Train in vain? Denzel and Travolta square off

June 16, 3:32 PMLA Movie ExaminerJim Luksic

Previous Next

Comment Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the LA Movie Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

Denzel Washington and Tony Scott (AP)

Let's cut to the chase: The Taking of Pelham 123 (whose title I will dissect later) is predictably well-acted by big names and sufficiently entertaining.

But then, that's what we've come to expect from Tony Scott, who brought us other frenetic, action-packed thrillers such as Domino and Man on Fire.

Here, the British filmmaker is reunited with his go-to man Denzel Washington (Deja Vu, Man on Fire and Crimson Tide), who portrays a subway dispatcher unwittingly called upon as the voice of reason. His tall order? John Travolta comes aboard as an armed perpetrator, stopping trains and taking names amid the canyons of the world's most impatient city.

Supplying additional dramatic weight are John Turturro as the hostage negotiator and James Gandolfini, shaking off the rust of Tony Soprano to serve as mayor of the Big Apple.

The movie's godforsaken name is not only saddled with the burdensome (and unnecessary) phrase "The Taking of" but also inexplicable spacing among the numerals: If, as the narrative explains, the train is that which emerges from Pelham Bay at 1:23, there's certainly no need for spaces. 

Disappointingly, as written by Brian Helgeland -- who has remained in good stead since penning the exceptional Mystic River a half-dozen years ago -- The Taking of Pelham 123 is nothing if not formulaic: Its dialogue drips with gratuitous vulgarities, yet fires off a sharp line on occasion ("Life is simple now; you just gotta do what I say.")

Washington's credible performance saves the day. In light of this hostage-ransom rehashing, often bogged down by slow-motion gimmickry, that's his toughest task of all.