Customer Reviews

The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 [UMD for PSP]

5 star:		(27)
4 star:		(28)
3 star:		(36)
2 star:		(20)
1 star:		(17)

 

 

I enjoyed watching this suspense/action film from one of my favorite directors - but when it was all done I actually liked the Blu better as a whole than the movie itself. It seems as though lovers and haters here already know the story of a hijacked subway train in NY, but either way I think everyone should give this BD a chance.

The picture clarity was outstanding throughout and very little drag gets noticed even with all of the dark sequences in the tunnels. The DTS rocks consistently and I am glad they went this way for being a train film, but Tony Scott is a big DTS guy anyway so I expected not to be disappointed. The special features are what make this package and include:

* 30 minute making-of that covers all aspects of production sans the additional documentaries. Plenty of background regarding Tony's vision - filled with plenty of unbleeped expletives from cast and crew alike (always prefer things to be uncensored). Love the story about the Albanian cousins who ended up being in the film, one right out of prison to fill his needed authenticity.
* 15 minute "Third Rail". Awesome informative piece about the aspects of working underground in the MTA property. Really good material about what it took for this film to be made like no other before it (usage and cooperation with NYC and the MTA).
* 6 minute Stylizing. Interesting plug for the hair styling crew behind this film (Lab Salon).
* 7 minute marketing Pelham. Like a long music video/trailer - would loved to have seen one with Man on Fire.
* Descriptive audio track in English - I loved this. Had not heard one before and it actually had customers mesmerized with how accurate and fast this narrator was regarding everything happening on screen - recommend giving it a try.
*CineChat and MovieIQ - your BD player has to be tuned up for handling these guys. The MovieIQ is more fun if you are into the trivia thing and have time.

Overall - a fun film on a solid BD. Enjoy.

I loved this movie. Of course it is a remake but they did an excellent job of updating the plot to fit our more modern times. The character development was great, Travolta does a great bad guy. It moves at nice pace. If you enjoy a movie with suspense you will want to watch this one.

By and large, the types of films that Denzel Washington sticks his name on provide viewers with incredible acting, great character development, and a plot that sucks you in and makes you really care about what is going on. Unfortunately, "The Taking of Pelham 123" does absolutely none of those things.

Acting: The film focuses on Washington's "good guy" (a New York subway line coordinator) matching wits with John Travolta's "bad guy" (who hijacks a subway car in exchange for a large ransom). However, neither of them are able to act anywhere near their full potential. Whereas Denzel is at his best when his passions/convictions get the best of him, in this movie he is not once allowed to emote wildly. Instead, he turns in a ho-hum performance where he stays cool, calm, and in control the entire time. While that may have been the character that was written on the page, it didn't suit Washington at all and thus should have been cast differently. As for Travolta, he is too busy dropping F-bombs and maniacally raving to really be allowed any sort of acting maneuvering. His character is the same from the first time that we see him until the last.

Plot: Though hyped up to be an incredible, fast-paced film, the plot really is no different than anything that has been done a thousand times before. Crime, hostages, ransom, banter, rescue attempt. That's all it really boiled down to, and those same themes were covered in much more riveting fashion in mere minutes of, say, "The Siege" (another, much better, Washington film).

Character Development: This area was easily the biggest weakness of the film. Though it seems as if, in the beginning, the film is moving towards some interesting developments for both the Washington and Travolta characters, the "revelations" come and go in seconds and are never touched upon again. It's as if the writers had some good ideas in mind, but never really got everything ironed out.

Also odd was the strange dialogues throughout the film. At times, in the middle of what should have been a tense hostage crisis, Washington (or his co-workers/superiors) were often seen laughing or joking with each other in a fashion that didn't at all seem to fit the tense mood of the film. I kept expecting the tension to pick up as the minutes ticked by, but before I knew it the movie was over and it seemed as if nothing substantial had happened.

Thus, despite my liking of most films starring Denzel Washington, I would have to steer other viewers clear of this one. The plot is shallow, the acting isn't anywhere near fully realized, and the character development/dialogues are just plain stupid or non-existent. I have not seen the original version of "Pelham", but I'm willing to bet that this remake didn't live up to it.

One of the worst movies I have ever experienced. Doesn't even pretend to make sense. Warning: spoilers...

Revolta blathers endlessly about nothing, zero character development. Oh, wait, hes Catholic and served food... that's a character? If you randomly scrambled Revolta's villain dialogue from Broken Arrow and Punisher, it would sound exactly the same in tone as this movie and have twice the content.

Most of the action consists of police cars and motorycles, completely unopposed, unable to get from uptown to midtown without crashing themselves to bits. Why does a motorcycle randomly crash into a stationary object every 15 minutes in this movie? Why do all the helicopters fly in uncalled-for slow motion, repeatedly using the same footage? Why, when the cops are in the helicopters, does the city scroll by so fast in the window that the copter must be going at least 1000 mph? How does taking a single subway car hostage cause international gold prices to spike several thousand percent when 9/11 caused what, a 2% spike?? Why can't Denzel select a decent script, and why can't Revolta retire back to the obscurity that he so richly deserves?? Why why why?

I have not seen the original version of this and so will not be writing a comparison.

On its own, this is a pretty decent thriller, with Denzel as a man who is dealing with his own scandal and struggle as well as having to take on John Travolta as the angry, bitter man who wants revenge on the city of NY for past injuries. Tension and some bloodshed occur after JT and his cronies hijack a train underground and hold passengers hostage.

