Drivel, but entertaining drivel

Rating: 6/10 (5 April 2008)

I mean, come on, but even those of you who enjoyed it (and I count myself among them) must have recognised what unmitigated b*ll*cks this film was, surely? It had a good basic concept, admittedly, albeit scientifically implausible, and fairly poorly executed within the movie (ie. not very believable to start off with, completely unbelievable by the time the film finished with it).
But I struggled on and did my best to suspend my substantial disbelief (not an easy task) and watched a film which would have worked better with a touch of knowing humour running through it played absolutely straight, by Cage especially.
My wife kept howling with laughter as each event more ludicrous than the last hove into view. She particularly found the much-vaunted action sequences hilarious, as millions of rounds of ammunition were expended in loving slow motion, destroying vast quantities of fixtures, fittings and decor, motor vehicles, and anything else which was capable of having at least 20 squibs planted in it, but with no one capable of hitting the people they were aiming at, other than the Castor Troy character (whoever happened to be playing him at the time). Oh, and the Archer character (as played by Cage) being able to wound the good guys with pinpoint accuracy, so as to remain a good guy himself.
The vomit-inducing appearance of the ironic replacement son at the end was - well, vomit-inducing, and nearly as funny as the incredibly obvious set up when Gina Gershon was killed.
Joan Allen had the single most unflattering hairdo ever committed to celluloid.
And for all that, it was fairly entertaining, with Travolta looking as if he was having fun.
But don't ever get taken in by those reviews which count this one of the all-time great action thrillers. It's not. It's drivel. Seriously, it's major drivel - fun, perhaps, but complete tosh from start to finish.