The Taking of Pelham 123 (Remake) (2009)

Starring: Denzel Washington, John Travolta, John Turturro, James Gandolfini, and Luis Guzmán, with a small role from Adrian Martinez
Grade: B-

When Jay-Z’s “99 Problems” opens a film, you automatically have my attention.

Summary

In New York City at the Rail Control Center over in Midtown, MTA subway dispatcher Walter Garber (Washington) jokes around with co-worker Delgado (Ramón Rodríguez). At the same time, a tattooed man brandishing sunglasses waits for the 6 train, Pelham 123. Eventually, we will learn his name to be “Ryder” (Travolta). Elsewhere, his cohorts are seen at different stops waiting for the same train such as Ramos (Guzmán), Emri (Robert Vataj), and Bashkin (Victor Gojcaj). A motorman patches in to Garber to ask why he’s being delayed by a red signal light. Garber is confused by it too but has him roll through it slow, per the rule book. Next, Garber gets a call that there’s a cracked rail and it may take two hours to fix it. As some of the men enter the train, Delgado expresses his sympathies to Garber that he’s back on the floor again, though Garber insists it’s only a temporary position and he’ll be back in the office soon. Following this, the quick-thinking Garber comes up with a plan for the train that called to get back on its schedule. Meanwhile, Ryder is on the platform waiting for the train to pull up. When it does, he points a gun straight to the head of motorman Jerry Pollard (Gary Basaraba) when he pops his head out of the window. He forces Pollard to open the door, which allows for Ramos to get in and hit him. Bashkin pulls a gun on conductor Regina (Tonye Patano). It’s now 2PM and Pelham is under control by hijackers, though unbeknownst to the others on the train.

One of the passengers is a young man who’s talking with his girlfriend through video chat, but his connection gets lost as the train moves. Now, Pelham is starting to miss stops and people take notice. The train comes to a complete stop, and Ramos takes the cutting key from Pollard. Seeing this on his map, Garber calls in to Pelham 123 asking why they have stopped, even though they’re all green ahead. Ryder is hearing this, but he just tells Pollard to do what he says. Wearing a badge, Ramos goes through the train car and gets stopped by Emri, but he tells him “Not yet”, so he steps aside. Using the cutting key, Ramos disconnects the car he is in from the rest of the train. One is going backwards. The one with Ryder and Pollard stays put. Garber is told by his co-workers that Pollard is the motorman, and he’s familiar with him because he went to motorman school with him. He calls in again to ask what’s going on, but there’s no answer. Garber asks for an express train to pull up next to Pollard to see what’s going on in the cab. Back on the train, Bashkin notices a passenger coming towards him and Ramos and deduces it’s a plainclothes cop, warning Ramos to stop the train on his signal. The man comes over to them and identifies himself as Transit Police, so Bashkin has Ramos stop the train. This throws the cop off and Bashkin shoots him in front of the passengers. Realizing it’s on, Emri shoots his machine gun into the air to warn the passengers on his part of the train. Garber gets the report of gunshots, so he calls off the express train. Ryder comes out and starts yelling at the passengers. The kid with the laptop drops the device, and it lands under one of the seats.

The early shooting was not part of the plan, so Ryder calls on his walkie-talkie and asks Ramos what’s going on. Ramos and Bashkin explain the situation, prompting Ryder to ask to talk to Regina. They give her the walkie-talkie, and Ryder directs her to take the passengers off the train and onto the platform station. Cops are now driving in from every direction, and they help Regina and the passengers out once they get to safety. Ramos and Bashkin walk over on the tracks to rejoin Ryder and Emri, with Ryder popping out to tell them to turn the power off from where they are walking, all the way down. Bashkin shoots the breaker open, and Ramos pulls the master switch to shut everything off. Following this, Ryder finally patches in to the Command Center to talk to Garber. He has Garber look at his map to reiterate what he’s done, saying one car is more manageable than 10. He has Pollard tell Garber about the hostages. Next, Ryder talks about what he wants. Considering the market today, he thinks a million dollars is chump change. For some reason, he lands on the exact number of $526,315.79 and tells Garber to multiply it by the 19 hostages he has. It’s $10,000,000.01, prompting one guy in the Command Center to sarcastically ask if Ryder is an accountant. Even so, Ryder is cool with this total and wants Garber to call the Mayor (Gandolfini) with the price and how he wants it in 100,000 one-hundred-dollar bills. The one cent can stay with Garber as a “broker fee”. Additionally, Ryder wants the rest of the money in plain suitcases, the kind with the wheels and the handle on it. Continuing, Ryder says this isn’t a “futures contract”. It’s a “spot trade”, meaning there’s a time limit. Giving him a chance, Ryder asks what a fair time limit would be. Garber tries to avoid answering, but Ryder insists. Garber tries Thursday, but Ryder prefers an hour.

