What a strange little movie. It's almost three separate movies in one. The first is about a bank heist, the second is about a sappy romance, and the third is about a politically charged police investigation. Out of the three, only the heist portion has any merit and even that is pretty thin. It's mostly a study in how to create flat, 1-dimensional characters that nobody cares about. The political parts were dull and this Nixon stuff has been re-hashed a million times before. The romance part seems like it was written by a 12 year old boy who's never touched a girl (and in turn, that's how the lead actor plays the part, which was unintentionally the most amusing part of the film). For the most part, I would call the performance "cringe-worthy." The female lead was only remarkable for how much she appears to be a clone of Nicole Kidman (where DO they find these people?). There was so much awesome music in that era, but we get the b-list of the b-list here. You could see everything coming a mile away, partially because they structured the story in a way that intentionally gave away spoilers. Kind of a bizarre approach to filmmaking.
I watched this only because I like heist films set in that time period. There was more sport back then - now technology has made large scale robberies practically impossible. Do not waste your time with this and instead check out "Thief (1981)."
4 out of 7 found this helpful