I have a bad habit. I tend to buy movies on recommendation alone, which often leads them onto my shelf to sit unwatched for months if not years. That is the case with Joseph Sargent’s The Taking of Pelham 123 which was recommended at some point and which I purchased for $10. It’s still sitting on the shelf – unwrapped but also unwatched. Looks like I’ll have to put a little more effort into sitting down with that one since the trailer for the remake is now kicking around the interwebs.
Directed by Tony Scott, the modern take stars John Travolta as the leader of the kidnappers and Denzel Washington as the Metro worker who ends up as chief negotiator. Watching the trailer I had two thoughts. The first was that there was a whole lot more action going on than I expected and secondly, I’m having a hard time buying Washington as a meek sort of dude who *happens* to get caught up in all of the action. I’m now used to seeing him kick ass and this meek Washington isn’t doing much for me. The one real highlight of the trailer: James Gandolfini. I can’t figure out what role he plays but god I love that guy. The cast is nicely, very nicely actually, rounded out with Luis Guzmán and John Turturro.
Not sure this will be any good but I’m wondering if this will turn out like Domino a lovable, crazy mess of a movie. We’ll find out when The Taking of Pelham 123 opens on June 12th.
Trailer is tucked under the seat!
Go watch the original Marina, it is a total blast. You and your husband will have a ton of fun watching it. Kurt and I both raved about it during one of the podcasts I sat in on.
As for the remake, that trailer looks terrible. Nothing like the original at all.
I’m pretty sure I bought it after you mentioned it. See, someone around here listens to you!
Plan is to see it this weekend. Ah, a romantic evening starring a train heist!
That trailer is WRONG. WRONG. WRONG. on so many levels. The original Pelham123 is truly fucking awesome, because it is both sharp and also very much a shaggy dog.
This version has had the film buffed right the hell out to make it shine all glossy like.
Washington doesn’t have the sloppy-joe with intelligence sparkling underneath, he is just playing the same character from Inside Man only in a sweater. Matthau brought so much to the original that obviously Scott & Co didn’t care to bother with.
And Mr. Travolta, you are no Robert Shaw.
They better keep the damn theme music . If the change it with a hip-hop version. O Boy.
This trailer actually makes me more angry than the typical re-do, I’m going to purchase the original though. Great little film.
The remake looks like any other run of the mill action-crime film. I think I’ll rent the original instead (which I haven’t seen either, but it sounds better).
At least someone has intelligence and good taste around here Marina.
The trailer makes it look like the tossed out the whole last half of the film as well. In the original the thieves were trying to look pretty plain and inconspicuous and there is Travolta with a damn neck tatoo for all to see. Way to blend in idiot.
I really do need to buy this film.
I’m really suprised someone hasn’t sampled that theme song for a hip hop song. It sounds like something Kanye in particular would be all over.
Actually Kurt, I hope they do have a hip-hop theme song – it would help to further remove this from the original.
The trailer doesn’t do much for me either, but I suppose it might be an OK crime thriller (uh, if you like Tony Scott that is). But why couldn’t they just call it “Subway Heist” or “Under The Streets Of NY” or “We Promise – No Scene Longer Than 5 Seconds!”. Yep, they got the concept of a subway car holdup, but it looks like nothing else – so why the steal of the title? Can’t it just be “based on it”? I can’t imagine the perfect ending of the original could work at all in the new one – I hope they don’t even try. At this point, the less that is the same between them the better.
Oh well, it doesn’t effect the original which is still great fun.
It will be amusing if the robbers use code names and people say that Scott & Co. stole it from Tarantino. Yessir, that would be pretty funny.
Looking over Tony Scott’s filmography, he’s yet to disappoint me. I like every single one of his films (that I’ve seen). Some more than others, but I like them all. Despite the hate on this thread, I see no reason why this film will be any different.
The original is in my queue and I just moved it up a bit higher on the list so I will get it within the next month or so however.
Oops, was not a fan of “Revenge” with Kevin Costner. That was years and years ago however. Maybe I’ll like it upon rewatch. I do like me some Costner. That’s right, I said it.
I don’t know why everyone gets so easily bent out of shape by these remakes. Do they really taint the originals in any way? Maybe it’s just me, but I just don’t really care. I’ll always enjoy the original, and that’s that.
Having said that…I think this trailer looks awesome. This is Tony Scott’s take on the story of The Taking of Pelham 1-2-3. This isn’t the original. The idea of a new director putting his stamp on a story that’s been previously told is an interesting experiment to me. The more similar a film is to the original, the more pointless remakes are. After all, aren’t we sick of things just being rehashed? At least Tony Scott is owning this thing. Yes, Travolta is no Robert Shaw; the solution? Watch the original!
I want this to be a Tony Scott film, not a ‘as close as it gets’ shot for shot rehash.
Amen to that Jay C.
Three cheers for derivative filmmaking! Its not rehashing, it is retelling
You should be in marketing Jay.
Um, what Matt said.
This looks like pretty lazy Blockbuster filmmaking, judging from the trailer they simply took the original premise and basically buffed out everthing that made the film interesting and replaced it with generic-high-gloss-pablum. Sure this is only a trailer, but sheesh, it barely even looks like a Tony Scott film, closer to Michael Bay.
The curious thing is of course is why use PELHAM 123 at all? Nobody is reading the book anymore, and really, how many people below 30 have seen the original film?