It’s 2:13PM, so he wants it there by 3:13PM. The “late fee” is Ryder killing a hostage every minute past the hour. After getting Garber’s name, he then furiously reiterates his point and tells him to figure out a way to notify the Mayor. On a different subway train, the Mayor is sitting there with a couple of members from his staff talking about retirement. A few workers for the Mayor pull up to one of the subway stops to tell him the news, so they ride the train to the next stop to work on a plan. An advisor tries to turn the train into an express to skip the next five stops, but after the people start complaining, the Mayor calls this off. At the Command Center, Garber’s annoyed boss Chief Transporation Officer John Johnson (Michael Rispoli) seems to be pissed off that Garber is the one who’s in this position of importance. They are interrupted by news of the Hostage Negotiation Team arriving and the Mayor being notified. Johnson tells him not to fuck this all up. Garber asks if he wants to do it, but Johnson assures Garber that it’s his call and leaves. Garber notifies Ryder with updates and the conversation starts to ramble a bit, leading to Garber making a joke about New Jersey and Ryder telling him to watch it because he was born there. As they continue to talk, Garber starts to get bits and pieces of information out of him, and he writes it down. Though Garber accidentally reveals he’s married, he figures Ryder is Catholic after he talks about how he feels as if he’s in a confessional with him as they talk. Eventually, it leads to Garber asking him what he should refer to him as. Of course, this is when he says, “Ryder”. After talking about how him and Garber crossing paths could be fate, Ryder reminds Garber he has 50 minutes left and to not call unless he has news.

In the tunnel, the hijackers mess with the electricity a little bit and it turns the internet back on to allow for Ryder to check updates on the stock market. Unbeknownst to them, this fixing of the signal allows for the one passenger’s laptop to turn back on, so his girlfriend gets a live feed of the inside of the train because their video chat was still going. At the Command Center with 48 minutes to go, Lt. Vincent Camonetti (Turturro) of the NYPD Hostage Negotiation Team appears and greets Garber and Johnson, with Garber telling him everything he knows. Camonetti wants to see if they can get a signal, so they can talk on their cell phones, but Johnson assures him this isn’t possible from where the train is at in the tunnel. Camonetti then becomes intrigued by some of the notes Garber wrote down. Because of some of the verbiage he used like referring to the hostages as “commodities” among other things, Garber thinks Ryder is some type of Wall Street guy. He also mentions that he thinks Ryder is Catholic. Camonetti wants to take the reins now, so he sits in Garber’s spot after Garber shows him how to use all of the equipment. Johnson tells Garber to go home and take the rest of the day off. Though Garber wants to stay to see things through, Johnson forces him to leave. On the train, one passenger complains he has to take a piss, so Ryder opens the door for the guy. A kid follows this man’s lead as well. Then, Ryder has them close the doors and they drive off, with the man too scared to go but the kid not having a problem with it. Ryder is patched in with Camonetti, but he only wants to talk with Garber. Camonetti insists it’s his job now, but Ryder refuses the conversation. He demands Garber or he’ll kill Pollard. Again, Camonetti says Garber was sent home, so Ryder shoots and kills Pollard in front of everyone.

Ryder tells Camonetti they have sixty seconds to get Garber. Otherwise, he’ll kill another hostage, though he blames New York City itself for Pollard’s death. Delgado runs out and gets Garber as soon as he exits the building. Telling him how Ryder killed Pollard, he brings Garber back inside just in time. Furious, Ryder tells Garber to not leave, or he’ll hunt him down himself.

Now, they have thirty-nine minutes left to deliver the money, but the chaos has just begun.

My Thoughts:

In terms of making a solid actioner centered around a troubled hero taking on a maniac villain, The Taking of Pelham 123 is adequate entertainment. When compared to the original however, it doesn’t even come close. Despite better star power, some added twists, a high-profile director, and a massive budget, this remake is nowhere near what the original was.

