Cash Out

Cash Out tries to charm its way through the well-worn heist film genre, but stumbles on uneven execution. John Travolta delivers a charismatic performance as Mason, a seasoned thief attempting a complex score. The heist itself is decently staged, but the plot relies on a predictable twist and underdeveloped characters.

While there are some fun moments, particularly the banter between Travolta and his team, the shaky camerawork and forgettable action sequences hold the film back. The biggest missed opportunity lies in the supporting cast. Actors like Kristin Davis and Lukas Haas are wasted in roles that lack depth.

Cash Out isn't a complete wash. Travolta's performance is engaging, and there's enough action to keep things mildly thrilling. But for a truly satisfying heist experience, you're better off looking elsewhere.

Mason Goddard (John Travolta) and Amelia Decker (Kristin Davis) lead a team of expert robbers. Amelia turns out to be an undercover FBI agent, but she fails to arrest the group. A few months later, Mason is semi-retired and has to stop his unreliable brother Shawn (Lukas Haas) from a wild robbery scheme.

The starting premise is fine although what it turns into makes a lot less sense. In fact, it makes next to no sense. I do like the lighter tone of this standard bank robbery caper. I hate the swooping drone shots. It's been years since that's innovative and it gets tiresome. The bank manager is kinda fun. Travolta is still doing this character and it has rarely worked. He needs to add in more vulnerability. This is a B-movie and nothing more.

A team of criminals led by Mason (John Travolta) attempts their biggest heist.

Cash Out relies heavily on genre tropes to deliver a story devoid of surprises as well as good writing. The action is forgettable. There's a lack of character development. John Travolta's charismatic and laid-back attitude, while entertaining, doesn't come across as a realistic depiction of a professional robber. There were times when the movie scored high on unintentional comedy.

Behind those continuous hyperactive shots that look like the work of a kid who got a drone for Christmas, unnecessarily shaky POV takes, cheap VFX, cheesy dialogue, and Travolta's spectre of expressions being narrower than these criminals' knowledge of how to rob a bank, there might be something positive. For instance.

The plot want bad, the acting was bad especially Kristin Davis who I just can't take serious in these type of roles.

As for Travolta he must be hoovering up roles to top up his pension plan as it was such a bad film for his standards.

I thought overall that giving it a 4/10 was me being rather generous.

If you have a spare 90mins on yours hands and you don't care what you watch then this'll do as it's mind numbing escapism .. but I do question the acting and some of the choices for the lead characters.

It'll be interesting to see if Travolta continues to choose these forgettable flops or get back to what he does best ... only time will tell.

Although technically speaking, this movie is objectively not well-produced, the featherweight stakes keep it from sinking under the gravity of any sort of pretention. A movie like this can't jump the shark because it never builds itself up enough to let the viewer down. It's floating above the proverbial lake from first moment of the first scene. It is clear that the care and craftsmanship of a masterpiece has not been afforded this job. Although the movie has the production values of an 80s TV action pilot, Travolta was surprisingly compelling, relatively speaking. His natural charisma just brings a minimal level of cresibility, and ge is able to almost single-handedly hold the viewer's interest. It was not surprising to read in the Trivia section that the director abandoned the project before the end of principle filming. Yet, it was easy to watch, the way sit-coms are easy to watch after dinner while your meal digests, and you really don't need anything other than an uncomplicated diversion.