This is Snipes' and Harrelson's third movie together so a three rating is apropo. Don't think I'm giving it a 3/10 rating just because. No, no, no. This tripe earned its 3/10.
The movie started in fine form: funny and exciting. Snipes and Harrelson were playing off each other like it was "White Men Can't Jump 2." In this movie Snipes and Harrelson play foster brothers John and Charlie who are both decoy cops for the N.Y. Transit Authority. Essentially, their job is to catch would be thieves. One of them acts inebriated waiting for a thief to take advantage while plain clothes officers wait in the wings to catch the crooks. From the very beginning it is established that John is the responsible one while Charlie is a screw up.
The movie was humming along until in steps Grace Santiago (J. Lo). Now we have a love triangle. I hate love triangles. Both brothers had the hots for her yet she was only attracted to John. John was going to be a noble brother and step off (you know, bros before hoes) so that Charlie could have her, but she came at John so hard how could he resist? Naturally, that caused some problems.
But even more annoying than the two lovers and the third wheel was the Transit Authority chief, Patterson (Robert Blake). Wow! Was he ever the lampoon. All he was missing was a white cat to incessantly pet. They made him this megalomaniac who's sole concern was his coveted "money train." He acted with such impunity it was as though he was answerable to no one. At one point he fired Charlie in a fit of anger. I don't know much about the New York Transit Authority, but if they're anything like the NYPD then they have a powerful union that would get Charlie his job back with back pay.
But the firing was miniscule. It was something to help illustrate his power, control, and villainy. The fact is that he was depraved, and he became more and more depraved as the movie went on. He went from an unbearable jerk of a boss to an outright depraved criminal with no regard for human life. In his warped mind it was OK to endanger the lives of innocent people to stop his money train from being stolen. It's a move that even the most morally bankrupt supervisor wouldn't make based solely upon simple risk management. On the one hand you have a train with four million dollars and on the other hand you have a train full of passengers. A simple risk assessment would lead a person to value the lives of the passengers over the money because even if you don't personally value human life you should at least know that they can and will sue the pants off of you for risking their lives.
But we needed his character to be so deplorable in order for us to root for Charlie heisting the train. Hollywood can't have us ethically torn on this matter. Make the victim of the robbery a horrible person and we can all sleep at night.
It was just too farcical. Then you can add to that the fact John tells his new bae that Charlie is robbing the money train like they've been together forever. Why in the world would you share that information with her? Because you two are in love and you share everything? I can give you two good reasons not to:
1.) You just met her and you don't know what her next move will be and
2.) you took away her plausible deniability. It was a dumb move from every respect.
We still got a happy ending from this fetid goop. John saved Charlie's hide, Charlie made off with half a mil, they got to punch the lights out of Patterson, and Patterson was arrested. Not that I cared much by this time, I just wanted it all to be over.
The movie started in fine form: funny and exciting. Snipes and Harrelson were playing off each other like it was "White Men Can't Jump 2." In this movie Snipes and Harrelson play foster brothers John and Charlie who are both decoy cops for the N.Y. Transit Authority. Essentially, their job is to catch would be thieves. One of them acts inebriated waiting for a thief to take advantage while plain clothes officers wait in the wings to catch the crooks. From the very beginning it is established that John is the responsible one while Charlie is a screw up.
The movie was humming along until in steps Grace Santiago (J. Lo). Now we have a love triangle. I hate love triangles. Both brothers had the hots for her yet she was only attracted to John. John was going to be a noble brother and step off (you know, bros before hoes) so that Charlie could have her, but she came at John so hard how could he resist? Naturally, that caused some problems.
But even more annoying than the two lovers and the third wheel was the Transit Authority chief, Patterson (Robert Blake). Wow! Was he ever the lampoon. All he was missing was a white cat to incessantly pet. They made him this megalomaniac who's sole concern was his coveted "money train." He acted with such impunity it was as though he was answerable to no one. At one point he fired Charlie in a fit of anger. I don't know much about the New York Transit Authority, but if they're anything like the NYPD then they have a powerful union that would get Charlie his job back with back pay.
But the firing was miniscule. It was something to help illustrate his power, control, and villainy. The fact is that he was depraved, and he became more and more depraved as the movie went on. He went from an unbearable jerk of a boss to an outright depraved criminal with no regard for human life. In his warped mind it was OK to endanger the lives of innocent people to stop his money train from being stolen. It's a move that even the most morally bankrupt supervisor wouldn't make based solely upon simple risk management. On the one hand you have a train with four million dollars and on the other hand you have a train full of passengers. A simple risk assessment would lead a person to value the lives of the passengers over the money because even if you don't personally value human life you should at least know that they can and will sue the pants off of you for risking their lives.
But we needed his character to be so deplorable in order for us to root for Charlie heisting the train. Hollywood can't have us ethically torn on this matter. Make the victim of the robbery a horrible person and we can all sleep at night.
It was just too farcical. Then you can add to that the fact John tells his new bae that Charlie is robbing the money train like they've been together forever. Why in the world would you share that information with her? Because you two are in love and you share everything? I can give you two good reasons not to:
1.) You just met her and you don't know what her next move will be and
2.) you took away her plausible deniability. It was a dumb move from every respect.
We still got a happy ending from this fetid goop. John saved Charlie's hide, Charlie made off with half a mil, they got to punch the lights out of Patterson, and Patterson was arrested. Not that I cared much by this time, I just wanted it all to be over.