The Taking of Pelham 123 isn’t bad by any means, but it never lived up to the lofty expectations it set for itself as soon as this remake was announced. The problems begin with director Tony Scott. If you’ve seen enough of Scott’s films, you are very aware of his signature style, highlighting the frenetic energy of the action with his camera movements and jarring editing that are strangely reminiscent of those old piracy advertisements from the 2000s. It can be very distracting, though in some action flicks it can work depending on the story and the content. For instance, Scott’s Déjà Vu is an example of his style complimenting the energy of a plot very well. Sadly, the same cannot be said for The Taking of Pelham 123. Instead of intensifying the suspense and the tension between our stars, the look of the film is that of an editing team living off energy drinks, coffee, and no sleep. It’s gimmicky, dreary looking, and it takes away from a plot that has more substance than the film seems to give itself credit for. In some movies, you may need to add more stylistically if the screenplay is barren from a story or an emotional standpoint, but this is a movie that actually had enough subplots, moving parts, and a connection between characters that Scott’s “extreme” style was not needed to spice things up. If anything, the movie would have benefitted more from of a grounded approach similar to the original film.,

More importantly, it also feels less suspenseful than the original, a film in which a lot less stylistic choices were made. In Joseph Sargent’s movie, I never questioned the pace in which the characters worked at because it moved briskly and there was enough going on to where you wouldn’t think about it. In this remake though, the viewer can’t help but notice certain beats where the ticking clock they were working against didn’t match up to how long the action was taking. This can be seen consistently throughout the second half of the film. The biggest example being when Garber is demanded by Ryder to deliver the money himself or more hostages will die. The first minute of the seven minutes he gives them is spent pondering, and Camonetti tells him he doesn’t have to do this when everyone in the room knows he has to. There’s the first mistake. You only have seven minutes, and you have to make it across town. Every second counts. Why are they all sitting there for a minute wondering if he should or not? Do you really think they have time to fuck around within this story? Not at all! The immediate response should have been Garber giving a worried look to Camonetti and both men sprinting out the door! Then, it only gets worse. With only six minutes to go, Garber accepts a phone call from his wife, and they talk leisurely about his situation before she demands he say that he loves her and how he should come back with milk, as extra inspiration to remind him to come home safely. Why even accept the phone call when you only have six minutes to get all the way to that subway tunnel via helicopter, land, learn how to use a gun, and deliver the money? Also, why wouldn’t he call her while he’s on the helicopter to save time, knowing what’s at stake? Next, Garber and Camonetti talk on the helicopter once he finally gets on, and they don’t seem to be bothered by the time at all.

You’re telling me they did all of this in six fucking minutes and land without issue? You’re telling me everyone is chilling during this series of events? There’s no way!

Based off of what we’ve seen from our loose cannon villain beforehand, both men should be frantically getting on the helicopter as quick as humanly possible and begging the pilot to go even faster. How they go about things is too illogical and takes too long considering the time given them. The second half of the film seems to forget the written-in time clock, despite it being the driving force behind the antagonist’s actions and the entire movie. Tony Scott must have taken Camonetti’s advice of “pretend the deadline doesn’t exist” to heart and kept that in mind with the pacing of the action. With that being said, this phone call scene reminding the audience that it could be Garber’s last was a good example as to how this remake handles the emotion better than the original, with the strongest factor being that we get to know the principal characters on a much more personal level. Oddly enough, despite this movie focusing more on the violence and an action hero battle between our two stars, the original is a better action thriller, while this remake shines more with the emotional storytelling. When considering all of the x-factors from both versions of the story, this is something you’d never predict at first glance.

