Dynamixor
The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.
Chirphymium
It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional
ThedevilChoose
When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.
no-skyline
Christopher Lambert (Highlander) and Christopher Lloyd (Back to the Future) star in this little known comedy as Gus and Bruno two dim witted jewelry thief's who steal the wrong diamond. A comedy of errors and farce ensues as three rival groups battle for the stone.It's gentle comedy that has the occasional chuckle and is well worth a watch as the leads have a good chemistry and Christopher Lloyd gives a very good performance as the quirky older crook. Christopher Lambert shows there is more to him than Highlander and it's a shame he hasn't done more comedies. I enjoyed the film overall but it never rises above average, some of the jokes just aren't funny. But the end set up and payoff makes it worth a look.7/10 - Enjoyable but forgettable.
xtopperx
I saw this movie while I was working at a Post Production studio in Hollywood, back in 1990. I was 19 and maybe somewhat more sympathetic back then.Post Production can get boring at times, and a lot of very dull and incompetent programming gets produced and sent through Post Houses, like the one I worked at. But this movie, even being a solid "B" flick: starts, gets moving, does it's best with what it has, and wraps up decently (as far as stories go). From what I remember, this movie doesn't pretend to be anything but entertaining; and while other movies do that better than this one, this is a movie that can entertain you if your bored and can watch a jewel thief movie without being critical about clichés. You can tell that the producers knew how much they could get from this budget and story and I don't think this crew could've done better. Chris Lambert, Chris Lloyd, and JT Walsh... good combo, and I think they pull it off as best it could be done.
Ciderborg
This film is funny. That's the first thing you need to know. The second thing is why? Take two safe crackers, a ruby, an incompetent Armenian, a hard boiled police chief, a corrupt diplomat and a host of stoopid hoods, give 'em all a sparklingly witty script and a spaghetti plot, and watch them sort it all out. Lambert and Lloyd are a great comic duo and the late J T Walsh is a joy to watch as he gets madder and madder. This is not a film that'll change your life but it will make you laugh for an hour and a half and the way the world is right now, there are few things more valuable than light relief. With memorable one liners and side splitting sequences, this is a gem that too few people know about. It's not even IN Leonard Maltin's 2002 movie guide. Do yourself a favour and rent it if you get the chance. You'll love it.
Leigh Loveday
Well, I've seen Adrenaline, anyway. And... no, that's about it.Why Me? sort of falls between two stools: it's not shoulder-dislocatingly funny either by intention or by good old-fashioned ineptitude, which makes watching it a bit of a pointless exercise. The old jewel-thieves-in-over-their-heads caper has been done to death, and the combination of Christophers Lambert and Lloyd provides the film with a distinct reek of B-list. Neither are wacky enough to be engaging for very long: Lloyd's clearly only there for the money, and you get the impression that Lambert's actually toning down his natural dementia. He's one of the most charismatic actors around, but it's just not given the chance to shine through here. (Only one "heh heh heh" as well. Or perhaps there were more during the times I fell asleep.)So then, Why Me?: brief moments of promise amidst the sadly overwhelming boredom and confusion. No wonder nobody's ever heard of it.
