Offical website
Blu-rays, DVDs & more
eBay affliate link
Art of the Movies
Buy posters on MoviePoster.com
IMDb
Two For The Money movie stills
Reviews provided by RottenTomatoes
Rene Rodriguez, Miami Herald: Why make a movie about the sports-betting industry -- a potentially rich subject for a film -- and spend so little time showing us what goes on behind the scenes? Read more
Robert K. Elder, Chicago Tribune: Pacino's bark is ultimately better than Two For the Money's bite. Read more
Ted Fry, Seattle Times: If Two for the Money maintained the same backbone as its alluring stars, it could have done much more than just break even. Read more
Richard Roeper, Ebert & Roeper: It really works as a study of gambling. Read more
Bill Muller, Arizona Republic: The movie offers no handholds for the audience, leaving us behind in a flurry of important-sounding but meaningless exchanges between two-dimensional characters. Read more
Wesley Morris, Boston Globe: Aside from Pacino's snappy contribution, the acting isn't very impressive -- even Armand Assante and Jeremy Piven are misused. Read more
Carina Chocano, Los Angeles Times: Two for the Money takes its cues from classic rise/demise stories of fresh-faced young men and their amoral mentors, but it stops short of making a point. Read more
Amy Biancolli, Houston Chronicle: Its rhythms belong to a sports film: game, game, hurdles, big game, biggest. And that, at least, you can bet on. Read more
Lisa Kennedy, Denver Post: The film rides on the believable chemistry of its trio. If it doesn't go all the way, it certainly sprints toward a climax that feels like a gripping 2-minute drill. Read more
Owen Gleiberman, Entertainment Weekly: Short on the number-crunching nitty-gritty. Read more
Philip Wuntch, Dallas Morning News: Even in the film's early, relatively enjoyable moments, you'll hear a small voice reminding you that there's a difference between a genuinely good movie and a merely watchable one. That pesky voice grows louder and louder with each scene. Read more
James C. Taylor, L.A. Weekly: Dan Gilroy's script can't find a thematic thread to make the rags-to-riches-to-rags plot feel relevant. Read more
Gene Seymour, Newsday: The story, like Wile E. Coyote, runs off a cliff, hangs in mid-air and drops, section by section, into a deep canyon. Read more
Lisa Rose, Newark Star-Ledger: The plot is predictable and Pacino is cast in a role he can play on autopilot. Read more
Jack Mathews, New York Daily News: If you're looking for a movie for a boys' night out, it's a winner. Read more
Roger Moore, Orlando Sentinel: The movie makes a bet that the filmmakers can't cover. Read more
James Berardinelli, ReelViews: Original screenwriting gives way to cliches, and the resolution, while offering closure, seems false -- too much a case of the filmmakers wanting to have their cake and eat it, too. Read more
Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times: You can see Al Pacino doing something he's done a lot lately: Having a terrific time being an actor. Read more
G. Allen Johnson, San Francisco Chronicle: Big, loud, glossy and entertaining. Read more
Colin Covert, Minneapolis Star Tribune: The stop-start rhythm is bad on the movie's gearbox and before long we realize that we're looking at a highly polished lemon. Read more
Rick Groen, Globe and Mail: Falls somewhere on that aesthetic scale between mediocre and flat-out bad. Read more
Peter Howell, Toronto Star: Pacino is having a blast, and so might the viewer, at least until our scenery muncher finally gobbles all the foliage mid-way through the picture. Read more
Mike Clark, USA Today: The movie has a lot of built-in flash and is thus mildly entertaining, though the running time grinds it down. Read more
Ben Kenigsberg, Village Voice: Turns from ludicrous to incoherent. Read more
Desson Thomson, Washington Post: Hedges on its lurid promise. Read more