I saw The Taking of Pelham 123 today; I am a fan of the original 1974 movie (although I have never read the Morton Freedgood novel upon which THAT movie was based).
I admired the performances of Denzel Washington, John Travolta, John Turturro. They provided a great deal of believable characterization and intensity that gave the movie its suspenseful moments. I'm not convinced that the movie was an improvement on the original, and I think the problem that Hollywood sometimes has with this sort of re-make is that they feel they must throw all sorts of modernizations at an already good story. Weird camera angles, freeze frames, lots of loud annoying music in a downright distracting soundtrack.
I would love for a director to rediscover silence and its dramatic possibilities.
Still, it was an exciting movie, and if you don't mind an endless stream of F words and lots of blood, I'd recommend it.
However, I'm asking whoever is out there in Hollywoodland to consider removing these cliches from all future movies:
--unnecessary car crashes
--chase scenes in which no one can tell who is chasing, who is being chased, and who is in between
--dialogue that implies everyone in the world is profane
--the line "We've got company," used in any context
--casting women who look twenty to play the parts of women who are supposed to be forty-something
Okay, that's my mixed review of this summer remake. If you're a fan of any of the main characters, I think you'll like their performances in this suspenseful tale.
Image here.
8 comments:
Amen to all of your suggestions. It wasn't a bad movie but the derivative aspects nearly ruined it. And it lacked atmosphere due to its reliance on technology.
Yes! I mean, I was pulling for it, but I think directors must feel so pressured these days to use a little of everything, and then that dilutes the final experience.
Get rid of unnecessary car crashes?
Are you anti-American? :)
I realize they're popular--I just can't figure out why. All I can ever think of is how much it costs, and how wasteful it is. I suppose that's too practical.
But in this case the problem was with the storyline--there were three car crashes and I could only figure out why one was important to the story.
Maybe it was an effort to prop up the US car industry.
Lord knows it needs some propping.
As a Detroiter, that's true. But emphasizing how easily they crumble, may not be the way to go.
Good point, Patti! :)
Post a Comment