Click Above To Buy NOW!

The only reason I ever heard about The Taking of Pelham One Two Three was because they mentioned it in a Beastie Boys song. Other than that, the film has never been a real part of the pop culture consciousness, until the remake came along. Since I was planning on seeing that one, I decided to check out the original… because tearing apart a remake is so much easier when you’ve torn apart the original.

In Pelham, a bunch of shady dudes, wearing hats, glasses, and moustaches, decide to hijack a New York City subway train. They take some hostages… and then demand a million bucks in cash… a whole million dollars… for four people. Way to think big guys… even for 1974. A lone transit authority dude must figure out a way to keep the hostages alive and capture the bad guys… because apparently, New York City’s cops are a bunch of bumbling morons. His only help? The mustachioed Jerry Stiller. It’s a simple plot that should make for a great flick, but which is ruined by an ending that rapidly devolves into campy bullshit.

Part of the reason that Pelham is worth watching at all is that it is filmed in the gritty style of the ‘70s and directed solidly by Joseph Sargent. Sargent does a masterful job of making the film look great. The shot selections are nice and the balancing of tension is just right. It’s too bad the film was made in the ‘70s, because it lacks the violent realism of today’s film, and even though the bad guys are portrayed as menacing mysteries, you never feel like they are totally insane and ready to waste anyone. The only hiccup in Sargent’s work on Pelham is the end of the film, which is totally corny, sudden, and completely out of place in what was a tense flick. The end of the film definitely leaves a little to be desired, and the film’s penultimate shot is embarrassingly corny, which kind of sucks, because the rest of the film is solid throughout.

The cast of the film is a mixed bag. Walter Matthau, who plays Lt. Garber, the transit cop, is poorly cast. He doesn’t seem so much as a hero, as he does a car salesman who wandered onto a movie set. While the casting could have worked with a different setup for the character, the writing doesn’t gel with Matthau’s bewildered, old dude approach. Robert Shaw (Jaws, The Sting) on the other hand is perfectly cast as the cold and calculating Mr. Blue. Shaw’s performance is intelligent and nuanced and he is the highlight of the film, which makes his character’s end all the more disappointing. Hector Elizondo (Leviathan, Pretty Woman) also brings a little bit of psychopathic joy to the film as a loose cannon operating under the name Mr. Grey. Elizondo’s character is skuzzy, violent, and everything you’d expect from a scumbag who takes people hostage. In the end, the bad guys outshine the good guys in this film, and this brings it down a peg, as the film focuses far more on the good guys.

As far as thriller’s go, The Taking of Pelham One Two Three is solid throughout, but then the end shows up and ruins everything. It’s like being in the middle of a hardcore fuck session and then, just as you’re about to spray wad, someone cuts your dick off. The good news is that most of the film is good… but you still have no dick and need to blow a load.

Final Synopsis: Give this a watch if you’re going to see the remake. Otherwise, watch this at your own leisure. It’s not a classic or anything other than a serviceable thriller, but it’s not terrible either.

Points Lost: -1 for Walter Matthau, -1 for a weak ending, -1 for not giving the bad guys the end they deserve, -1 for the film’s last shot… which is totally cheesy

Lesson Learned: Back in the day, we used to negotiate with terrorists.

Burning Question: Why are the cops so worthless in this film?

The Taking of Pelham One Two Three
6/10

Tags: 1974, action, crime thriller, dick o'neill, Doris Roberts, Earl Hindman, great cheats and swindles, hector elizando, jerry stiller, Joseph Sargent, latest movie review, Martin Balsam, recent2, Robert Shaw, thriller, Walter Matthau