Gone
In Sixty Seconds
(2000)
Rated: PG-13
Runtime: 1 Hour and 57 Minutes
Reviewer: Dale
Grade: CThere is a wonderful moment in this film where Nicolas Cage is about to lead his men (and woman) into a night of fast-paced thievery. He prepares for this by popping in a tape of "Low Rider" by War. The younger thieves look perplexed by this, but all the old members of Cage's crew smile and are totally getting into the music, knowing this part of the ritual and happy that they are a part of it once again.
Thus, with the ritual completed, Cage waves his fingers and says: "Let's go!"
Thus ends the best part of "Gone in 60 Seconds".
If you get a hard-on just thinking about a cool, old car in mint condition, thinking how the engine sounds when you first gun it, thinking about the satisfaction of putting your foot down on the gas pedal and seeing what the beast can do, then this movie is right up your alley. There are a lot of cool cars in it, and they go really fast, but other than that, this is a fairly eventless film.
It is the story of a reformed car thief (Cage) whose dipshit of a brother (Giovanni Ribissi) gets in trouble with a man who can best be described as a poor man's Alan Rickman. Christopher Eccleston is the villain, and, as he plays him here, is unfit to carry Rickman's jock. I wanted the man dead, but it wasn't because of any genuine menace. It was because the man was annoying as all hell. Anyway, this turd needs to put fifty cool cars aboard a ship on Friday morning. So he tells Cage that he won't kill his irritating brother if Cage gets those cars and gets them by eight on Friday morning.
Cage and his brother then steal a bunch of cars and drive them really fast but the Duke boys they ain't. They enlist the help of a lot of colorful and underused character actors to help them carry out their quest. Among this potpurri of felons: Angelina Jolie as Cage's ex-girlfriend, the esteemed Robert Duvall as his former mentor, a couple of angry black men, a mute Englishman, and a really big dog. The mute Englishman (played by Vinnie Jones) was my favorite by far. He is cool. All he does is steal cars and beat people. He is a walking reminder that a good actor can create a memorable badass without even uttering a word. And Vinnie Jones, who was equally good in "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels" is a good actor, conveying more of a sense of menace than anyone else in the movie. Including the lackluster villain.
The movie gets right down to business. After all, it knows it has a shitty script. Why bother making us watch it develop? They didn't even bother writing a script, apparently. They just bought a lot of cars and hired some good actors and hoped that everything would work out on its own. The whole thing moves too fast, actually. It doesn't give us any time to get to know any of its characters, or to care about them enough to root for them. Cage is a delightful actor when given a meaty or insane enough role to sink his talons into. He even took his Forrest Gump-wannabe character in "Con Air" and made him likable and quirky. But he is given far less to work with here than he was in even "Con Air". (It's pretty bad when you are watching a movie that makes you nostalgic for "Con Air") He does his best, but he has nothing to work with. Maybe he signed a long-term contract with Jerry Bruckheimer and this was made just to fill the quota.
The relationships between characters must be guessed at because at no point are they explained or even really eluded to. The editing is very rapid and the music is very loud. In fact, this is one of the noisiest films I have ever seen. I couldn't even determine where the noise was supposed to be coming from. It was just phantom noise that was thrown in to pump adrenaline or something. The film moves at a quick pace, but it has no point. It means to entertain, so then why doesn't it try harder to do so? The film involves a team of car thieves and yet only has one chase. Even on that level it is a bit disappointing. The car chase, when it finally does arrive, is pretty exhilarating, but it just leaves you wanting more.
Another gripe: I wanted more of an in-depth look at the world of car thievery. I would have cared more about what they were doing onscreen if the purpose behind what they were doing had been explained at all. What is that thing they are hooking to the car's battery? Why does it let them steal it? What are they doing? I wondered this quite a bit. At one point, Cage disarms "The Club" by taking off the steering wheel and replacing it with one he just happened to have with him. That is the only instance in which I could understand how they were actually stealing the car. Other than that, I sat scratching my head and wondering "What does that thing do?" The editing and camera work only adds the element of confusion to the whole affair. It was not nearly as irritating as in movies like "Enemy of the State", but can we once have a Bruckheimer action film where things are filmed so we can tell, at all times, what is going on? Jerry, there are other ways to film a movie. At this point, the trailers for the films make more sense than the films themselves.
My advice to you who want to see "Gone in 60 Seconds"? Watch any episode of "The Dukes of Hazzard" instead. It would make more sense, have more of a plot, and would have more car stunts. And if you are just going because you want to see cool cars?
Go to a car show instead.