The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 2009

Ben Lyons, At the Movies: I was really disappointed by this. Read more

Christy Lemire, Associated Press: The prevalence of technology also makes the crime itself seem rather archaic. This is the way a criminal mastermind steals millions of dollars today, by hijacking a subway train? Read more

Michael Phillips, Chicago Tribune: Denzel Washington is that valuable paradox, the relatable supernova. [But] it's too bad the movie around him isn't better -- the '74 edition, propelled by David Shire's incredibly badass theme music, kicks the remake's behind all the way to Coney Island. Read more

A.O. Scott, New York Times: The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3, an energetic updating of the 1974 mass transit thriller, takes account of how much the character of New York has changed. Read more

David Edelstein, New York Magazine/Vulture: Travolta's high-tech 21st-century scheme turns out to be not just preposterous but superfluous, demented. Read more

J. R. Jones, Chicago Reader: Crisp supporting turns by John Turturro (as a hostage negotiator) and James Gandolfini (as the mayor) combine with plenty of vehicular mayhem to make this a superior diversion. Read more

Joe Morgenstern, Wall Street Journal: Most of the film's energy is generated by flamboyant cinematography and music-video cutting, and much of that energy is false. Read more

Scott Von Doviak, Fort Worth Star-Telegram/DFW.com: I can think of worse ways to while away a hot, sticky summer afternoon than ducking into the air-conditioned comfort of the multiplex for a couple of hours worth of jacked-up, seat-rattling, subway-heisting action. Read more

Moira MacDonald, Seattle Times: It ticks along as efficiently as a new clock. The performances are smooth, the car-crash effects remarkable, the pace never flagging. Read more

Nathan Rabin, AV Club: John Travolta's wildly successful post-comeback crusade to become synonymous with crap continues with The Taking Of Pelham 1 2 3, Tony Scott's bracingly awful remake/desecration of the classic '70s thriller. Read more

Bill Goodykoontz, Arizona Republic: There's fun to be had in Pelham, at least for a while, but nothing more than that. Read more

Ty Burr, Boston Globe: The new Pelham is a solid, suspenseful tale all over again, so long as it stays in the subway tunnels and airless offices of the transit department. Read more

Peter Rainer, Christian Science Monitor: Whereas the original, directed by Joseph Sargent, was essentially a well-oiled B movie, the new incarnation, directed by Tony Scott, is bristling with high-tech gimcrackery and over-the-top camera flourishes. Read more

Lisa Kennedy, Denver Post: Kinetic director Tony Scott balances his need for speed and flash with fleshed-out drama, making Pelham the best of his recent outings. Read more

Tom Long, Detroit News: The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 is a near-perfect summer entertainment thriller that shows good story, good director and good actors trump gaudy special effects any day. Read more

Lisa Schwarzbaum, Entertainment Weekly: An open-hydrant whoooosh of an action thriller about a hijacked NYC subway train with passengers held as hostages -- a caffeinated update of a 1974 city-on-fire cult classic that cracked wise with a cynical, now nostalgia-inducing, graffiti-era veracity. Read more

Eric D. Snider, Film.com: Not a bad way to pass a couple hours, as long as you don't sit too close to the screen and are inured to a steady barrage of loud dialogue that doesn't bother to be clever. Read more

Kenneth Turan, Los Angeles Times: The film does what a good hostage negotiator does: It distracts us from what's going wrong and pulls us into the story. Read more

Rene Rodriguez, Miami Herald: Hiring Tony Scott to direct The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 is like hiring Michael Bay to direct My Dinner With Andre: A colossal mismatch of director and material. Read more

Rafer Guzman, Newsday: Director Tony Scott may not suffer from attention-deficit disorder, but he is convinced you do. Read more

Anthony Lane, New Yorker: Can a director be arrested for the attempted hijack of our emotions? Read more

Stephen Whitty, Newark Star-Ledger: We've been waiting too long for a sharp little urban thriller with a couple of tense scenes and one fine, bold performance. Given the time, we'll grab this express train, happily. Read more

Joe Neumaier, New York Daily News: Like the subway itself, things move by connections, craziness and clockwork in The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3, a fast and relentless hostage thriller that never stops. Read more

Roger Moore, Orlando Sentinel: It's a movie that gives you little to ponder and one that's more easily quoted than felt. Read more

Steven Rea, Philadelphia Inquirer: As Ryder's motives begin to reveal themselves, The Taking of Pelham 123 loses its aura of post-9/11 dread, replaced by a muddled commentary on Wall Street greed in these days of raging financial crises. Read more

James Berardinelli, ReelViews: It is remarkable how, with all of the advances in technology over the years, a story like this can remain largely unchanged despite a 35 year gap between tellings. By allowing the movie to unfold in real time, Scott enhances the level of suspense. Read more

Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times: There's not much wrong with Tony Scott's The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3, except that there's not much really right about it. Read more

Peter Travers, Rolling Stone: This movie hits you like 600 volts from a sparking third rail. Damn straight it's electrifying. Read more

Andrew O'Hehir, Salon.com: Helgeland's story is so formulaic and the characters so stock that we're just sitting there waiting for these guys to perform like circus animals. Read more

Mick LaSalle, San Francisco Chronicle: The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 has all the usual virtues of a good action suspense drama. Read more

John Swansburg, Slate: It's easy to imagine why Pelham's producers wouldn't want Scott's professional but dull picture to be compared with the 1974 classic. Read more

Colin Covert, Minneapolis Star Tribune: Set in a nightmare New York City, the subway hostage thriller batters our nerves like a tom-tom. Read more

Calvin Wilson, St. Louis Post-Dispatch: Scott keeps things tense while allowing for the occasional blast of humor. Read more

Liam Lacey, Globe and Mail: Most disappointing is the new film's reluctance to even attempt to match the ingenuity of the original movie's celebrated one-two punch ending. Read more

Peter Howell, Toronto Star: Against all odds and better advice, director Tony Scott, screenwriter Brian Helgeland and main protagonists Denzel Washington and John Travolta take a much-loved genre classic and arguably make it better. Read more

Ben Kenigsberg, Time Out: Read more

Joshua Rothkopf, Time Out: Read more

Tom Huddlestone, Time Out: 'The Taking of Pelham 123' is not a bad film: it's ponderous and shallow, but always watchable. But what it crucially fails to do, especially in the light of its illustrious predecessor, is justify its own existence. Read more

Christopher Orr, The New Republic: Pelham is not merely a film that may induce seizures in those who are susceptible; it is a film that seems engineered to approximate the experience of a seizure for those who are not. Read more

Claudia Puig, USA Today: The new Pelham takes the chilling original premise and modifies it for an era steeped in technology, making for an energetic and engrossing adaptation. Read more

Todd McCarthy, Variety: The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 is an efficiently reworked version of a tense, ticking-clock suspense story. Read more

Jim Ridley, Village Voice: Scott's redo comes up short in almost every regard against the '74 model. Read more

Philip Kennicott, Washington Post: Like most of Scott's recent films, this one ends in self-indulgent silliness. You end up asking yourself, how do the few fun bits of the film manage to survive in the midst of so much lousy filmmaking? Read more