Hey there folks. Thanks for checking out our The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 review.
Director Tony Scott and Denzel Washington are together again (the two have worked together previously on films like Deja Vu, Crimson Tide and Man On Fire) for this remake of the 1974 film which featured Walter Matthau. Everything sounds good so far… except they cast John Travolta as the main antagonist and Travolta isn’t exactly high on many people’s “favorite actor” list these days. I must admit I’m not much of a fan if his either and I thought his casting in this film opposite Denzel was a mistake from a marketing standpoint.
But hold the phone a second. While I readily admit that I don’t find Travolta all that good of an actor these days, I have to confess that whenever he’s cast as the “bad guy” in a movie, I usually end up liking him much more than usual (aside from quite possible the worst movie created in the history of cinema, Battlefield Earth). I loved him in Face Off, I even liked him in Broken Arrow. So maybe he’d fit in Pelham 123?
THE GENERAL IDEA
The synopsis for The Taking Of Pelahm 123 reads something like this: “Tony Scott directs this remake of the Walter Matthau-starring thriller from 1974 with this Columbia Pictures production that pits a transit cop (Denzel Washington) against a group of hijackers lead by John Travolta, who take over a subway train in order to rake in a hefty ransom. David Koepp (War of the Worlds) is adapting the book by author John Godey. ~ Jeremy Wheeler
In “The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3,” Denzel Washington stars as New York City subway dispatcher Walter Garber, whose ordinary day is thrown into chaos by an audacious crime: the hijacking of a subway train. John Travolta stars as Ryder, the criminal mastermind who, as leader of a highly-armed gang of four, threatens to execute the train’s passengers unless a large ransom is paid within one hour. As the tension mounts beneath his feet, Garber employs his vast knowledge of the subway system in a battle to outwit Ryder and save the hostages. But there’s one riddle Garber can’t solve: even if the thieves get the money, how can they possibly escape?”
THE GOOD
One of the key elements to any good heist movie is that you’ve got to have the audience asking themselves the question “how on earth are they going to pull this off”? Or in the case of Pelham 123 “how on earth are they going to get away with it”? Unlike many heist movies, The Taking of Pelham 123 actually begins with the heist (in a sense) with Travolta and crew taking the train and the rest of the movie is a bit of a cat and mouse game that really does have you guessing “how do they plan to get out”. It’s this question that keeps you interested and riveted to the unfolding story and it really was pulled off well.
Denzel Washington continues to amaze me with his ability to take the best, or worst characters on screen and really make them pop. His performance in this film is no exception. Washington wasn’t given the best dialog to work with here, but somehow he finds a way to make this character REAL, sympathetic and we become interested in him due to the performance. This guy really is amazing.
As I mentioned in the beginning, I tend to be a lot more open to John Travolta in a film if he’s playing the antagonist, and I’ve got to say he steals the film. Granted, he had much better material to work with than any other character in the movie, but to his credit Travolta takes advantage of that and runs with the character. He’s intense, insane, smart, and funny at the same time (I think Travolta got all the biggest giggles from the crowd in the movie). Thumbs up.
THE BAD
There is a sub plot in the movie regarding Denzel Washington’s character facing an investigation at work for alleged bribe taking. The story line takes up a considerable amount of the film and it was a total waste. Here’s how I measure it… if you can remove a character or subplot from a movie entirely, and you wouldn’t have even noticed it being gone or if it had absolutely no effect or influence on the main story line… then get rid of it. Oh I realize that Scott was going for a motivation of redemption and exoneration for Washington’s character, but it was completely inconsequential and just took up screen time for literally no reason.
The ending of this movie SUCKS. It’s so horrible it practically undoes any good thing the rest of the film did. It was soooo bad and soooo terrible that even when the credits started rolling I stayed in my seat half expecting the screen to come back on to show more things happening… to show us that the movie didn’t end the way we think it did… so do SOMETHING. But no. A film that built up a satisfying story and sense of tension let it all completely unravel at the end in one of the most unsatisfying endings to a movie I’ve ever seen. Very disappointing.
OVERALL
The Taking Of Pelham 1 2 3 is a pretty good heist film, setting up a good premise and giving us fairly solid characters with a really good villain, that unfortunately bleeds a lot of its energy with a pointless subplot and then completely unravels with a horrible ending. The movie as a whole still kept me moderately entertained for the runtime, but blows it at the end. Overall I give The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 a 5 out of 10.
Could be very very interesting ,if at the final Denzel grab the money or that 307 millions….or we could realize Denzel was part of the bad team…it was more interesting(sorry for my english)
Bye
Blah, blah, blah. I could hardly get through the movie. I only recently watched the original on television with Walter Matheau and it was great. They rewrote this one to modernize it and add “f..ck” about a thousand times. Nope, wouldn’t recommend.
