Walter Garber goes to “bat for the city of New York” in Tony Scott’s remake of the 70’s classic The Taking of Pelham 123. This time it’s Denzel Washington reprising Walter Matthau’s role as a New York Subway dispatcher who turns up for what will be anything but a normal day at work.
Having been alerted to a halted subway train in the middle of the underground, Garber suspects something is awry and attempts to communicate with Pelham 123 via radio. He’s is met by the voice of a criminal (played by John Travolta) going only by the name Ryder, who informs him that the subway train has been hijacked. Ryder’s gang are demanding $10,000,000 for the safe return of the Pelham 123 subway train and its passengers, but not without condition. The New York subway network is brought to a stand still and Walter Garber must ensure the safe delivery of the ransom within one hour, otherwise Ryder will carry out the gradual execution of his hostages.
Remake Vs Original (see a list of the 10 worst remakes here)
The contrasts are stark between the original and remade The Taking of Pelham 123 and in many respects a sign of what is wrong with modern Hollywood.
Tony Scott’s reworking of Pelham seems far too cluttered and the narrative too hurried and over the top. Joseph Sargent’s original was low key but endearing, the tale of brash, everyday New Yorkers working in the complicated but un-glorified subway network who are confronted by a bunch of Johnny come lately thieves who very nearly pull off an incredible and (surprisingly) believable heist. We hardly get to know the characters in any great detail, particularly the hijackers, symbolised by their use of civilian clothing (adopted to blend in with the equally anonymous passengers on Pelham 123).
Brian Helgeland’s screenplay gives greater depth to the two leading characters, but do we really need it? Ryder is a more talkative, cocky criminal than Robert Shaw’s original villain, Mr Blue. However, this serves only to provoke a hammy performance from Travolta, Ryder’s bantering with Garber is phoney and too elaborate to ever come across as authentic. He’s almost funny and slightly likeable with his quirky mannerisms and one-liners, a trait that means the character loses his ability to be genuinely menacing when the film requires it. Then again, how much menace can Edna Turnblad from Hairspray really exude?
In comparison, Robert Shaw’s Mr. Blue didn’t have to prove his metal, he just radiated it with his ability to hold frame with a steely glare and kept the chit-chat to a minimum. Here be the lesson - less is more Mr. Travolta.
Pelham 123 Riddled With Clichés
As with most Hollywood movies these days we must have a central protagonist with a sentimental character arc to sustain our loyalty, only Walter Garber’s is so patronising it’s actually quite offensive. Garber is living with the guilt of having taken a bribe from a Japanese tube train manufacturer in order to obtain his vote in a business deal. He’s been humiliated with demotion and now awaiting the result of a company hearing.
However, despite an FBI negotiator (John Turturro) being brought in to take over the proceedings, Ryder insists that it is Garber, and Garber only that communicates with him (The popular heist movie motif of a criminal striking up a relationship with his negotiator at the end of a phone line is trudged out). The control room is now awash with the FBI agents and also New York City's Mayor (James Gandolfini), who’s been rushed to the epicentre to offer his support in New York’s time of crisis.
Now facing-off on the radio, Ryder forces Garber into a tearful confession to his bribery charge. Unbeknown to Garber, the criminal has computer with internet connection deep underground on Pelham 123 (yes an internet connection) and has cleverly researched his opponent. Ryder now has the edge. Asked to confess in order to save the life of one of the hostages, it’s a cruel test of Garber’s metal and quite obviously the start of his redemption for the bribery. It’s not long before Garber is given the chance to completely atone for his sins (here’s the character arc again) when Ryder insists that it’s his new found friend who delivers the ransom money directly to Pelham 123 and into his own hands. Can Garber save $10,000,000 of New York’s money and at the same time save his own damaged integrity? What do you think?
The Taking of Pelham 123 isn’t anything that we haven’t seen before in a Hollywood thriller. The outline of the original remains in tact, but much of its lovableness and charm is put on the scrap heap for a less than thrilling thriller. it’s every inch an over the top Tony Scott film, so if you love the original you’ll no doubt hate this clumsy adaptation.
Rating: 2/5
Pelham 123's Low Points:
- Despite having only 6 minutes to reach Pelham 123 before another hostage is killed, Garber finds time to call his wife to tell her how much he loves her (of course). She politely reminds him to pick up some milk after work. Marriage eh?
- New York’s Mayor talks directly to Ryder via the subway radio system in the type of scene usually reserved for US Presidents talking to civilisation-threatening terrorists or aliens.
Subtle References to the Original The Taking of Pelham One Two Three:
- On the way to work, the Mayor of New York complains of always gets the flu when he goes on a school visit and demands a vaccination. In the 1974 original Lee Wallace’s obnoxious Mayor is bedridden with the virus when we first meet him.
- Garber’s first name, Walter, is a reference to Walter Matthau who played the same role in the original
- The colour of Denzel Washington’s shirt and tie are the opposite way around to Matthau’s in '74.
 |
