Review of Con Air (1997) by Filipeneto — 03 Apr 2018
This film is slightly based on true air travels made to transfer convicted criminals. I think I don't need to say that the idea of a plane full of chains and bars, with criminals traveling like caged beasts, is pure fiction. Despite having a good cast and some regular action scenes, this film has a very poor quality. The script, written by Scott Rosenberg, is too unrealistic and implausible, starting with the totally stupid idea to fill a plane with crazy killers (one wearing a mask out of "Silence of the Lambs"), side by side with an arsenal of light weapons and fatty policeman full of donuts. This scenario could only end badly, making the hijacking too predictable. I don't understand how the police had so much difficulty in tracking the airplane with so many locators and covert surveillance devices available in that days, on the service of the writers and the director, Simon West. Starting from there, the film only gets worse, with a huge circus of unlikely and unbelievable scenes. The end is worthy of the Razzie Award that this film won.
The film has a good cast led by Nicolas Cage, John Malkovich and John Cusack. Also participating, among others, Ving Rhames, Steve Buscemi, Danny Trejo, Renoly Santiago and Dave Chappelle. Nevertheless, none of the characters was particularly interesting with the exception of John Malkovich, who gave his Cyrus all the required malice and wickedness without allowing himself to explore a little more his evil. Some of the characters tries, mainly through dialogue, rehearse a few moments of humor, but it's a shot that backfired. The action scenes are truly impressive, but most merely to show-off, being clogged with special effects and sound. For posterity remains a regular action movie, able to entertain, which seeks to impress but ends up leaving us a bitter taste, like a good wine that was too long exposed to air.
This review of Con Air (1997) was written by Filipeneto on 03 Apr 2018.
Con Air has generally received positive reviews.
Was this review helpful?