Amping up the sarcasm on things, boy I simply cannot wait until the reboot the Diehard Franchise with Zac Ephron or Robert Pattinson.
The originals aren’t tainted by these remakes, and if anything there may be a sweet DVD of the original. But who really is going to bother with JOE SARGENT’S version when there is a slick-glossy-soulless Tony Scott version (and I say this as a defender of DOMINO). Umbrage at remakes (as cliche as that is at this point) is more anger at the multiplex herd mentality to these things compared to the filmmakers. But to follow completely on this, I’d rather see an original TONY SCOTT JOINT than a rehash/retelling/remake/reboot/re-heat/recycle.
“Three cheers for derivative filmmaking! Its not rehashing, it is retelling
You should be in marketing Jay.”
Some of my favourite films are derivative. In fact, my favourite sub-genre’s thrive/depend on derivative filmmaking. Hello Roger Corman! Hello John Carpenter! Hello Larry Cohen! Hello the entire Italian post-apocalyptic sub-genre! Hello slasher films of the 80′s! Hello basically every horror, science fiction and action film ever made!
“This looks like pretty lazy Blockbuster filmmaking, judging from the trailer they simply took the original premise and basically buffed out everthing that made the film interesting and replaced it with generic-high-gloss-pablum.”
Not sure how you can come to this conclusion without seeing the final film. Trailers are built to get people in the seats. Of course it’s going to be generic and high-gloss. It’s a modern action film.
” Sure this is only a trailer, but sheesh, it barely even looks like a Tony Scott film, closer to Michael Bay.”
Actually, I would say Michael Bay films look like Tony Scott films.
“But who really is going to bother with JOE SARGENT’S version when there is a slick-glossy-soulless Tony Scott version (and I say this as a defender of DOMINO). Umbrage at remakes (as cliche as that is at this point) is more anger at the multiplex herd mentality to these things compared to the filmmakers.”
Does it matter who bothers with Joe Sargent’s version? How does the mentality of ‘the herd’ affect your appreciation of the original? (P.S. You yourself mentioned in this post that this trailer inspired you to go pick up the original. It does work!)
“I’d rather see an original TONY SCOTT JOINT than a rehash/retelling/remake/reboot/re-heat/recycle.”
I don’t totally agree with this line of thinking. The idea of filmmakers being wasted on remakes, comic book movies and what not. Without Batman Begins, there may not have been The Prestige. Without Good Will Hunting there may not have been an Elephant. Without Oceans 11, 12 and 13, there probably wouldn’t have been a Bubble. Those filmmakers that manage to balance the big studio pictures with their personal projects seem to have the most satisfying careers. (Brian DePalma for example)
I somewhat agree, and look forward to having this debate at length when we get THE MOVIE CLUB to do the ALIEN Quadrilogy.
I understand the issue that many directors do one for them, one for me. In a perfect world there would be more directors who walk the line like Peter Weir who manages to make nearly every one of his American films that serve both his own purpose and manage to be Studio friendly too. Weir’s case is pretty rare though not without its weak entries (Green Card, Witness)
Oh, and Congratulations Canada/America, you’ve just spoken that Horror Remakes can be runaway-successes instead of simply grinding earners. The $20M Friday13 reboot just cleared an estimated $42 on opening weekend. (For those keeping score, that is more (in unadjusted dollars) than the entire run of VIII, IX, & X).
I’m sure that Freddie Kruger and Chucky can’t be too far behind and are getting the ultra-fast track as we speak.
Wither the Sleepaway Camp, Visiting Hours and April Fools Day reboots? They are as sure to come along as the 3rd and 4th tier Marvel and DC men-in-tights.
I now finally see why they spent mega-dollars on the Star Trek reboot. Iconic properties are hollywood license to print money.
Sleepaway Camp remake… now there is a remake I can get outraged about.
April Fools Day has been remade twice already.
Just watched the original Pelham 123. Damn good. Damn damn good. Error on the DVD box though, says its 2 hours 4 minutes when its an hour 40 minutes. One of only a few boxes with such s significant error – the Paris Je T’aime box has it as almost 3 hours, when that is much shorter as well.
Gah. I still haven’t come across the Paris je’Taime special edition yet. We’ve had the regular version come through the store a couple of times, but not the good one yet. Is the special edition worth waiting for?
Well they can always say it’s a re adaption of the book the original is based on, similar to Spielberg re adapting the Old Boy manga instead of the film.
Anyway. The original is a big favorite of mine. Matthau is genius in it and the scene where he meets the cop he’s been talking over the phone for half the movie face to face for the first time is brilliant.
Looked pretty bad to me,,,
Denzel’s really phoning this one in,,,
i mean, really guys? it doesn’t look THAT bad. the original is a classic, but like Jay said above, this isn’t a remake like Sleuth, where they are just doing the exact same thing as before. Tony Scott (who I admit I am not a huge fan of) seems to be putting his own stamp on it. if they are going to remake a movie shouldn’t that be what we want?
john travolta has become to butt of everyone’s jokes lately. but despite my annoyance of him as a person and in many of his over-the-top, over-acted roles, when he is good, he is good. we’ll see how this works out for him, but i am rooting for him. it’d be nice for him to have a hit too, especially with the recent death of his son.
Again, Tony Scott. Done deal; they have my money. I don’t think it looks “bad” at all.