Sometimes, a natural and realistic approach is better, and this approach did wonders for the original. Here, everything was loud in style and content, but it didn’t have the same effect. Moreover, Scott and screenwriter Brian Helgeland forgets the underlying beauty of the first film. The value of teamwork and everyone working towards a common goal is lost. The spirit of New York isn’t seen in this remake compared to the original. Everyone is at odds, and Denzel’s Garber is only kept in the loop because Ryder demands it. His boss in Johnson is actively rooting against him just because of Garber’s legal troubles that don’t affect him at all, and the police seem to be weary of working with him because of the twist added with the bribery (it was only $35,000; big deal!), with Camonetti coercing him to agree to getting his house searched. Even when Garber is given the money to deliver to Ryder in the tunnel, the city worker who shows him how a gun works looks as if he doesn’t care to be there and gives Garber the encouraging line of, “Just don’t fuck it up” when human lives are at stake. The cynical tone of this remake is a far cry from what the original prided itself on, making it feel like every other action thriller of the 2000s era and missing the point (and the fun) of the original entirely. The one chance they had to remind the audiences of New York, the battle of good versus evil, and how important it is to taking Ryder down after he’s put so many at risk is the aforementioned scene in which Garber and Camonetti are on the helicopter flying to the subway in a hurry. As they fly, there’s a moment of silence between the two as Camonetti talks about a similar situation to the one they’re in and how it worked. Then, he points out to Garber how nice it is to see the city from the perspective of the chopper because “You can see what you’re fighting for”. It’s a very good line for the hero to internalize and to really take the third act home, but Tony Scott fucks it up once again.

Look, I’m not asking for Scott to turn this thriller into a Monet, but a line like this is the proverbial softball in what should lead to an all-encompassing aerial shot of one of the most iconic cities on planet Earth. All he had to shoot was something simple, yet eloquent, to remind Garber and the viewer “what you’re fighting for”. Instead, he chooses the fuzzy, shaky, out-of-focus look of the city that the rest of the movie has relied on, and it looks so out of place following this movie-defining line that it comes off as comical.

Denzel Washington is good at avoiding his usual onscreen persona. He packed on some pounds for the role, acts like he’s never seen a gun or violence before, and does everything he can to be the exact opposite of what John Travolta does with Ryder. There’s more to Walter Garber too, as he’s not as innocent as he portrays himself to be. Writing in the twist where he’s forced to admit he took a bribe on a contract from a train manufacture was interesting, and it strengthened the onscreen bond between Garber and Ryder, as Ryder sees him as someone who was unfairly shat on by the system like he was all those years back. You can feel the secondhand embarrassment in the room when Garber is forced to admit it in front of all his co-workers. Though it does work within the story, and Washington’s acting afterwards does add a lot to the character development of this still relatively good guy, I can’t help but think he could’ve still gotten away with this lie. Honestly, Ryder was going to kill that kid George if Garber insisted that he didn’t take a bribe. From a liar’s perspective, he could’ve covered the mic and told the rest of the room that he still didn’t do it. He was just “admitting” it to save the kid’s life. Am I wrong here? Why does the entire room just assume Garber was lying like they didn’t just see Ryder hold a gun to George’s head after he’s already murdered someone beforehand. Wouldn’t anyone “admit” to whatever Ryder wanted in that situation? It almost seems disrespectful that the entire room essentially turns on Garber when there’s clearly a bigger problem at hand that he has to deal with. This is more an issue with the screenplay though, not Denzel. For the most part, his work as Walter Garber does keep the story moving, and it’s much easier for the unofficial friendship with Ryder to develop with how earnest Washington’s performance under stress is. Unfortunately, it’s just not as interesting as we’d like it to be. He does a good job for what they wanted to focus on in this remake, but I have to be honest here.

I liked Walter Matthau’s Garber more than Denzel’s, and it pains me to say it.

In regard to the villains, the original does the group as a whole a lot better. Besides John Travolta’s Ryder and Luis Guzmán’s Ramos, who isn’t onscreen long enough for us to really care, the other two members of the crew are nothing. Right now, I couldn’t tell you what they look like, never mind any character traits or names. If you said one or both men were in a Steven Seagal direct-to-video movie as the main villain, I would 100% believe you. This is how faceless and unimportant they are to the story. In the original, each guy was a key cog to the machine ran by Mr. Blue, and they had distinct enough personalities to make you wonder about each guy. Here, it was just “John Travolta and his merrymen of dipshits”. Now, I like seeing John Travolta get opportunities in big budget films because he gets too much of a bad rap for picking awful projects almost any time after he finally hits on something. Though he’s thoroughly entertaining throughout the running time with his burgeoning respect for Garber and how funny he is in a dark way (one of the best quips of the film comes from him saying Garber has a sexy voice and how he would be his bitch in prison), he doesn’t cross the line into the menace he’s written to be. Even as he kills and has this unstable violent energy that follows him to make us think he will snap at any time, along with a just-out-of-prison look that is almost too on-the-nose, you’re not frightened at what he may do. It’s what you expect from him in a movie like this. In his defense, this still works for a good action movie because all you really want is a good counterpart to the hero that is just as entertaining but in a more twisted way to make the viewer want to see his comeuppance.

