.jeri.

Ric and I watched this with the Agadonis sometime in January, if I remember correctly. I'm sorry my memory of it is so foggy already! The story is written and directed by Michael Crichton and follows Sean Connery. Donald Sutherland, and Leslie-Ann Down as they plot out an unheard of crime in Victorian England - stealing a load of gold from a moving train.

I liked certain aspects of this movie, most of which involved the actually how-to behind the robbery. There are many steps that must be taken before the final heist takes place, and all of the details of accomplishing those steps are what make it a remarkable story. The first set of mischief begins when the thieves need to steal keys, which are hung around the necks of men who rarely let the keys out of their sight, as well as a key that's in a room under constant guard. I liked the creativity of how these were acquired, although since there's a lot of emphasis on how many seconds one of the tasks has to be done, I would have liked to see the whole shot of Donald Sutherland running in to make an imprint of the key in the guarded room.

Regarding the time period, though, well, it seems as if Crichton decided to make a movie during a certain time period but didn't care to pay attention to details. The social conventions of the time are just plain ignored. I can't help it - I've been listening to a lot of books from this time period in England lately, and the combination of Moll Flanders and Nicholas Nickleby made some of the parts of this film ridiculous. There are so many sexual innuendos in this movie, which were a) cheesy and b) not characteristic of the times. I'm sure there were certain types of people who made such innuendos in those days, but they wouldn't be making them to proper ladies who were complete strangers, because that would have been too insulting and shaming for the young ladies to bear. Also, regarding the jail out of which one of the characters escaped (can't remember the name right now, but it was the same as the one in Moll Flanders) - well, back in those days, there were so many thieves running around and the law wasn't exactly completely fair in its punishments. Basically, anyone who stole anything or got accused of stealing something would have found his head in a noose rather swiftly. So the idea that this young kid had been hanging around in jail for a while was a little ridiculous, as was how easily he was able to get out.

But I don't think this was a movie meant to focus on certain details. It's meant to be a fun heist movie, and the only details of any relevance are the ones actually involving the heist. I particularly liked Donald Sutherland and his scenes of how he is able to sneak into the train car with the gold. Actually, that brings about what I really struggled with in this movie - I was rooting for Sutherland over Connery, although Connery seemed to be the main character. I thought Connery's character was brash and rude and lacked any aspect of character that made him worth liking. The way he treated the people he worked with was mean, and I was hoping they would all double-cross him by the movie's end. It surprised me when they didn't (whoops, spoiler). Since this was a heist movie, and the audience is basically being asked to root for criminals, I thought it would have benefited from some story element that made it seem "okay" for the criminals to steal other people's gold. Or, if there was no back story that made it seem okay, then the characters themselves needed to be likable enough to deserve the gold. I always get caught up in these quandaries with movies of this sort.

Overall, the movie was entertaining, and some of the robbery sequences alone (how about that action with Connery on top of a moving train?) make it worth the watch. I didn't care for almost all of the characters in the movie, and some of the liberalizations with the time period bothered me a little bit, and it's sometimes a bit slow. So, I guess I'd probably give it a three out of five stars. Take that for what you will.