inforaza This is a Crude, Irritating, Ill-Executed, Retarded remake of the original 1974 movie.This stupid movie again proves 2 important things: 1 - Many remakes are not as impressive as the original and 2 – The movies of the 1970s have subtleties that appeal to our minds, in contrast to, the fast-paced,noisy, show-offish, macho movies of today. The taking of the Pelham 123 suffer from the following ills: 1.Crude shot-effects (stuttering frames, image wipes and frantic editing)2.Crude dialogues (excessive use of the F-word which also includes the boy and the girl with laptops expressing love for each together using the F-word in the middle of tense situation)3.Stupid scenes/dialogues (Walter Garber's wife asking him to bring home a gallon of milk during the hostage crisis and the stupid GF of the boy with the laptop asking him to express his love for her in the middle of the hostage crisis)4.No depth in any character 5.No real suspense at all (only noisy dialogues and machismo) 6.Noisy background musiS: me -
[email protected]
Zeeshan Mahmud In my college art class on the first day the professor asked what is art. I replied: The Ikea commercial. Anything that is unboring. She laughed.And I said, art makes you want to roll the images in your mind's eye again and again. Anything that makes you want to come back.Well a good testament of a movie is if it makes you want to rewatch. And it did. I love the tension, the self-righteous philosophical tension. In fact, I rewatched Law Abiding Citizen and was craving something similar. Google AI is not intelligent enough to suggest it from similar pattern and themes.People may frown at my high rating. But it held my attention even after a rewatch and that's what it really matters. I will probably hit Phonebooth next for another rewatch keeping up with the similar style.
zkonedog 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 ions/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.
vagg-fm Im not going to say much.My opinion is that the film was really good in of script and produced the action and intensity I was looking for but there were some things that totally ruined my experience.First of all, the music was awful and did not much at all with was being depicted from the screen. Really bad music selection.Secondly, there were parts on the film that the camera would - i don't know how to say it - "lagged", moving slowly, shaking and ruined the whole part. Its like watching a horror movie and at the point where the door slowly opens, the camera man shakes the camera for like 5 seconds and you miss everything.Travolta and Washington were really great in that movie and I believe that if the team behind the scenes was better, it could have hit an 7.5-8 overall.
