Honeymoon in Vegas (1992): The Absence of the Obvious [Joey’s Review]

by Joey Lewandowski · Published September 11, 2015 · Updated November 19, 2017

Expectations can be a dangerous thing. Too many times, I’ve fallen victim to overhype; I’ve built something up in my head to an insurmountable level, and when that thing falls short of my expectations, it’s disappointing — even if it’s great. It’s all worth it for the times that things do clear those astronomically high bars, though, propelling them toward greater heights and into the territory of “my favorite things ever.”

Within a film, expectations can lead to disappointment, too. When movies go down the path and follow every beat you expect and lead you to the end you saw coming all along, it’s disheartening and feels like a waste of time. When films subvert those expectations, wonders happen. Like a boxer who makes you look one way and hits you with a cross from the other side, movies that turn on a dime and deliver something unexpected are very exciting. There are exceptions, of course; films can pull plot twists out of nowhere and leave you scratching your head, wondering what you missed.

HONEYMOON IN VEGAS is an example of a movie that builds you up for things and then, sometimes, never delivers. It’s strange in this regard. It’s a likeable movie, and much lighter fare than a lot of the heavy stuff we’ve been dealing with in #CageClub for the past few weeks. But at the same time, it’s like FIRE BIRDS in that there are a few plot beats that make you wonder how the film could have been better.

Honeymoon in Vegas opens as Jack Singer (Cage) introduces us to his private investigation business. He’s tasked to track down cheating spouses and provide proof of their infidelity. (In the ultimate irony, he’s later forced in the movie to let his fianceé (Sarah Jessica Parker) take a romantic getaway with an older man (James Caan) so that man can absolve Cage of a gambling debt.) Cage seems good at his job, and comes across as a real master of disguises. The film shows him in several costumes in its first 10 minutes, all of which help him do his job better. Later in the movie, though, when he needs to track down his finaceé, he uses none of these investigative abilities or costumes.

Huh? Why bother giving him the perfect profession for this duty, only to never return to it?

The only client of Cage’s that we really get to know is a man who’s convinced his girlfriend is cheating on him with Mike Tyson. Seeing as this is 1992 and the man’s girlfriend is, ahem, less than beautiful, Cage (along with the audience) finds this highly improbable. In need of money, though, he’ll go about his job and dig a little deeper. After traveling with SJP to Vegas to get married, we find out there’s a heavyweight boxing champ at the hotel where they stay, signing autographs and making sure guests have a good stay. For no good reason, though, it’s not Mike Tyson. The film sets up the perfect one-two punch (ha! boxing!) of far-fetched premise and potential to see that scenario play out, only to swap out Tyson for an actor playing a part in the exact profession Tyson is known.

Again: huh? Why? Maybe the film couldn’t get Tyson. Maybe he backed out. Maybe they never planned to have him in the first place. It just makes me wonder, though, why the script was written in a way to set up a perfect joke, only to see it not even attempt to land it.

Ultimately, I think I’m just being too hard on this movie. It is a comedy, after all, and not a prestige show like Breaking Bad. Even so, it’s disheartening to see a movie set things up so well, then intentionally choose to not follow-through.

Honeymoon in Vegas is a fun movie, and a welcome reprieve from the recent heavy #CageClub affair. It’s a movie set in Vegas and filled with Elvises — what’s not to love? Plus, it has a singing, bookkeeping dentist as Cage’s best friend. Also, there’s baby Bruno Mars as an Elvis impersonator: