Stolen

If you are wondering, "Why is Nicolas Cage starring in a movie that only got a token theatrical release before being dumped on DVD?", well, from what I've heard, Cage's overspending combined with a massive tax debt has made him take less prestigious projects in order to raise money. Actually, I had high hopes for this movie, because it was a production from Millennium Films, a company that often makes high quality action movies. However, this movie is one of their rare misses. Technically, the movie is above average for a movie aimed primarily at the DVD market. However, the basic story has been told so many times before that there are few surprises this time around. Most likely you'll be impatient long before the end because at times the movie seems to be stretching things out. Also, Cage's character never really becomes sympathetic - you'll never get involved in his plight and be rooting for him. And this is yet another movie where filmmakers don't know how heavy gold bars are in real life! Let's hope Cage managed to pay off his debts with this movie so he can be free to pick more quality projects.

The plot is rather simple and not original, but chases during and within Mardi Gras festivities in New Orleans are interesting to watch (here, adding the carnival does make sense, in most other movies it is just meant to confuse viewers and chasers). However, the "final end" could have been different, more sophisticated.

Nicholas Cage is good as usual, but the real star (and best villain) of the movie is John Lucas - vicious inside and outside. Female characters tend to be sketchy, although actresses do their best.

An OK movie for killing time, but it is neither Heat nor Snatch or similar. A typical Cage-related action.

this movie is action-packed and of course, there are mucho take-for-granted flaws throughout the whole movie that usually a quick tempo thriller could never avoid. but there's one thing we should admit, nicholas cage did every of his movie 110% with his 110% over-the-top acting or shall we say, commitment. his endeavor in this movie is no exception: he never stopped running from the very beginning to the end; and it's not easy at his age to play such action role, even all the scenes in his movies could be edited. the investors of his movies should consider their money never wasted on this actually quite superb actor. again, i'd like to reiterate, even this is not a great movie, it's still quite watchable, and you can't treat it as a B movie.

Zero fanfare, barely-there 141 theaters count in the U.S. (a surprise, considering it's a movie starring Nicolas Cage and directed by Simon West of CON AIR and THE EXPENDABLES 2 fame), and scathing reviews -- everything about STOLEN spells rotten. Many have even lambasted this as among the worst Nicolas Cage movie he's ever acted. Personally, I don't blame them for being so harsh since Nicolas Cage's movies nowadays are mostly rubbish. But surprisingly, STOLEN isn't as bad as I thought. It isn't good either, but rather a fairly worthwhile action thriller.

The movie follows Will Montgomery (Nicolas Cage), a master thief who has been sent to prison for 8 years after being double-crossed by one of his partners (M.C. Gainey) in a $10 million robbery gone awry. Upon his release, he plans to leave his criminal past behind and attempts to rekindle his shaky relationship with his estranged daughter, Alison (Sami Gayle). However, FBI agents Tim Harlend (Danny Huston) and Fletcher (Mark Valley) are both convinced that Montgomery must have stashed the $10 million somewhere before he was arrested. But Montgomery insists he's already burned all the money before he surrendered himself, so his prison sentence will be significantly reduced. Soon, it doesn't take long before Montgomery's past comes back to haunt him when his former partner, Vincent (Josh Lucas), who is long thought to be dead, works as a taxi driver and kidnaps Alison. Vincent has been waiting for 8 years to exact revenge against Montgomery, who shots his leg during that fateful robbery, and now he wants the missing $10 million as ransom. Montgomery is given 12 hours to retrieve the money at all cost, or Vincent will kill Alison. As time running out, Montgomery has no choice but to go back his old self again and re-teams with his another partner, the beautiful Riley Jeffers (Malin Akerman) to pull off a bank heist.

STOLEN plays strictly by-the-numbers, and it's terribly clichéd all over the place. David Guggenheim's screenplay is full of implausibilities, and the characters are all caricatures at best. But the movie's ludicrous tone has somehow plays out fairly good to its advantage. Thanks to Simon West's energetic direction, the movie zips along fast enough. Frankly, watching STOLEN is akin to watching a mindless '90s action movie -- enjoyable as long as you put your logic aside. The action are quite entertaining , especially given its $35 million low-budget cost (the opening heist scene and the car chase scene inside the parking lot comes to mind), even though they tend to get a bit distracted by its fast editing. Mark Isham's score is catchy and entertaining enough, but its snappy tone that favors over its caper genre does sounds awkward during its more dramatic moments.

Acting-wise, Nicolas Cage plays the same old character we have seen too many times before -- twitchy, that is. But at least, it's not as worst as critics might lead you to believe here. Josh Lucas certainly has a field day playing an over-the-top, crazy psychopath while both Danny Huston and Mark Valley make quite a worthwhile comic-relief pair as two buffoonery FBI agents. Malin Akerman puts up a thankless role here, which is nothing more than showcasing her beauty and little else.

While STOLEN won't top anyone's list as one of the must-see action movies of the year, at least it delivers adequate supply of guilty-pleasure entertainment.

Not really, especially if you think about what he did last year (Mechanic, Jason Statham) and more recently with Expandables 2. So Stolen is kind of the odd one out of that trio of movies. While it does have some fine acting talent involved, it never really takes off. It's not a complete letdown either, so you get a movie by the numbers.

There's quite a few things that you can see coming (rather predictable then) and the story does have some neat coincidences happening, that could only happen in a movie like this. One of my pet peeves gets checked too (unfortunately). It's when a character explains what is obvious. It's selling the viewer short (most of them anyway) and it's something I don't like at all.

Acting-wise it's OK and the "tension" is there almost until the end.