This Means War

I must be getting old.

Suspension of disbelief should allow a viewer to accept the unbelievable in a film.

The use of government resources, weapons, gadgets and personnel, for personal purposes is corruption.

The trailer tells us that two best buddy, highly dangerous CIA agents discover that they are dating the same girl.  Then it becomes a spy vs. spy (which was funny in all its brevity in Mad Magazine) attempt to sabotage the other, apparently utilizing all of their training.

Why would two, clearly attractive and deadly CIA agents who happen to be best friends, wage war on one another for a women?  And after tens of millions of dollars are spent on destruction - a lot of shit blows up in the trailer - is the moral of the story going to be that no women should get in the way of friendship?  Are we going to learn that they decide to team up and pull a prank on her because she can't choose?  So, is it just me or is this just another stupid premise for blowing shit up (and I like shit blowing up)?  Even if the prize is a clueless, albeit immensely talented and hot, Reese Witherspoon?

While the film could potentially be funny, in a completely mindless cartoonish sort of way, I'm having trouble with the suspension of disbelief thing - i.e. these idiots would be sent to Guantanamo for using CIA resources.

The thing is: when something looks so blatantly stupid that it pisses me off, I can't help but think that I might be missing something.  Like maybe, could this be a metaphor for friendship? How about for trust?  How about the virtues of monogamy and how all else is too complicated?  Shit, I if you don't already know this stuff, I'm sure you could learn it from Barney or Dora or whomever the kiddie role model of the month is. 

I am so annoyed by this trailer that I think I will actually see This Means War.  It's fun being wrong, but even more fun being right.