I enjoyed it but...

I enjoyed the movie quite a bit actually, but find myself wondering why. It felt as if I really didn't have anyone to "cheer for" in the cast.
When the movie starts out Philip comes out as a strong contender for the hero of the film, standing up to his father in law and seemingly and overall nice, solid guy. That changes as the movie progresses, and in the end whilst I can understand the character's motivation for some of his actions, he just came across as an arrogant ass in the end; a shady two faced jerk.
John, while at first appealing to me as the stout, silent-but-decisive stereotype, just ends up being kind of dull. Sure, he makes some executive decisions and comes out on top, but Bronson's delivery doesn't exactly seep with inspiration or drama. It worked in Once Upon A Time in The West...but not here.
Dorothy, lovely girl. But is shackled to the script of the stereotyped women of the day. While not completely helpless, is just there to provide soup and a bit of unrequited tension.
Robur; I thought the awesome Vincent Price character would appeal to me with his noble intention to bring world peace but it soon turns out that he too is flawed; with delusion of grandeur and won't let any reason compel him to see the errors of his grand scheme. Collateral damage be damned!
No sir! I honestly found myself in favour of Prudent, the father. Henry's portrayal of him (I'm not familiar with the actor himself) was absolutely over the top hilarious as he pontificates to everyone around him. Of course, he too is not a man of noble intentions or past, but at least he had a wild passionate performance. For me he stole the show, I guess some people on forums can't deal with that kind of personality though. Understandable. But who the hell else does one cheer for...