Travolta does this handily, as his outbursts and amusing line delivery, whether it be intentional or unintentional, makes this a performance worth watching (“…George his friends call him “Geo”. He’s got an 80s skateboard thing. He makes it work…”). It’s an early look into the third phase of Travolta’s career as he swings for the fences more and more, with this film being one of the earliest examples. On the other hand, he doesn’t reach that next level as a villain to push this remake to where it could have been. He was intimidating at times, but he didn’t have the mystique. We understand what he’s about early on, as he wears his heart on his sleeve. This is a far cry from the original and completely different from Robert Shaw’s subdued performance as Mr. Blue. He wasn’t winning any Oscars either, but Shaw was dark enough in his performance as a villain to where you wanted to learn more about him and how he will react to his other cohorts. In this remake, Ryder was in full control but also didn’t seem to care about anyone else on his team, so neither did the audience. It bordered on scenery-chewing levels of fun, but he kept it together anytime he held a gun on someone. The only surprise about Ryder was the Wall Street twist where it was more about the stock market rather than the $10 million, but this almost made him look like some mastermind “supervillain” rather than the murderous felon that dominated the screen for the hour and a half prior. This extra twist didn’t fit the character written nor the performance that accompanied it. When the Mayor and his advisor deduce that some idiot with a gun wouldn’t know about the $10 million limit at the federal reserve and figure he’s a Wall Street guy, I’m inclined to agree. The problem is that they wrote him like an “idiot with a gun”, or at least a loose cannon with one. Lastly, he relied on “motherfucker” and “buddy boy” way too much.

Also, I could’ve done without the story of how he was able to shit in prison after remembering how a dog did the same while directing a dogsled he was riding in Iceland. I get that this led to a pivotal moment where the characters could trace this story to find it who he is, but there had to have been a better anecdote to get there, right?

On a side note, I liked the different direction they took the Mayor in compared to the original. Instead of being better or worse, it was just different. Sometimes, this can work, and James Gandolfini did a good job as the Mayor on the verge of retirement from politics who’s now stuck in the middle of all of this. He really carried himself like a mayor. His face when the press bombards him about the hostage situation, and someone interrupts to ask about his divorce was gold, as was his saying “Yes” when asked if cheating on his wife was worth it. Plus, it gave us that great scene where Ryder gives the fake offer of the Mayor for all the passengers. Any excuse to see Travolta hilariously rant as Ryder was a good choice. He was having fun, and so were we watching it. Additionally, small elements like the woman on the train trying to inspire the stranger to fight for them, pointing out his ring that indicates he’s a veteran when he thought it was about his race, and John Turturro’s role as the frustrated hostage negotiator who has to turn into a teacher and bystander to the action because Ryder’s refusing to work with him were some excellent tension-building inclusions to add layers to this story. Camonetti’s crash-course on negotiating was especially well-written for the allotted time it’s given, as he compares it to “rodeo clowns keeping the bull from what he wants to do”. All things considered, that’s a pretty good description.

At one point, the Mayor asks why they didn’t send the helicopter with the money to make it in time for Ryder’s request, and everyone’s dumbfounded reaction was hysterical.

Wait, why didn’t they? That’s a great point. Actually, why didn’t they in the original? This isn’t necessarily a movie-ruiner because you don’t really think about it until he brings it up, but now it’s all I’m thinking of!

For action movie fans, the remake of The Taking of Pelham 123 is a fiery encounter and exciting battle of wits worth seeing between polar opposites Denzel Washington and John Travolta. The intensity, the violence, and the emotion between both men and their stories, as one works towards righting the wrongs that happened to him and the other tries to redeem himself for what he did, is entertaining enough to want to see through. On the other hand, those looking for the big-budgeted, modern era remake taking the original film and pushing it to an even higher tier of excitement and suspense with a better cast and director will be sorely disappointed with stylistic choices, underdeveloped characters that come nowhere close to the original’s ensemble, and added twists that muddy the elements that this version does right. With that being said, you could argue that this would have a higher rating if the first one didn’t exist, and this was its own original movie. Sadly though, this isn’t the case. For how much was put it into it, this remake should have been a lot better in comparison but falls way short of its goal.