
Where the Money Is
2000

2001
RDirector
Tom DiCillo
Runtime
93 minutes
Average Rating
No ratings yetSynopsis
Ray Pluto has many problems. He is satirized in the tabloids as the "loser cop." His partner is starting to seem suspiciously attracted to him. A pair of screenwriters across the hall keep bugging him for help. The superintendent of his building is stabbed by hoodlums hired by his own rebellious daughter. To top it off, a sexually aggressive chiropractor may just be Ray's undoing.
Overall Score
Limited
Category Breakdown
LGBTQ+ Representation
The film lacks prominent LGBTQ+ characters or storylines centered on non-heteronormative identities. Romantic complications remain within conventional frameworks without explicitly critiquing heteronormativity.
Gender Representation
The narrative subverts traditional masculine archetypes by portraying the male lead as a neurotic, incompetent 'loser cop.' Conversely, female characters exhibit significant professional autonomy and interpersonal agency.
Racial & Ethnic Diversity
The film focuses on a relatively homogeneous urban professional demographic. There is no evidence of significant racial blending or a diverse cast that challenges Anglo-Saxon norms.
Religious & Cultural Diversity
The story explores situational ethics and fragmented truths through a postmodern lens. However, it avoids overt critiques of Western institutions, religion, or capitalism.
Disability Representation
There is no discernible representation of physical, sensory, or neurodivergent disabilities. Disability is not utilized as a central narrative device or tool for character development.
Strengths
Areas for Improvement
AI Analysis
Double Whammy functions as an independent character study focused on urban neuroses and individual psychological complexity. It finds its strength in subverting traditional gendered power dynamics and the archetype of the authoritative male leader. However, the film lacks intersectional breadth. The narrative architecture prioritizes social mishaps and individual dysfunction over broader social or identity-based representation, resulting in a narrow demographic focus. Ultimately, while the film offers a progressive look at masculinity, it fails to engage with diverse racial, cultural, or disability-related perspectives.

2000

2018

2001

1996

1977

1991

1986

1981

1997

2002

1998
No reviews yet. Be the first to share your thoughts on this movie!
Use the rating form above to leave a star rating and optional review.