by Lou Vailant

Created on: June 22, 2009   Last Updated: June 23, 2009

Title: The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3
Release Date: June 12, 2009
Director: Tony Scott
Film Studio: Columbia Pictures
MPAA Rating: R for Violence and Pervasive Language

One word can almost suffice in summing up this movie. It was horrible, and there are plenty of reasons for this. First of all, Tony Scott is no stranger to the motion picture business. He has a few blockbusters to his credit, the biggest of which include Top Gun, Beverly Hills Cop II, Days of Thunder, and Enemy of the State. With this in mind I find myself questioning whether his directing career seems short of breath because of his directing style, or simply out of chance. Nonetheless, his performance as director in The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 is one of the worst I have ever witnessed.

I found myself questioning my own eyes for the first fifteen or so consecutive minutes. With awkwardly placed slow motion (which does continue at brief points throughout the film), painful camera angles, and music which mismatched the situation and general feel of the movie, anyone could have made a better flowing movie.

The timeframe of the movie staggers, and though the goal is to move as quickly as possible through the one hour span over which the heist takes place, the movie feels like it was piecemealed together. The acting in the movie was average all around with the sole exception of John Travolta. Anyone who has seen him in multiple films will understand what I mean when I say this, but Mr. Travolta lives to play this sort of role.

Movies like Pulp Fiction and Swordfish appeal to his capabilities and are without question his best. His character Ryder is devious, clever, and realist. He is unphased by what society thinks; the man is out to get him, and he is out for revenge. This principle drives him to take control over Pelham 123 and shake the town with fear. Ryder is a very smart character who has no regard for human life, not even his own. As he makes an awkward companion in Walter Garber, it becomes clear that the distinction between the two, though it seems obvious, is actually blurred.

Garber is the everyman, and Ryder's goal is to prove to Garber that he is also. Garber fears Ryder, he sees him as a leech to society, a black sheep in a crowd overrun by innocents. Ryder is human nature, the angry, the loathing, the worst and yet oddly essential aspects of humanity. Even once Ryder is arrested or killed, once the terrorist situation is fixed, the problem will still persist. There is no stopping human

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>