Gone in 60 Seconds Review
By Joe Lozito
Driven to Tears
Before "Gone in 60 Seconds", there were probably two camps of Nicholas Cage fans: those who thought he sold out to big budget Hollywood claptrap such as 1996's moderately entertaining "The Rock" and 1997's thoroughly disappointing "Con Air", and those who pine sadly, imagining that each new film will mark the return of the "Leaving Las Vegas" Academy Award winner. After "Gone in 60 Seconds" there will likely be no one left in the latter category.
"Gone in 60 Seconds" is the type of utterly bad action nonsense that could not have even looked good on paper, so it isn't possible to forgive Mr. Cage for accepting this assignment - and judging by the way he unintelligibly murmurs his lines, even he is embarrassed to be on screen. Also under artistic indictment are Delroy Lindo (so wonderful in "The Cider House Rules"), Robert Duvall (wonderful in everything), and Angelina Jolie who, given a total of ten lines, possibly comes off least scathed.
Worst of all (and that's really saying something), "Gone" doesn't even live up to what little promise it had. The "steal 50 cars in 24 hours or your brother dies" plot should have at least provided some good car chases, if not some good cars. But instead, the rare and outlandishly expensive autos paraded through the film are given almost as little screen time as Ms. Jolie (obviously, they were each rented for the film and are potentially what the title refers to). Even the obligatory car chases are few and far between (I never thought I'd be hungry for a good car chase). And, as filmed by Dominic Sena (Kalifornia) - who, judging by the pristine look of the film, studied under Michael Bay and Tony Scott - they play with all the suspense of a tire commercial. When the film finally gets around to staging a chase scene, it features (again and again) Mr. Cage's pursuers getting repeatedly cut-off by various passers-by and objects (in one case, a tank of pressurized gas run amok - no, really!).
This is the type of film whose hero needs to be in the right regardless of his flagrant disregard for the law and general public safety. So, he is given his mother's blessing, his brother's love, and no police are harmed during his chases - even the one hit square in the driver's side door by a wrecking ball! But by that point, the audience has learned to look past the plot potholes to the impending end of the film.
Didn't it seem odd to the filmmakers that the big car-jump scene wasn't actually performed in reality, but was computer generated instead? Given that the film is based on the 1974 original by H.B. Halicki - a stunt driver turned writer-director - this shows the general missing-the-point feeling surrounding the film.
So clumsy is the film that while our "heroes" are "boosting" their 50 cars in 24 hours, the audience never has a clue how many they have successfully stolen. I suppose it doesn't matter, since there's never any suspense that they'll pull it off, but it would have been nice to know when the movie was going to end.
