For anyone who grew up on Candid Camera (and that must be most people over 35), this is an enjoyable feature that has been overshadowed by the other Allen Funt feature, What Do You Say to A Naked Lady? This time the theme is, of course, money, and the lengths that people will go too to get some. The best segment involves Muhammad Ali refusing to pay for a COD package. There's also a delightful conversation about rich and poor between Funt and his small daughter. Add in the time capsule footage of East Village hippie dropouts, and you've got a winner!
2 Reviews
Cutting edge "Candid Camera".
Aussie Stud21 December 2002
Allen Funt produced and directed this 1972 theatrical release of "Candid Camera", aptly tilted "MONEY TALKS", a social and economic commentary on money and its value to different classes of society.
As this film was filmed in 1972, it may seem very out-dated, but believe you me, many of the standards and issues discussed in this film certainly apply to today's economy. Most audiences across the world associate "Candid Camera" with funny set-ups and comedic situations where everyday people are 'tricked' into bizarre situations while being secretly filmed at the same time. "MONEY TALKS" is not like that.
While people are indeed being filmed secretly, the situations themselves are not funny. Some of the 'sessions' include Allen Funt having one-on-one interviews with many people living in poverty and asking them what the almighty 'dollar' means to them. Some of the situations are almost too realistic to take in. One of them has Funt interviewing homeless people, drug pushers and addicts in some kind of a halfway house. Another scenario has Funt interviewing a man who makes a living out of sharpening knives while discussing his own self-worth, which is not very much. In fact, more than seventy percent of this movie is not funny, which makes for a very uncomfortable and very serious setting.
Several other 'situations' include a tap-dancing man who offers to pay for services by tap dancing, a particularly sad moment where a poor shoe-shiner complains about how people have scammed him in the past, only to have the tap-dancing man screw him over yet again and tap-dance his way out of the sale. That was certainly NOT funny. Although I am sure these people were paid for their services after the cameras were shut off, watching these situations taking place is very hard to take in.
Another particularly disturbing set-up would include an unsuspecting temp being hired to take phone-calls from a would-be hit-man, discussing his rates from car license fraud to murder.
There is much controversy to be found in this movie. A young black man surveys passing black people to get their opinion on whether the one dollar bill should feature a 'black' George Washington. Another scene has Funt interviewing a 92-year old black woman about poverty and how she survived growing up with three different husbands and making a living by picking cotton.
The worst set-up involved a street-girl confessing to Funt that she begs people in the street to buy her pairs of shoes, only to have Funt send her out to scam more people into giving her money - one scene in bad taste involving a man who might have been a sleazy pedophile suggesting that she go with him to 'buy a pair of shoes'. As the girl looks uncomfortably back to the camera as if to ask, "What should I do?", you can't help but feel that if the cameras weren't there to complicate things, she most certainly would have gone with the man to make those few extra dollars.
Although Funt does blend in some light-hearted fun, such as women standing in the street with money attached to their pants, and a plate of one dollar bills set up on the street with a "TAKE ONE FOR FREE" sign, there is not enough amusement to label this film a "comedy". In fact, that was my biggest problem with "MONEY TALKS". I didn't know whether it wanted to be a comedy, or whether it was trying to be a serious documentary at the same time.
There is much wisdom to be found in the youth of 1972, a young man at Harvard interviews a male student, asking him if he was 'okay' with his father paying for his tuition, among other things - it reminded me of the film "WOODSTOCK". There is also much wisdom to be found in "MONEY TALKS". It is a sad, truthful and gritty look into the state of the economy and the citizens of America who are borderline or below poverty level. It seems like a very odd mix of scenarios to try to play with in order to make 'fun' of. I don't know exactly what Funt was trying to achieve with "MONEY TALKS", but trying to market this movie as anything like one of his "Candid Camera" specials is everything but false.
This is a film not to be taken light-heartedly. For social-economic students, this film is highly regarded. It is almost like a time capsule of the economy that existed during and post Vietnam-war. For comedy fans, this is a film that should probably be avoided. The one stand-out scene that should be seen involves Muhammed Ali dressed up as a security guard messing around with unsuspecting delivery men looking to collect a 'Cash-On-Delivery' payment.
My Rating - 6 out of 10
As this film was filmed in 1972, it may seem very out-dated, but believe you me, many of the standards and issues discussed in this film certainly apply to today's economy. Most audiences across the world associate "Candid Camera" with funny set-ups and comedic situations where everyday people are 'tricked' into bizarre situations while being secretly filmed at the same time. "MONEY TALKS" is not like that.
While people are indeed being filmed secretly, the situations themselves are not funny. Some of the 'sessions' include Allen Funt having one-on-one interviews with many people living in poverty and asking them what the almighty 'dollar' means to them. Some of the situations are almost too realistic to take in. One of them has Funt interviewing homeless people, drug pushers and addicts in some kind of a halfway house. Another scenario has Funt interviewing a man who makes a living out of sharpening knives while discussing his own self-worth, which is not very much. In fact, more than seventy percent of this movie is not funny, which makes for a very uncomfortable and very serious setting.
Several other 'situations' include a tap-dancing man who offers to pay for services by tap dancing, a particularly sad moment where a poor shoe-shiner complains about how people have scammed him in the past, only to have the tap-dancing man screw him over yet again and tap-dance his way out of the sale. That was certainly NOT funny. Although I am sure these people were paid for their services after the cameras were shut off, watching these situations taking place is very hard to take in.
Another particularly disturbing set-up would include an unsuspecting temp being hired to take phone-calls from a would-be hit-man, discussing his rates from car license fraud to murder.
There is much controversy to be found in this movie. A young black man surveys passing black people to get their opinion on whether the one dollar bill should feature a 'black' George Washington. Another scene has Funt interviewing a 92-year old black woman about poverty and how she survived growing up with three different husbands and making a living by picking cotton.
The worst set-up involved a street-girl confessing to Funt that she begs people in the street to buy her pairs of shoes, only to have Funt send her out to scam more people into giving her money - one scene in bad taste involving a man who might have been a sleazy pedophile suggesting that she go with him to 'buy a pair of shoes'. As the girl looks uncomfortably back to the camera as if to ask, "What should I do?", you can't help but feel that if the cameras weren't there to complicate things, she most certainly would have gone with the man to make those few extra dollars.
Although Funt does blend in some light-hearted fun, such as women standing in the street with money attached to their pants, and a plate of one dollar bills set up on the street with a "TAKE ONE FOR FREE" sign, there is not enough amusement to label this film a "comedy". In fact, that was my biggest problem with "MONEY TALKS". I didn't know whether it wanted to be a comedy, or whether it was trying to be a serious documentary at the same time.
There is much wisdom to be found in the youth of 1972, a young man at Harvard interviews a male student, asking him if he was 'okay' with his father paying for his tuition, among other things - it reminded me of the film "WOODSTOCK". There is also much wisdom to be found in "MONEY TALKS". It is a sad, truthful and gritty look into the state of the economy and the citizens of America who are borderline or below poverty level. It seems like a very odd mix of scenarios to try to play with in order to make 'fun' of. I don't know exactly what Funt was trying to achieve with "MONEY TALKS", but trying to market this movie as anything like one of his "Candid Camera" specials is everything but false.
This is a film not to be taken light-heartedly. For social-economic students, this film is highly regarded. It is almost like a time capsule of the economy that existed during and post Vietnam-war. For comedy fans, this is a film that should probably be avoided. The one stand-out scene that should be seen involves Muhammed Ali dressed up as a security guard messing around with unsuspecting delivery men looking to collect a 'Cash-On-Delivery' payment.
My Rating - 6 out of 10
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
