Scott: Tonight I am reviewing The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3, a remake of the 1974 movie that starred Walter Matthau. The movie’s about a hijacker/terrorist taking over a subway in New York City.

 

John Travolta stars as Ryder the bad guy. Initially you don’t know if he is a terrorist, hijacker or just a bad guy. He has team of other folks with him and they quickly take over the subway and start making demands.

 

The person they call to make demands to is disgraced subway executive Walter Garber played by Denzel Washington. Having been accused of taking a bribe, he’s moved from the front office to the control room for the subway system.

 

What did I think?

 

It was almost good. It came close, but it lacked in every area.

 

It was supposed to be action packed, but there wasn’t much action.

 

It was supposed to be dramatic, but the drama wasn’t there.

 

It was supposed to be a thriller, but the thrills were very few.

 

It was supposed to be good…

 

It just missed a little in each area and that was enough to make it miss by a lot overall.

 

I like Travolta, just not when he’s playing a bad guy. I’m not a fuddy duddy (a term I quote from a friend), I cuss and am crude all the time and I’m ok with that. In this Travolta must have been paid by the eff word for the number of times he says it. That word alone doesn’t make someone menacing or scary and this movie is clear proof of that. Every time he cussed it seemed forced and fake, almost like there was an inside joke about it that we weren’t in on. It was distracting.

 

I also like Washington and once again I thought he did a good job. I haven’t seen a lot of him recently simply because we haven’t had his movies. I always look forward to any that he is in because I appreciate his acting skills. When he first appeared on screen I assumed he was an employee that spent too much time in a low respect job because his boss was jealous of him. When we later find out that he was higher up in the food chain than his boss, things make more sense, but his abilities don’t make sense. He really acted like he wasn’t very smart even though he should have been due to his former job. It’s hard to describe what I mean, but you will understand what I’m saying when you see it. His acting didn’t take into account all of the supposed experience his character had.

 

Even with all that, I still liked him.

 

Normally in movies like this, if the hostage negotiator isn’t the star of the movie, he’s a straight up a-hole. When we first meet Hostage Negotiator Camonetti (John Turturro) he certainly seems that way. A strange thing happens, he grows, he changes, and it’s amazing. He grew into someone, that by the end of the movie, I liked.

 

Rounding out the cast is the reluctant Mayor (James Gandolfini), Garber’s Supervisor John Johnson (Michael Rispoli) and Phil Ramos (Luis Guzmán). Gandolfini is kind of the comic relief in the movie. He is the classic embattled mayor in the middle of a marital scandal and city reporters are more interested in asking about that then about the ongoing subway hijacking.

 

Director Tony Scott has been around a while. In fact, he’s put out some classic action movies like Top Gun, The Last Boy Scout, Days of Thunder and Enemy of the State. This isn’t up to par though.

 

Brian Helgeland wrote the screenplay based on John Godey’s novel. He has written screenplays for a couple of my favorite Saturday movies, Payback and A Knight’s Tale. In this I guess he needed more words so he added the 50 or so eff bombs to up the count.

 

What do I rate this?

 

It was an inconsistent movie and I just never got into it. Overall I give it a 2.5 and for a thriller, I give it a 2.