Although the kernel of the original 1974 film’s plot is here, the Taking of Pelham 123 has little to do with The Taking of Pelham One Two Three. Originally a band of criminals, each glorying in the name of a colour – Blue, Green, Grey and Brown - an idea stolen a few years later by Quentin Tarantino in Reservoir Dogs – hijack a subway car and threaten to kill a passenger each minute their millions in ransom fail to appear.
They work in concert with each other, each bringing his ‘gift’ to the job.
Ryder’s not even especially frightening, which may have more to do with our positive associations with Travolta. He throws in a couple of ‘fun’ and homicidal crazy moments, but they don’t amount to a character. He is a somewhat loveable thug with a keen sense of irony and completely fluid emotional state. We suspect early that there is something else at work with him - besides the fact that he’s a sociopath. He knows too much about subways and banking.
Denzel Washington is Garber, the train dispatcher, recently demoted from a big shot job because he alleged took a bribe. He’s the one who connects with Ryder following the hijacking to find out what he wants and why he’s threatening to kill innocent rail passengers. They realise they have certain things in common despite what we think - that one is ‘good’ and one is ‘bad’.
Washington is inexplicably passive here, I guess because Garber rides a desk all day, like Walter Matthau in the earlier version. Lean and mean no more, Washington’s operating with words, not muscle. His job is to keep Ryder talking, not shooting. They develop a weird bond which buys the city time to find the Mayor and ransom money, if their plan will work. Turns out it’s a dumb plan.
This short film is excessively noisy and bumptious, cursed with shaky cameras and jolting, jarring editing, which seems at least a decade out of date. One wonders if it was thrown together too quickly or if Scott believes these novelties have anything to add to a film these days.
Audiences are too sophisticated to be fooled into thinking it’s a good film because it appears to have a lot of action. It ain’t action folks, its window dressing, a mess in disguise. And this isn’t a particularly good film. It’s predictable and forgotten moments after the credits begin. As a matter of fact, I was never enchanted by the original film and this one certainly lives up to it.
Written by Brian Helgeland, John Godey
USA
Your Talkback on this Story