Decent entertainment, though not all that memorable.

Tough guy, Ryder (played by John Travolta), has taken a New York City subway train and its passenger's hostage, and will only release them once the mayor has paid $10 million dollars. Meanwhile, transit worker Walter Garber (who is under suspicion of taking a bribe) is the unfortunate dispatcher who Ryder makes contact with, and soon finds himself embarking on a series of tasks to rescue the hostages. There were two really great actors (Travolta & Washington), some snippers, some chase scenes, some really bad guys, an entertaining Mayor, and tons of stuff that should have made this a must see, but I was disappointed. There was so much potential, so many possibilities, but nothing really seemed to connect. There was no follow-thru, and nothing to really justify the mediocre ending of Garber (Washington) walking home with a half-gallon of milk following his showdown with Ryder (Travolta). Not even Travolta's attempt at being a bad guy and using "MF" constantly (although the tattoo on his neck was cute) seem genuine, just forced. What worked for him in Pulp Fiction (tough guy yet likeable) didn't really work here, and while I would love to give this a great review, I can't. But I will give this tale a "2" because I thought the outtakes and extras on the DVD were great.

Expected much more from this movie, C'mon it's John Travolta and Denzel Washington. Travolta just seemed to overact and you never get a feel as to what drives him in this film, no layers, no subtext, he's just a bad guy. Denzel who is usually so good, was very subdued, like he phoned this one in. And I wasn't buying James Gandolfini as the mayor. Throw in some unnecessary and unrealistic car crashes and you have a mess of a movie.

The script and acting in this movie is boring and not worth watching. Production quality is definitely up to par, but watching a competently staged and filmed movie that isn't well written or acted is not worth the effort. It is especially sad when you compare it with its 1974 original which is funny, suspenseful and very well paced. I love old movies, but often new productions are much easier to watch because modern production standards are really superior two those of most movies made in the 1960s and 1970s. It has to be a really good movie to remain superior to later production with all the bells and whistles available to current producers and directors. I can watch the 1974 Pelham 1 2 3 over and over again. This 2009 version I refuse the watch again. I can't understand why the 2009 version didn't use the best line in the 1974 version, "What do they expect for 35 cents, that they'll live forever?" There's more humor in that line from the 1974 film than there is in the entire 2009 version.

What can't I say about this dog of movie One good thing is I did not pay good money watch it since I have a DVD/sat service and it was on a late viewing so I recorded and sorry I even took the time to do that. Dialog was full of profanity F this GD that MF ect. I think I counted at least 325 Mr bad guy John used one or the other. The other bad guys all they did was look around and act like a bunch of stiffs and gun tooting crazies. Mr Washington was just as bad he must and was not right guy for this role. Movie get a F and just like when ever they remake a classic movie they mess it up big time and this movie is no exception. Rate for this is an D and is not a family movie at all.

Director Tony Scott's latest movie, a remake of The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 (2009), was one of my latest DVD rentals from Redbox. The movie had two things going for it in my mind to get me to watch it: Tony Scott and Denzel Washington...both of whom I typically love. But the magic just wasn't there for either of them on this flick. The movie was great looking as always for Tony Scott movies and very "techie" as Tony Scott movies tend to always be. And Denzel Washington's acting was good as always. I think it was purely the story and the script that just didn't grab me. Now I admit that I am not much of John Travolta fan either. About the only movie of his I like is Phenomenon (1996)...it's the exception to an otherwise slate of movies that he has starred in that just don't do it for me...including Pulp Fiction (sorry to those I offend!). I feel the same way about Nicholas Cage...very few of his movies I like. I don't know what it is about the two of them, but I just don't connect with them. It might be their egos or personalities. Or the characters they typically choose to play.

But back to The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3...the first act of the movie was good. It built-up my interest and kept me involved in the picture. But somewhere in the middle act I got bored and found the story to be predictable. And funny enough, I've never seen or studied the original 1974 movie, so it wasn't that. Or maybe it was that. Maybe the problem was that essentially this was a 35 year old story that was updated in terms of look and feel, but lacked the upgrade in character development and story. The thing about great movies I think is that they are both timeless and of their time. It's a paradox really...like everything in life. Sometimes I like the remake better and sometimes I like the original better. And sometimes both. For me its almost always the same criteria for a movie: Do I like it? Do I like the characters? Do I like the actors and director's vision/style? Do I like the look/production design or music? Can I personally relate to the story or any of the charcters? There's got to be something that I really grab on to. And The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 just didn't have that for me.

I know that a lot of my movie reviews don't really say much about the actually movie but say more about how I feel about the movie. That's my approach to movies. It's an experience for me that I share with you and then you decide if you want to have the experience based on my experience. Isn't that how we all approach movies? To me, a movie is like eating something. You can talk in great detail about it and describe it to someone and that may entice them to try it out...but at the end of the day, you have to actually EAT something in order to truly experience it and make a decision on whether or not you like it or not.

If you want a better Tony Scott/Denzel Washington movie to watch, I suggest Deja Vu (2006). And I also love Enemy of the State (1998), Crimson Tide (1995), Days of Thunder (1990), Beverly Hills Cop II (1987) and of course his classic movie, Top Gun (1986). I look forward to whatever Tony has in store next. And same with his brother Ridley Scott, who has made some of my favorite movies of all time.