In the cinema world, there’s one thing you can be sure of—any film that stars Kevin Costner, Ryan Reynolds, or Bruce Willis is going to take some (in my opinion) undeserved shots by the critics. I don’t know why, but they always seem to pick a few more nits or look a little harder to find something to harangue. Criminal has two of the three thespians, so you can just imagine the critics sharpening up their pens, ready to draw blood. It’s a good thing you guys have me around to set you straight.

I actually like all three actors, although admittedly they’ve all made some bad choices. Here, though, Costner carries the film, lifting it up beyond the (mostly) silly plot, while Reynolds is barely in it long enough to credit him with anything—good or bad. The plot, as I mentioned, is a bit far-fetched. CIA Agent Pope (Reynolds) is killed scant minutes into the film, and his memories are transferred into the brain of Jericho Stewart, an incarcerated sociopath with just the right type of brain damage for the procedure (Costner, doing his best “savage Hannibal Lecter” impersonation).  Veteran actor Tommy Lee Jones plays Dr. Franks (like Frankenstein…get it?), who performs the operation, and rounding out the talent is Gary Oldman, playing the government operative who needs the information to stop the anarchist hacker bad guy from getting his hands on a computer worm that gives one complete control of the U.S. missile system.

Costner is the one who really shines here. Although the first few moments, when he’s “all Jericho,” are a little over-the-top-cringe-worthy, once he settles into the role, and Jericho starts having an internal struggle between his own lack of morality and the thoughts and feelings of Agent Pope, he does quite well. In fact, Costner plays bad guys well enough (A Perfect World, Mr. Brooks) that you have to wonder why he doesn’t do it more often. Jones, however, is underused, and Oldman chews scenery like he hasn’t eaten in weeks. Nope, it’s Costner who does the heavy lifting, and makes the character just interesting enough that we want to keep watching.

The story draws on a lot of clichés from the genre, and often seems to skip over things that it really ought to explain. It also strains credulity every once in a while. The names are overly clever by half, and the film compromises its own morality frequently. We’re supposed to worry about the well-being of Pope’s widow and child, but apparently not the many innocent people beaten and killed (some by Costner) as the story unfolds, including police officers in pursuit of who they think is the bad guy? I found that a little disturbing.

That said, I actually had fun watching it. By no means is it going to win any awards, but it ends up being better than it really should be, and as long as you don’t think about it too much, I can think of worse ways to spend an evening. IMDB says 6.4. That’s probably too high, though. I’d put it at a 5.5, or an even 6.0 at most. You’ll have a good time, but your inner critic will make you feel guilty about it. (running time 1:53)