The John Travolta and Denzel Washington tandem is a two thumbs up for me in this film. I totally agree in the concept of “how can they escape at the end..even if they have the money that they demand..” I am really in for that investigative type of a moviegoer though.
This film brings me more interest to see this movie not just by a mere trailer. For curiosity sake I’ll give this movie a 7/10.
No video Review??? :( John your face expressions tell a lot about what you think :D
okay okay you got me! I’m to lazy to read… :D
well I have no choice..
There is only one movie which i like a lot with John Travolta. It’s “Face Off” with Nic Cage. That was so cool. Both were great in that movie I think. aaaand ok not to forget Pulp Fiction of course.
But i think i will skip This movie…
Waiting for TRANSFORMERS BABY!!!!
John will you write a review on Thursday? read that you will watch it in 2 days
Cliff’s Notes: “Meh”
:)
The movie look’s ok but will see.
John, just curious.
Did you see the original film?
If you did, and I find this important as someone who has seen the original and is considering seeing the new one, is the remake’s storyline different enough that I won’t know what will happen next?
And is the film good enough to make me ‘forget’ the original while I am watching or is it bad enough that I will be constantly saying to myself ‘this was done so much better’ in the original?
Just watched it today and I have to completely agree with you. I thought the first hour and ten mins were pretty good but then after that it completely sucked. It had a bunch of car accidents that were completely unnecessary. The whole laptop thing in the train with the web cam kept pissing me off. I also hated the end alot. Not worth the time.
i can see why people hated the ending of this movie but i liked the main actors so much ill give it a 7/10
but man with out blowing up the hole “catch” the ending sucked
I guess in Inside Man you also didnt like the side story of Denzel’s character.
Travolta is WAAAAAAAAAAY over the top. You could make a drinking game of how many times he says some variant of “fuck” “motherfucker” or “fuck that”.
He didn’t write the script… I thought he was quite good as well
His acting was cartoonish and over the top, as usual whenever he plays a villain. Hated it.
on spill.com review of this movie they said that you could make a drinking game of how many times he says “mother fucker”, they said if you did that youd die from alcohol poisoning
I find it funny that Riddley Scott can be so talented and his brother Tony can suck so badly at making films.
Tony Scott is the man. He’s evolved his style thru the years and maybe lost the mainstream but his track record speaks for itself. He can do The Hunger then Beverly Hills Cop 2, Top Gun and then do Revenge in the 80’s. The Last Boyscout, True Romance, Crimson Tide and Enemy of the State in the 90’s to Spy Game, Man on Fire, Domino and Pelham.
but ya gotta admit that ridley scott is the better director, aside from body of lies which was less than ok
The highlight of this film was the interactions between Ryder(The hijacker) and Gerber(The disgraced Train Dispatcher). Washington and Travolta do a really good job. I believe the screen writers attempted to use the subplot involving Gerber being investigated for taking bribes, in order for the audience to question Gerber’s morality and worry that he may succumb to Ryder’s temptations about taking a cut from the $10MM ransom. This ploy did not work. I agree with John about the ending. Very anti-climatic.
i wanna see this.
im in the minority cuz i love tony scotts frenetic style.
i get off on how he composes shots + textures together. amazing.
and with the nyc subway (<333) being the subject im expecting to be visually blown away.
First off I a HUGE fan of the 74 original as I think its one of the best films of that decade. I had huge reservations about this remake when it was announced, but I must say I really liked it. Washington and Travolta were at the top of there game. Very, very good I might add! The movie is more of a re-imagining than a remake and I think director Tony Scott for the most part did the material a solid. While the ending wasn’t as good as the original(never had a chance) I didn’t have the same huge problem with it that you did. Brian Helgeland’s screenplay added a few nice wrinkles to the characters which were good in my opinion. For moviegoers looking for a solid R-rated adult oriented entertainment take this ride. The audience I saw it with really liked it as I was talking with them after it was over. 8 out of 10 for me! Mile’s better than films like Wolverine and Land of the Lost this summer.
chuck
I agree completely, it ended suddenly and too fast. I still give it a 3/5, Needed more action though. Shutter Island was a good trailer. It’s probably not on the Movie Blog because it’s not supposed to be online yet
Where’d you hear that the “Shutter Island” trailer isn’t supposed to be online yet? I’m pretty sure Apple officially released it a few days ago, I don’t think they took it off either. Or was that a joke referencing the “Warrior’s Way” incident, and I’m just slow?
shutter island is on the apple site.
been there all week.
Hmmmn… Yeah that’s about what I expected. Its probably a movie that will just make me feel indifferent, which, to me personally, is a waste (almost as much as an absolutely terrible film).
Also, John, the first trailer for Scorsese’s “Shutter Island” has been out for days now, in case you didn’t know yet, or maybe you’re just not interested. I suggest checking it out though if you haven’t yet, personally, it looks like it may be awesome. Like some Twilight Zone/Hitchcockian Scorsese flick. That’s enough to get me excited.