The Rails

A review published this morning describes Nicolas Cage's performance in Spider-Noir as "inspired." The review also says he "goes off the rails."

These two phrases appear in the same sentence. I am not making this up.

Nicolas Cage has been described as going off the rails in approximately one hundred films over thirty-five years. The phrase has appeared in reviews of action films, romantic comedies, historical dramas, and at least one film about a beekeeper. The phrase is the most consistent thing in his career. The rails have not changed. The description has not changed. The critical evaluation of the description has now changed.

For the previous thirty-four years, "off the rails" meant: this performance has a problem. In Spider-Noir, it means: this performance is inspired.

(The critics who wrote the previous thirty-four years of reviews have not issued a correction. They may not be aware that going off the rails has been reclassified.)

The review notes that Cage's take "stands out from every other live-action Spider-Man iteration." There have been six live-action Spider-Men. Five of them stayed on the rails. Critics noted this approvingly. Nicolas Cage is the sixth. He did not stay on the rails. Critics are noting this approvingly.

The rails appear to be optional.

This raises a question for the critics, which I am not qualified to answer: when they described the previous hundred films as off the rails, were they describing a direction or a quality? Because if it was a direction, he has been going the right way. If it was a quality, the quality has not changed.

Nicolas Cage has not responded to this question. He may not be aware it is being asked. He appears to still be off the rails.

The Rails are still there. Nobody has moved them. Discussing Film has not commented on the rails.