New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Unfortunately it’s when we’re NOT in one of those places that the film tends to lose its way.

Without the gratuitous source of tension you get from being trapped in a tuna can and surrounded by gunmen, Pelham is forced to rely on more inventive sources of conflict. Some of them work, some of them don’t. It looks quaint today, but the big board they use to track the trains is an effective dramatic tool that’s well used. Peter Stone’s script is often informative and contains a few moments of witty dialogue, but most attempts at humor either fall flat or are simply lost on 21st Century ears. The race to coordinate the ransom drop is often thrilling, but this critical subplot makes spotty use of time. The frenzied police escort through jam-packed streets is one of the best parts of the film, while the vast amount of time wasted reminding us how hard it is to collect $1 million on short notice is not.

Still, the film manages builds up more than enough inertia to carry it through the dodgy parts. Planes, trains and submarines are great places to build tension, and bad places to be surrounded by people who want to kill you. And all the while you can’t help but wonder, as the police do, how the criminals hope to escape. The answer also seems quaint, but in the process we are treated to the spectacle of Robert Shaw, who came closer to killing James Bond than anyone ever has, up against the only guy on earth who could make Jack Lemmon look overbearing. An “odd couple” indeed (yeah, I just did that), but it’s hard not to be intrigued. Garber is the only person in a position of authority who seems to take the killers as seriously as he should but he does, and with all the laconic charm Matthau can muster.

It’s doesn’t seem an ideal casting choice, but it’s hard to imagine a man of action doing what Garber does for a living. I get it. Meanwhile, his nemesis seems a little more conventional.

Mr. Blue is shown to be quite the heartless bastard, but you wonder whether he was as committed to victory as much as he was to the fight. He plays the sadist card well, but he’s a bit like Lex Luthor without Superman - very diabolical but without a worthy opponent, he’s forced to play to the level of his competition. And while the City does respond to the hijackers, their initial attitude toward the crisis is curiously pithy. This could be just another symptom of living in a time when domestic terrorists don’t seem so far-fetched. But it’s also a sign of a film that isn’t entirely sure how seriously it wants to be taken. Someone spent a lot of time trying to make the subway sequences feel real, only to leave the characters transparent.

It’s a missed opportunity because Pelham IS fun, and two-thirds of it IS exciting. The last act sags somewhat and a bland, procedural aftermath follows a fairly underwhelming climax. But it serves the story, and the ending is enough for me to make it worthwhile. You’ll spend most of the movie trying to convince yourself that Steve McQueen would have been a better choice than Walter Matthau, until the very last shot reminds you that The Taking of Pelham One Two Three is just a modestly enjoyable trifle that gives no more than it asks in return. And that’s okay.

So trust me. Stick around.

Continued:       1       2