You know, it’s a Saturday, don’t you … ?
Don’t you?
Wish I did: as I write, it’s actually, technically, Sunday morning …
Ah HEM!
But that’s what usually happens if me, Kevin and Adrian start nattering after a film … !
Which went into all sorts of interesting directions, but mentioning those would be a bit of a …
Bit of a …
Lets call it a distraction …
Because tonight’s movie was quite a nice little thriller: Tony Scott’s 2009 remake of The Taking Of Pelham 123.
Which sees subway-train dispatcher, Walter Garber — gracefully played by Denzel Washington — go to work for what turns out to be something of a bad day.
One of his trains gets hijacked.
Which isn’t something I’d thought was doable, but the script certainly manages to pull off.
As does the villain of the piece, Ryder: played with a certain amount of colour by John Travolta.
And I’m actually rather impressed with both leading men: they handled their parts convincingly well.
•••••
Andrea, was I hussing, again, there?
It does sound ambiguous, doesn’t it?
•••••
I’m digressing, here.
The film’s name comes from the hijacked train’s call sign: it left Pelham Bay Park Station, at 1•23 PM.
And the hijackers see the passengers as means to an end: commodities, as Ryder puts it.
Ryder and his team are demanding $10, 000, 000, before they start shooting, and give Garber — and New York’s police, represented by Officer Camonetti, played by John Turturro — an hour to raise it from the city’s funds.
Given that Ryder and company have shot 2 passengers by the time they hand over their demands, gives what they’re saying a certain amount of urgency …
•••••
Now, I’ve got to admit, I liked this one.
Seriously.
It’s an entertaining, nicely acted, directed and written film: one that is also trots along at a pace that lets you feel the breeze going through your hair.
Rather than given you whiplash.
Personally?
Personally, I think — if you’ve got a few quid spare — it’s worth spending money on The Taking of Pelham 123.
It’s money well spent.
ΩΩΩ
ΩΩΩ
No comments:
Post a Comment