Jamie Kennedy's favorite movie review site
Home Reviews  Articles  Release Dates Coming Soon  DVD  Top 20s Criticwatch  Search
Public Forums  Festival Coverage  Contests About 

Overall Rating

Awesome: 0%
Worth A Look: 5%
Just Average: 27.5%
Pretty Crappy: 7.5%

5 reviews, 10 user ratings

Latest Reviews

Gentlemen, The by Peter Sobczynski

Chiwawa by Jay Seaver

Joker by Rob Gonsalves

Dreamland (2019) by Jay Seaver

Hit-and-Run Squad by Jay Seaver

Shoot to Kill by Jack Sommersby

Day of the Jackal, The by Jack Sommersby

Weathering With You by Jay Seaver

Wonderland, The by Jay Seaver

Crypto by Jack Sommersby

subscribe to this feed

Taking of Pelham 1-2-3, The (2009)
[AllPosters.com] Buy posters from this movie
by David Cornelius

"A needless but enjoyable reworking."
3 stars

We all know there was no need to remake “The Taking of Pelham One Two Three,” which remains one of the best thrillers ever produced. You want to put a perfect story up on the big screen to entertain today’s audiences? Just re-release the original.

But of course nobody re-releases anything on the big screen anymore; that’s why we have DVD. And since “Pelham” has survived a reboot before (in 1998, as a TV movie), why not add it to the pile of oldies getting the treatment in today’s everything-old-is-new-again Hollywood? Looks like we’re stuck with another upgrade, its title now simplified to “The Taking of Pelham 123” to match the simplified new screenplay.

Compared to the 1974 original, the new “Pelham” is a royal mess and an exercise in modern lack of restraint, especially in the hands of director Tony Scott, who never met a movie he couldn’t ruin with an overuse of flashy camera work and ADD editing. But, surprise surprise, when viewed on its own, separate from the original film (and the John Godey novel on which both movies are based), it entertains the way it wants, as shiny, shallow popcorn fun.

Denzel Washington takes over the Walter Matthau role as Walter Garber, here reworked as a disgraced NYC public official (he’s under investigation for bribery charges) stuck working subway dispatch when a band of hijackers steal a train and take a handful of commuters hostage. The main baddie calls himself Ryder and is played by John Travolta, with the sort of results you’d expect from the guy - we just can’t buy him as a badass, no matter how many neck tattoos and sunglasses he’s sporting, and his tendency to chew every last inch of scenery leaves him contrasting too much with Washington’s more restrained, nuanced role. If Washington delivers a performance that’s better than the movie deserves (watch how he slyly handles a key sequence in which Garber is coerced into discussing the bribery charges; his forced grin and anxious stammer tell far more than the script requires), Travolta delivers one that’s precisely what the movie wants: over-the-top, self-aware, hammy to the hilt.

Unlike Robert Shaw’s relaxed, frighteningly calm Mr. Blue, Travolta’s Ryder is a ball of impulsive fury, dangerous in a whole other way, ready to kill his hostages on a whim. While this new direction makes the role somewhat interesting by removing us from what we expect from the story and making the villain’s next steps less certain, it also leaves him a chatty, bratty sort, an overwritten dolt you hope will just shut up.

Screenwriter Brian Helgeland lays it on thick in trying to expand the novel into a sort of morality play. Ryder tries to appeal to Garber’s darker side, repeating a mantra about how nobody is truly innocent, which brings us, again and again, back to Garber’s bribery case, an unnecessary character expansion. Helgeland is reaching here, suggesting perhaps that Garber’s involvement in the latter half of the picture (in which we’re treated to some out-of-place - yet still rather exciting - action sequences) is the city worker’s attempt at redemption. The movie ultimately buries this notion under too many flashy diversions, when spectacle overrides all else, turning the film into a superficial thriller where character depth gets easily forgotten.

Long gone is the clever give-and-take between Matthau and the villains. This new “Pelham” reaches for a different sort of battle of wits as it makes Washington’s Garber an average joe unaccustomed to dealing with chatty hijackers. There’s an energy in seeing Washington trapped between the criminals on one end of the radio and the hostage negotiators (led by John Turturro) on the other. Scott makes the remake shallower but still vibrant, amping up the thriller angle. His showy tricks - lots of on-screen countdowns - might clutter up the joint, but they also provide a faster pace that allows us to forget it’s just a movie about two guys talking on an intercom.

That’s enough to keep it exciting even when it gets stupid, and it gets stupid quite a bit. (A subplot about an internet video link is a groaner; dumbed-down dialogue leaves everything spelled out beyond the obvious; the “surprise” about Ryder’s day job will be a shock only to those who stepped out for a bathroom break for the entire picture.) There’s solid tension and unexpected action, and the whole thing whizzes by with snappy verve. Will we remember it in thirty-five years, like we remember the original? Of course not. But we’ll enjoy the hell out of it for as long as it’s on the screen, and that’s all Scott seems to want.

link directly to this review at https://www.hollywoodbitchslap.com/review.php?movie=18132&reviewer=392
originally posted: 06/19/09 05:09:10
[printer] printer-friendly format  

User Comments

9/12/17 morris campbell not bad the original is better 3 stars
2/25/11 brian Overactive camera movement and plot holes alternately cause nausea and snorts of derision. 2 stars
11/07/09 action movie fan decent remake, cast helps elevate hyper tony scott version of 1974 film 3 stars
11/05/09 Jeff Wilder Enjoyable while on. But fades once over. Inside Man and the original Pelham were better. 3 stars
8/10/09 damalc better than i expected but got silly late in the film 3 stars
6/25/09 mr.mike Clumsily handled ending mars an otherwise great movie. 4 stars
6/24/09 NatchuraLee This was a fun 90 min. of action. So what if it isn't the 1974 film? 4 stars
6/23/09 Kailee wasn't as good as i thought it would be. I wouldn't recommend it 3 stars
6/19/09 Ming This is a waste of time doing one that is differeint from the original, and not interestin 2 stars
6/15/09 Justin I hated it, amazingly everyone I was with liked it. No tension whatsoever. 2 stars
Note: Duplicate, 'planted,' or other obviously improper comments
will be deleted at our discretion. So don't bother posting 'em. Thanks!
Your Name:
Your Comments:
Your Location: (state/province/country)
Your Rating:

Discuss this movie in our forum

  12-Jun-2009 (R)
  DVD: 03-Nov-2009


  DVD: 03-Nov-2009

Home Reviews  Articles  Release Dates Coming Soon  DVD  Top 20s Criticwatch  Search
Public Forums  Festival Coverage  Contests About 
Privacy Policy | | HBS Inc. |   
All data and site design copyright 1997-2017, HBS Entertainment, Inc.
Search for
reviews features movie title writer/director/cast