Watch The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 For Free

Pretty Good

Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

When the director is Tony Scott, you strap in ready to go for a ride. Sadly this film is limited in scope, and doesn't go anywhere worthwhile. Enemy of the State was a great Tony Scott film. Pelham 123 is a thousand times worse. The premise is too simple. There's nothing clever about any of the characters. No plot twists, nothing to think about, and no satisfaction by the end. The bad guy played by Travolta, tries hard to give purpose to his murderous psycho plot, but it doesn't work. The writers struggle to bring anything worthwhile to the screenplay or dialog. No doubt the original book this is based on, is nothing special. The visuals try to make up for the void in the plot, with constant irritating jump cuts and over-saturated "video" effects. This stylistic treatment is overdone. Tony Scott has always used some degree of visual decoration, but this takes it too far. It starts okay, but by the time we reach the halfway point, things have descended into mediocrity and never recover. Just like with Pay Back, the studio should have intervened and re-wrote the second half, saving it from the train wreck which is Pelham 123.

The Taking of Pelham 123 is an enjoyable and fun thrilling heist thriller. It'snot so much a mindless action film as some may consider, but it does the job what audiences are looking for. Lead by strong performances from Denzel Washington and John Travolta, this train terrorism film clicks on all angles when we see the characters portraying and sparking back to one another. Although the ending may be predictable, the journey and overall suspense and thrills of the film is reason why this film works and is entertaining. The other reason is the chemistry of Washington and Travolta. The sci-fi and overall action in this film is greatly directed by Tony Scott. Surprised by a few laughs (many of which by John Travolta), this film is all around enjoyable and recommend for fans of thrilling action heist films.

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.

Author John Godey's premise gets reinvented for the technology-driven 21st century in this second screen adaptation of his work. Denzel Washington stars as Walter Garber, an NYC subway system dispatcher who just happens to field the call of the movies' villain. That man is "Ryder" (John Travolta), who holds the passengers of a subway car for ransom. $10,000,000.01 to be exact. But the catch is that the money must be delivered in exactly ONE HOUR. And Ryder is willing to kill hostages as punishment for not meeting his demands to the letter.Washington and the late director Tony Scott once again team up for undemanding, technically slick thrills. Part of the problem, though, is that the presentation is often TOO flashy, with a camera that sometimes refuses to stay still. For this viewer, that approach always seems to be saying that the filmmakers don't quite trust the material. Scott is able to generate some excitement, and tension, but the story doesn't have the same impact as it did in the 1974 version.In terms of the bad guys, Travolta really is the only one to leave an impression. The Brian Helgeland script gives Luis Guzman, as a participant in Ryders' scheme, precious little to do, and the other two guys who are in on it come across as one dimensional ciphers. Travolta is definitely good, and charismatic, in a fairly flamboyant portrayal, but it's Washingtons' efficient, low key performance as a working man caught up in an escalating situation that holds the movie together.An excellent supporting cast is on hand to provide their expertise: John Turturro as a crack hostage negotiator, James Gandolfini as the mayor, John Benjamin Hickey as the deputy mayor, Michael Rispoli as Garbers' boss, Gary Basaraba as a motorman, Aunjanue Ellis as Garbers' wife, etc.There's some cringe inducing dialogue along the way, but some decent moments as well. But this version of "The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3" really starts to derail once it insists on turning Garber into a typical action movie hero.Watchable but uninspired.Six out of 10.