Review: 'The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3'

The publicity emphasis around director Tony Scott’s “The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3” is that this is not a remake, but a “retelling” based on the original source material, John Godey’s novel of the same name. Fair enough. After all, who wants to beg comparisons to one of the very best urban thrillers to come out of the 1970s? And to be fair, it is a retelling, though an inferior one, that still manages to stand on its own as a pleasant, though unmemorable, summer diversion.

Denzel Washington is Walter Garber, a longtime civil servant in the New York City MTA who started at the bottom and worked his way into an administrative position until a scandal hit. An investigation’s underway, and until Garber’s name is cleared (or not), he’s demoted back to dispatcher. His skill and knowledge of how New York’s intricate subway system operates is obvious and impressive, but nothing in his career or life prepares him for the call he receives from the manic, ruthless Ryder (John Travolta), the leader of a small team who have just hijacked a subway car loaded with innocent passengers.

Ryder wants money. $10 million (and one cent), to be exact, and wants it in cash in 60 minutes or he’ll kill a passenger for each minute it’s late. Unfortunately for Garber, Ryder takes a shine to him, forcing the civil servant into the unenviable position as the only person the hijacker will talk to or deal with. Aiding him is NYPD hostage negotiator Camonetti (John Turturro), who helps Garber through the tense moments but also has to worry if this man, who’s facing an investigation where a prison term could be the outcome, isn’t the inside man.

The “retelling” works as far as keeping those of us familiar with what came before from knowing what will happen next, but even so there’s not much suspense. What made the original so riveting was the believability of it all. Robert Shaw’s quiet, shark-like efficiency and Walter Matthau’s clever but cynical civil servant were characteristics we recognized from our everyday lives; these people seemed to inhabit a real world that, thanks to a remarkable cinematography, was perfectly captured in a familiar time and place.

Tony Scott’s signature kinetic editing and an actual ticking clock which dramatically freezes the action every few minutes, feels surreal not real — and intrudes upon, rather than increases — what little tension there is. Hyper-visuals makes the familiar unfamiliar and never allows you to “feel” the City. It’s hard to relate to what’s happening because it’s set in a strange land called Planet Scott. Travolta also drains the suspense playing the exact same villain he did in “Swordfish” and “Broken Arrow.” Obviously, Ryder is written to be off-balance and unpredictable, but Travolta’s portrayal is so familiar, he’s anything but.

Oscar-winning screenwriter Brian Helgeland’s idea of an “update” is only an update as far as what the latest Screenwriting 101 courses are offering. Garber’s now saddled with a backstory, and an ever so convenient one that allows Ryder to get under his skin, and naturally the story beats must be found that allow for Denzel to run around Manhattan wielding a gun for a little man-to-man.

The story’s also “updated” to include a nod to the Internet and Rudy Giuliani, but what’s completely stripped away is what might have been the most interesting part of an update — a look into the municipal guts of a big city political machine. This is one of the more fascinating elements in both the novel and the 1973 film, the thing that lifted both just above pulp, but to its detriment, Helgeland limits his narrative scope only to the hostage situation. Even the Mayor (James Gandolfini) spends most of his time in the MTA dispatch center. The whole of New York City gave the original tremendous flavor and a real personality. Without this, other than the budget and stars, the update gives off a television-movie vibe.

Also hurting the story is a lack of emphasis on questions that would draw us in — like just how in the hell these guys plan to escape a subway tunnel surrounded by the entire NYPD — and an unnecessary emphasis on what doesn’t matter. An awful lot of dialogue is chewed up piecing together who Ryder really is and one of the Mayor’s better moments comes when he puts a final piece into place. But in the end, knowing who Ryder is adds nothing to the plot and has nothing to do with the climax. It’s just filler that serves as distracting misdirection because you keep waiting for a payoff.

The biggest misfire, however, is the score, a mix of techno, thundering effects and heavy metal that never creates an emotion, unless “garbled” and “jarring” qualify as emotions. Had director Scott borrowed heavily from David Shire’s driving, diamond-hard original, his movie would’ve improved by at least 20% without changing anything else.

That’s not to say “Pelham” is in any way a failure. What it is, though, is nothing special. Even though the climax is more sound and fury than excitement, what’s going on does hold your interest thanks mainly to Denzel who’s always watchable doing what he does better than anyone: portraying an everyday competence that doesn’t strain credibility as his character finds himself deeper and deeper in a world he knows nothing about.

So take it in, you won’t be bored, but in five years you’ll go back to watching the timeless original as though no retelling ever happened.