60 secondes chrono

Also, poor Nicholas Cage, I knew him well... Once upon a time (possibly in Las Vegas) he was a Box Office heavyweight. Now... well, you can probably pick up one of his latest films from those buckets you find of DVDs for £2.99 in petrol stations. However, before his decent into depressingly-bad cinema, he made some pretty fun films. Yes, he's won an Oscar in his time for his deep and meaningful acting, but you won't find any of that here. Just fun.

Nicholas Cage plays (basically) Nicholas Cage – only a Nicholas Cage who used to steal expensive cars, only to retire. However, his loose cannon of a brother steals (or doesn't steal – I forget – it doesn't matter!) for (or from) the wrong mobster in L.A. meaning Nicholas Cage the now not-so retired car thief must steal a load of flash motors in one night or his brother ends up in the car crusher (literally!).

If you like fast cars driving even faster (and, judging by the 'Fast and the Furious' franchise a lot of people do) then this one is basically for you. It's an action film and it's pretty much by the numbers, but, when it's such fun, who cares? Everyone cranks their performances up to eleven and it all comes across as one of those adorable eighties and nineties 'over-the-top' action flicks (yes, I know it was made it in 2000, but it sure feels like a nineties movie) with a real cartoony vibe to it. You have Christopher Ecleston plays the 'evil Brit villain' much like any other evil Brit villains you've seen in cinema. Vinnie Jones and Angelina Jolie are on hand to show their faces, but feel a little underused for what they could have been.

Ultimately, it's all on Nicholas Cage's manic shoulders and he does the film proud. It's loud, dumb and it's basically one long car crash that you'll probably be unable to tear your eyes away from.

This is one of those films I liked quite a bit the first time, but didn't think that much of it on the second viewing. I guess enough of it was just good for one look. Maybe it was the immature attitude that prevailed throughout the film that wore thin. But I am not going to knock the movie: it's entertaining and definitely worth a look if you have not seen it.

If you like cars and chase scenes. t's worth multiple looks. In fact, the car chase scene at the end is one of the best you'll ever see. Nice soundtrack in here, too, and a pretty good cast with Nicholas Cage leading the way.

The bad news? Well, here's yet another case of Hollywood making "bad guys" into heroes. We're supposed to root for people that steal cars? Hello??!!

This one of those movies that just radiates cool. Nic Cage is at his best, the soundtrack is outstanding, and the premise is unique. All of the characters are well cast and badass. Gone in 60 seconds is just a good time.

What's in a name? If the name is Jerry Bruckheimer expect it to be filled with action.

In producer Bruckheimer's latest film, Gone in 60 Seconds, its all about the nomenclature. With character monikers like Kip, Sway and The Sphinx and cars idealized with names like Diane, Sue and the elusive Eleanor, it's only the non-stop action that keeps you from wanting to just play the name game.

Not a deep script by any means, but it is a great vehicle for action as Nicolas Cage as Memphis Raines, along with Angelina Jolie and Robert Duvall, comes out of car-thievery retirement to save his brother's life by stealing a list of 50 exotic cars in one night. A remake of the 1974 cult hit, this film may not be destined for the same cult status but it is entertaining.

Surprisingly, it's the action that keeps you watching not the acting. Although loaded with stars, none of them have standout performances, including a very weak performance by one of my favorite up and comers, Giovanni Ribisi. Even Jolie, coming off her recent Oscar win, is just a token love interest with hardly any screen time.

Can a series of beautiful cars and the car chases they become involved in make a great film? I think so. The film is a pleasure to look at and although one particular scene takes you into the realm of unbelieveablity, the action is non-stop and the suspense is compelling. Just be wary of other drivers fighting for a pole position as you leave the theatre.

3 1/2 out of 5

As much as I like big epic pictures - I'll spare you the namedropping - it's great to kick back with a few beers and a simple action flick sometimes. Films where the plot takes a backseat to the set-pieces. Films where the dialogue isn't so cleverly written that it ties itself in endless knots of purple prose. There are HUNDREDS of films that fit the bill... but in my opinion Gone In Sixty Seconds is one of the better ones.

It's an update of the movie that shares its name. It also shares that picture's ethos, but not quite it's execution. Whatever was great about the original has been streamlined. Whatever was streamlined was also amped up thanks to a bigger budget. Often these kinds of endeavours are recipes for complete disaster - see the pug-ugly remake of The Italian Job for one that blew it - but here, thanks to a cast of mostly excellent actors, Sixty succeeds.

The plot and much of the dialogue isn't much to write IMDb about. Often you'll have scenes where the same line of dialogue goes back and forth between the actors, each of whom will voice it with different inflections. A lot of people found this annoying; I find it raises a smile. Each actor gets a chance to show off his or her definition of style here, with Cage, Jolie and Duvall leading the pack of course (and it should be noted that it's also amusing to see Mrs Pitt not given first billing here). The chemistry between good ol' Saint Nick the stalwart (see date of review) and Angelina leads to a couple of nice moments.

The villain is not even a little scary - I've seen Chris Eccleston play tough-guy roles before so I know he can handle them, but I think he was deliberately directed to make his role inconsequential as not to distract from the action. We know the heroes are going to succeed, somehow; we're just sitting in the car with them, enjoying the ride. I think a lot of these scenes were played with tongue so far in-cheek that it went over the heads of a lot of people giving this a poor rating. In fact, I wouldn't have minded some fourth-wall breaking winks at the camera: it's just that kind of movie.

All this style and not so much substance - something that often exhausts my patience if not executed *just* so - would be worthless if the action wasn't there. And for the most part, it is. Wonderfully so. I've noticed that it seems to be a common trend to be using fast-cut extreme close-up shots to direct action these days. I personally find this kind of thing exhausting. I prefer movies like this where the stunts are impressive enough to not need artificial tension ramping by raping tight shots all the time. I've been told that Cage actually did as many of the car stunts as he could get away with without losing his insurance (in real life I mean - his character clearly doesn't care) and it shows. The man can really move a vehicle and this is put to good use in the slow-burning climatic finale where he drives a Mustang into the ground in the most outlandish - and FUN - way possible.

So yes, this movie isn't an "epic, life-affirming post-9/11 picture with obligatory social commentary" effort. The pacing is uneven, some of the scenes could have been cut and not all the actors tow the line. But car movies rarely come better than this. So if you hate cars... why are you even reading these comments?!

I'd take it over the numerous iterations of "The Flaccid And The Tedious" (guess the franchise) any day. 7/10