Entrapment (1999)

"Entrapment" is one of those movies that, when it's on cable, you can stop and watch wherever you find yourself in the film. My guess is that it has something to do with the fun plot, (a heist movie with lots of gadgets and great locations) but more likely is the star power of Sean Connery, who at almost 70 years old (!) delivers another wonderful performance as the aging cat burglar Mac. Along with a very good and very easy on the eyes Catherine Zeta Jones, Ving Rhames adds a nice touch as a sidekick. Stick with this one, it's a fun ride.

Well to begin with, the film "Entrapment" has Sean Connery as the main actor with co-star Catherine Zeta-Jones. Could you pick better actors to star in a movie? Probably. Although, I think they were well picked for this film in particular. Sean was perfect to play the suave and sophisticated gentlemen and Catherine was perfect to play the beautiful and confident lady. What do they both have in common in acting abilities? They both are convincing when it comes to playing intelligent characters who can survive in fantasy film plots.I think Entrapment is a really good film! This action film actually has an interesting story where you more or less follow two criminals, who are working together, who are stealing rare artwork from famous museums and galleries from across the globe. They are also only working together because they are both using each other secretly, but neither one finds out until nearly halfway - to the end of the film. Action films, I think, are only good when there is an interesting and different story behind it to give it some substance. Otherwise, I get bored of watching films where there is just fighting and people firing guns when the plot is pathetic. If you are a fan of Sean Connery or Catherine Zeta-Jones's as actors, then you should definitely see this film. I actually think they make a very attractive on screen couple, even with the big age gap, although, I am probably biased given that I love them both as actors. This film is a lot of fun to watch, so don't miss out on it!

A movie with a preposterous plot, exotic locations, absurd action sequences, and so much chemistry between attractive actors that we don't care. Gets by well enough on style and star chemistry and the basic allure of watching a tightly-planned caper unfold. A certain sunny sloppiness almost redeems Jon Amiel's throwback caper flick.Connery and Zeta-Jones not only look great together, they work well together, too.Connery and Zeta-Jones are such fun to watch together it almost doesn't matter how little sense the movie makes -- and their relationship is far more gleefully perverse, weirdly chivalrous and surprisingly interesting than the trailer makes it look.Cleverly updates the formula with a sprinkling of fun, fin-DE-millennium touches.Entrapment luxuriates in the best Hollywood big bucks can buy: superb sets and cinematography, spectacular locations, expensive stars. During the opening credits the camera glides through a romanticised Manhattan skyline. The steel and chrome gleam, the lights of the skyscrapers are digital jewels and the frame of the screen is dynamically pierced at odd angles by a laser-like red beam. This sequence holds out a tantalising promise for the movie, particularly when the camera rests on a sinuous cat-burglar entering a high, tightly shut window with elegant ease. We expect an exciting, sleek and slick caper movie, something like To Catch a Thief (1954) or at least (let's not be too greedy) Arabesque (1966). It's not the stars' fault that Entrapment is disappointing. Sean Connery gets the Cary Grant treatment here, made the object of his co-star's desire. Catherine Zeta-Jones chases him just as surely and shrewdly as Audrey Hepburn chased Grant in Charade (1963). Given the 40-year age gap between them, her instigation is presumably meant to make their romance less risible, but it's an unnecessary precaution. Close-ups reveal Connery's skin is losing the battle with time, but his appeal was never really based on youth.Connery's stardom rests on his ability to represent a man completely at ease with his masculinity and his sexuality better than any other star of his generation. There was always something a bit suspect about prettier men like Paul Newman (cf. Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, 1958) while tougher guys such as Clint Eastwood seemed too stiff to be turned on by anything but seaminess (Tightrope, 1984). Connery, however, deploys his physical size, gruff and commanding voice, a glance both sure and sly and a stillness that can pounce into graceful movement at any moment to project a sexuality so confident it can afford to be nonchalant and playful. We are easily convinced that what Zeta-Jones wants from him, give or take a couple of billion dollars, is delivery on the promise of a rough good time.Zeta-Jones more than holds her own here. Connery may be the object of her desire, but Zeta-Jones is meant to be the object of ours. The sight of her leotard-clad figure practising gymnastics in order to avoid the burglar alarm's lasers is more spectacular and pleasurable than the action set pieces. She emerges from Entrapment a full-blown star, flirting with such intelligent sultriness not even a man of Connery's strength can resist. Good alone but even better together, the two have an undoubted chemistry.Entrapment aspires to be nothing more than a bit of glamorous nonsense, but although it has done all right by the glamour, it has perhaps done too well by the nonsense. Very badly structured, the story begins to feel ripped off half way through, its maze of double-crossings never delivering a narrative payoff. At the unbelievable and tacked-on ending, even a cynic might feel a twinge of discomfort at the lack of even a half-hearted gesture towards a moral rationale for the action. We're meant to root for these thieves just because they look gorgeous, seem meant for each other and are good at their work.The fact that the combination of sex and capital as spectacle is thought to need no other rationale says a lot about millennial culture, and would make a good subject for another movie. But this is by-numbers genre work which has forgotten a few sums. Entrapment fails as a caper film because it neglects that fundamental ingredient - a credible plot, evidently something even the biggest chequebooks in Hollywood can no longer guarantee.

Cringe-Fest of the first order. Full of expensive Scenes at the expense of anything involving or Entertaining. It even fails as a bit of attractive Fluff. It misses at every turn and is a grueling get-through and an embarrassment to all involved.Sean Connery is a good Actor but his choice of Roles after James Bond is mind boggling. A lot more misses than Hits. CZJ is attractive and competent and can add some dimension to one dimensional Beauty parts, but this is one unattractive Movie.The Plot is laughable, hard to follow at times, seems incompetently disjointed and misfires in all three Acts. The ending is unwatchable and the icing on this deflated cake is the finger down the throat Romance forced on the Audience, when in the beginning they promised not to. This Film fails to deliver on anything it promised.