While entertaining, it became almost tiresome after a while. The TV version is darker, more menacing, more suitable to how I experienced the story. The finale comes before you know it, a chase through the streets of NY that’s more exciting because it makes more sense. Just it doesn’t always leave you engaged in what’s happening, whether because the plot or the action lacks humanity. Take a classic hijacking story, take out the cops who barely appear in the film , and you get the story for this movie. Since when does a car collision send one of the vehicles soaring and somersaulting?
It uses some of the best lines from the original almost verbatim eg, “A person likes to know how much he’s worth”, “Do they still have the death penalty in New York” “I’ve always done my own killing” etc which is ok, but I can’t believe that Mr Blue in the film would not know the death penalty status in what appears to be his native New York. And he really makes the original movie shine. My only guess as to why this was made as it was, is because there are people who refuse to watch anything “old” and thus would rather watch a “new” version with current actors. She recovers, inexplicably, without meds. Hence Walter Matthau’s character as a Transit Cop would not have existed any longer. However, I also remember thinking “why? Nothing like the original TC-4 4 January With the one exception of an emotional relationship established by highjacker “Brown” Tara Rosling and her ‘angel of mercy’ female conductor “Babs Cardoza” Babs Cardoza , all other subplots among the hijackers and characters were not developed.
I thf that, because it was a remake by an explosion-happy director Tony Scott and starred ultraham John Travolta, it couldn’t possibly be all that interesting. Most of the time she seems perfectly rational.
Poor Brooklynite Lorraine Bracco is reduced to a supporting role formerly played by Jerry Stiller that does not make use of her endless talents. I don’t know why Hollywood feels the need to re-do classic movies. But hey, big shock! But as one other observer observed, the lacks Washington plays a disgraced investigation pending transit executive who’s currently slumming as the control chief.
I have always enjoyed both Denzel Washington and John Travolta in their various endeavors and thought the chemistry might work fine here. This tv movie was lacking in so many areas. Almost as if the director was saying “OK, guys, freeze for five more seconds” in almost every scene.
In the original Walter Matthau and the icy cold Robert Suntitles were brilliant.
One gets the feeling the original movie was being suubtitles closely during filming, with the director causally removing chunks of original script. Vincent d’Onofrios, as the senior high jacker, a quirky rather wooden actor at best, fleetingly looking like a young Orson Welles, does what he can to provide sinister menace to his role, while Edward James Taklng is not a very impressive substitute for the formidable Walter Matthau.
What makes this a little more than your typical cat-and-mouse game is the undercurrent of what’s gotten Washington character into hot water, as well as Travolta’s character’s actual motives. I could not wait for it to end as I was bored silly. I felt no tension, no “edge of the seat” sensation that the original brought, I found myself disliking most of the characters and really not caring what happened to them. New York’s transit system is zubtitles much a celebrity as the city it holds together.
There is no chemistry between them, they barely talk to tge other, they give you the feeling that they just met or that they hate each other.
Washington plays Walter Garber, the chief detective for the MTA currently involved in some controversy over a bribe he may or may not have taken. Popular opinion seems to favor the original version, but I came at it from a different angle. One of my all time favorite movies was this movie back in the theatrical version in As for the rest of the cast, James Gandolfini, playing a New York Mayor, is good comic relief, getting jokes about Giuliani, subways, and the Yankees but Turturro and Luis Guzman, playing a disgruntled MTA employee working with Ryder, don’t get much to do.
Remarkably, there were three other hijackers in the movie. There are many other bad things going with the movie, but i’ll end here.
The plot follows pretty much the story in the original version. HBeachBabe spaniwh November And he really makes the original movie shine. The deliciously menacing “Mr. Here Travolta is way over-the-top with all his “MF’ers”. I went to the this most recent remake of Pelham most don’t even recall the made-for-TV version filmed in Toronto spanishh with good reason with an open mind. Sign in to vote. This is the kind of movie both can do in taoing sleep and watching them go one on one with each other is the film’s main bright spot.
Little did he know that he’d become the confidant and “stand-in” hostage negotiator for a prickly criminal mastermind who takes over the Pelham subway train and demands money in exchange for the lives of its passengers. I was surprised to find this remake of the thriller was actually pretty good. What a tedious load of drivel this is.
While that’s being worked out, he’s been reassigned to desk duty as dispatcher in the subway command center. Somehow, the movie manages to subtjtles gripping and realistic without being over the top.
Subtitles for YIFY movie The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 (2009) 1080p
Watch this remake to satiate the curiosity factor only. I did not go into the theater hoping to hate the remake, but instead to like it. You’ll see the way the story was meant to be done.
This remake does indeed suffer from modest budgets, a less than sterling cast.
If you have not watched either, and you only want to see one of them, see the 74 version. Washington’s Walter Garber is unsure of himself, an actual Everyman thrust into a madman’s master plan. Actually, it plays like a movie from the 60’s or 70’s, not Travolta was dynamic, putting in a great performance, but I found his ths characterization not befitting as the supposed master-mind of the criminal plot involved. There’s just something about movies made for TV and especially in takinv time period.
The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 () p YIFY subtitles
Still it’s held subtitlez by good acting and solid direction and for that alone it’s worth a ride. This TV version was awful. The 74 version could almost have been sold as a comedy, but not this one. The story is expanded from a pure heist film to a bit of distorted revenge by Travolta, a disgraced Wall Street stud. The cops led by John Turturro are brought in but Walter remains as the lead negotiator at Ryder’s request.
In the original, the Subyitles Blue character was clearly British, and might be excused for not knowing the death penalty status in all 50 US states. There is a great scene where Ryder puts Walter on trial for the bribe and it leads you to think that these two are going to butt heads in dialogue-driven scenes all day long, exposing each other for who they really are.
Car crashes and shoot-outs take place, the car crashes coming within a sloppy scene where the police travel by motorcade to deliver the money and the shoot-out starting from a rat crawling up a guy’s leg of all things. Travolta, sporting a menacing goatee and tattoo, is at his over-the-top, f-bomb-dropping, lunatic best and Washington is his level-headed, average-guy adversary. Afterward, do yourself a favor and rent the original.