Making a not-so-good movie is bad. Remaking the not-so-good movie and turning into a not-at-all-good movie is even worse. It makes us wonder: What were the Pang brothers thinking and, in addition to this, what was Nicholas Cage thinking in the first place when he accepted to be the star of “Bangkok Dangerous,” a film which will definitely bring no good to his acting career?

The actor reprises his long-forgotten assassin role who finds the humanity inside him in the midst of love. Oh, how romantic! Oh, how clichéd!

The Pang Brothers already made this movie in 1999, but they don’t seem to have learned any lesson from their experience. Maybe they thought that if they remade their so-so film, it would become a blast. Wrong! “Bangkok Dangerous” steps on such tattered paths that it seems to be based on a silly kids’ game rather than an actual screenplay.

Nicholas Cage impersonates Joe, a wannabe gloomy assassin whose hair-do makes him look less menacing and more hilarious. He gets a job which requires him to carry out four assassinations in the Thai capital. “The money’s good and I do what I’m told,” the hesitant murderer tries to convince himself every single time. However, he admits, “Work is steady, money’s good, but it’s not for everybody.”

As he tries hard to get his job done, Joe hires a pickpocket named Kong (Shahkrit Yamnarm) in order to lend him a hand and act as his obedient sidekick. Nevertheless, Kong is not quite as wishy-washy as the deaf-mute pharmacist (Charlie Young) Joe falls for, seemingly because she gratifies every nostalgic castle in the sky regarding the flaccid Asian passion servant.

Nicholas Cage’s expression is so stiff that it seems incapable of portraying any kind of feeling. All of his once appealing moral fiber and charm have been blown away. All of his features give the impression of being everlastingly ice-covered in a bloodcurdling expression of ennui. He’s a dangerous Nicholas Cage. For our eyes and brains.