glaring inconsistencies. In the end, you're simply left with a story that could not have concluded the way it does. If you're like me, you'll be left hacked off and wanting answers. But don't look to the director's commentary on the DVD. Because the first thing Jeff Probst tells you in that commentary is that they aren't going to discuss the movie. Instead, they're going to discuss how to make a movie! Imagine that. The creators of this absolute turd of a movie are going to tell you how to make your own movie. Wonderful!

This is how the twist goes...

[the-riddler-1 · 8/10 · 8 February 2010]

Be advised - this whole review is about the twist at the end of the film so if you don't want to read a spoiler, stop now.

I think the end is fair enough. James Earl Jones, (the impostor Avery), is a colleague or relation of the real Avery, not the guy Victor. The impostor has stumbled across the phone message, knows that Avery plays those numbers every week, impersonates the guy, gets the loot and is going to run off with it. Victor and the real Avery have been conned. Victor has picked up the message second, and so the real Avery appears, too late.

Now these days there would be a 60 second montage explaining all this at the end, but the director decided we should figure it out for ourselves.

Nice 1

Riddler.

Horrible

[bwils44 · 1/10 · 25 October 2019]

One of the absolute worst movies I've ever seen. How do people get funding for trash like this?

Extraordinarily Clever, but Does Not Resolve As I Would Prefer

[spoken · 29 July 2006]

Spoiler first: If you have a preference for resolved endings that close the books, happily or otherwise, then this film may leave you just this side of angry. On the other hand, if you like Hitchcock, 'Outer Limits' and/or 'Twilight Zone' you'll probably be very happy. I would have been better off with a warning.

Note: I saw the broadcast TV version, no swearing.

The movie is cleverly constructed to make you *think* while moving closer and closer to the edge of your seat. The viewer absolutely *must* pay attention or loose a lot of important little things as well as the giant, surprise U-turns/twists.

For my part I approached the movie with skepticism because I have turned over found wallets and bank bags with no thought, no ethical dilemma. I don't understand the minds of those who have to think about the right thing to do. But this film is so well done I forgot all about myself and became caught up as though I were one of the walls in the room.

Speaking of walls, it just now hit me that the main characters never leave the room in which they are playing poker. Not once did I feel claustrophobic, never did I come out of the movie from 'stale set' fatigue.

So I recommend "Finder's Fee" for those with a yen for suspense, and I hope you enjoy it!

Cut out the last 5 seconds

[SnoopyStyle · 5/10 · 24 January 2015]

Tepper (Erik Palladino) finds a wallet in the streets. He's a caring guy who looks out for his elderly neighbor and about to propose to girlfriend Carla (Carly Pope). He calls Victor from a phone number in the wallet that belongs to Avery Phillips. Then he discovers that the wallet holds a $6 million lottery winner. It is the weekly poker night with Fishman (Matthew Lillard), Quigley (Ryan Reynolds) and Bolan (Dash Mihok). It is tradition to bet their lottery tickets and not check the numbers before hand. Tepper hopes that nobody comes for the wallet but then Avery Phillips (James Earl Jones) comes by. He decides to return the wallet but switch out the lottery ticket. Then the police locked down the apartment looking for a fugitive.

The twist is flashing like a neon sign. So much so that it gets annoying. For the second half of the movie, I had great hopes that Jeff Probst would be smart enough not to do it. It would be a nod to fake out the usual twist but he falls right into the pitfall. This works a lot better as a moral dilemma which is destroyed. When Quigley makes that turn, the movie seems to figure it out. It just makes it so disappointing to lose it at the last moment.

There are other problems. I don't know why Tepper switched the tickets. It solves nothing and assumes that Avery doesn't know the number he purchased. It makes no sense. If he just takes the ticket, it can always be explained as being stolen by somebody else. The game itself poses other problems. It feels more like a constructed premise although I must admit that I don't have another premise without a complete overhaul. It's just too fake. Why wouldn't they play before the draw? These two problem can be excused but the last 5 seconds cannot be.

Hidden Gem

[Floated2 · 8/10 · 4 November 2020]

Accidentally stumbled upon this film, having never heard of it until viewing. Had no expectations and didn't know much about the film, just that the plot sounded relatively simple and that this featured Ryan Reynold in one of his earlier films.

Quite an interesting and thought provoking thriller. Brings up relatively real life situations and makes you think of what you may do if you were in the lead protagonist's shoes in that situation.

It takes place in one setting and it works. No special effects used and the film doesn't look low budget. Resembles that of a television series. The writing is good enough and sharp that the dialogue stays fresh and the events that unfold keep us watching. The acting by the lead character Tepper is convincing and that of James Earl Jones as of well.

There is a plot twist in the end that isn't exactly thought out or pieced together (perhaps if there was a montage of clips or images showing us how everything got tied up and explained what occurred- it could have been better). But the director seemed to want us to think for ourselves.

Finder's Fee is a hidden gem of a film and deserves more recognition. Currently an IMDB rating of 6.4 with only over two thousand votes.

Extra Thick

[view_and_review · 3/10 · 21 October 2021]

This movie could not have been more contrived. Everything about it cried "theatrics." Was this a play that was adapted for a movie? Was this a remake of an Alfred Hitchcock production?

The entire movie takes place in a guy's apartment where the tenant, Tepper (Erik Palladino), had a wallet he found with not much in it besides a lottery ticket. The ticket was a winner, but he wouldn't find that out until after he called the owner's brother-in-law and notified him that 1.) he had the wallet and 2.) he could come pick it up from his address which he left on the VM.

Who does that? I don't mean who calls a wallet owner to notify them that it's been found; who calls and leaves their full address with a total stranger? If anything you tell them to call you back so you can drop the wallet in the mail. No one would do that in Mayberry, let alone New York City which is where he lived.

But it was clear that they were establishing Tepper as the Mary Sue--you know, the character who's morally unimpeachable. He watched out for his elderly neighbor, he returned found wallets by giving out his address, and he was set to marry his sweetheart. That's why he was so twisted out of shape by what he did next.

He was set to have a poker game with his buddies Quigley (Ryan Reynolds), Bolan (Dash Mihok), and Fish (Matthew Lillard). While playing their game Avery Philips (James Earl Jones), the wallet owner, came by to get the wallet. It should have been a simple exchange, but Avery made himself nice and cozy in Tepper's home. It was the kind of move that defied all logic, but there he was playing darts and poker with them like he was one of the gang.

Now, by this time, Tepper saw that the lottery ticket in Avery's wallet was a winner. He swiped the lottery ticket and was going to tell his friends he had a winner, except for some weird rule they had amongst themselves. Apparently, because they play poker for lotto tickets, no one is supposed to check the winning numbers until after the poker game. I guess this makes the game more exciting. Tepper, instead of just telling the guys he had a winner, decided to keep it a secret because of this dumb agreement they had with one another. He was going to play poker with the ticket he'd purchased, a loser, while hiding the one he stole, a winner.

He would've gotten away with the plan if jolly-- yet suspiciously suspicious--ol' Avery didn't enter the game. Now that Avery was in the game, and Avery knew he had a lotto ticket in his wallet, Tepper had to replace Avery's ticket with his own losing ticket which left Tepper having to play the poker game with his new winning ticket. How it all went down was just as ridiculous as it sounds. Tepper could easily have told Avery that there was no ticket in the wallet when he found it and that would've been the end of it. But, because we need to fill an hour-and-a-half and Tepper was such an upright person he was half-stepping on this move of his to steal the winning lottery ticket. It also didn't help that his "friends" seemed to be doing everything to make it harder for him to operate.

The poker game proceeds while Tepper acted like a wanted felon. I thought he was going to implode. The weight of taking a man's $6M lottery ticket was about to crush this Dudley-do-right. At one point he yelled at his old neighbor Mrs. Darmsetter (Frances Bay) which brought the whole party to a halt. You would've thought he clubbed a baby seal based upon the looks he got. Oh it was rich. The sad puppy looks from everyone was too much. The sappiness was extra thick.

Tepper, through hook and crook, won the poker game. He was going to do the right thing and return the winning ticket to Avery until Quigley smashed Avery in the head with a bottle. You see, Quigley knew Avery had the winning ticket and that Tepper was going to let him walk away with it. Quigley was determined to collect that money (another over-the-top move). For the first time all night Avery looked feeble and old. Until that time he looked like a serious, savvy detective always one step ahead. It was actually quite galling how this old overweight Black man was relaxed as he was in the home of these young, strange white guys. Once he got cracked in the head with a bottle it seemed to knock all of the savviness and keenness right out of him.

In the end Tepper did the right thing and even called his girlfriend (a woman who spilled her guts on intercom for no apparent reason and sadly walked away) and told her he loved her. It looked like all was going to be right in Tepper's world again except Avery Philips wasn't Avery Philips at all. He was Victor, Avery's brother-in-law, and he just played Tepper for the winning ticket.

Very entertaining with great plot twists.

[se7en187 · 9/10 · 9 April 2003]

I saw this film last year at the Saugatuck Film Festival (and even got to meet the stars of the film Robert Forster, Dash Mihok, and Erik Palladino), and loved every minute of it. The place was sold out and everyone at the theater loved it.

What would you do if you found a wallet containing a winning lottery ticket worth $6 million? That's how the movie is set up in this fast paced film with great acting. James Earl Jones is great as always, Robert Forster has a small but memorable role, but I was very surprised that Matthew Lillard did such a good job in the movie. But the obvious star of the movie is the script. Written and Directed by Jeff Probst, there are so many great plot twists that keep you on the edge of your seat waiting to see what happens next. You won't believe some of the things you discover when watching this movie.

If you can find this movie somewhere, I highly recommend it.

**** out of ****

Not Terribly Interesting

[boblipton · 5/10 · 4 December 2023]

On a miserable, rainy night, Erik Palladino walks home to prepare for poker night with his buddies. He finds a wallet. There's no cash, but some personal items, and a lottery ticket. When he gets home, he calls the wallet's owner, and then checks the lottery ticket. It has won the $6,000,000 jackpot. His friends show up, and then the ticket's owner, James Earl Jones.

It's an interestingset-up and a good cast, with Ryan Reynolds, Matthew Lillard, and Robert Forster among the people who come into the apartment. The problem is that nine of them are particularly interestingly written characters. The actors try to fill them out, but it doesn't really work. Add in an essentially one-set story, and writer-director Jeff Probst has done a mediocre off-Broadway show.