The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3

Review  Trailer

• 
  

  December 04, 2010 at 10:04 PM, said ...

  I definitely agree with the fact that the movie unravels a bit at the end. It was a decent movie, but not really something I would ever watch again or recommend highly to people. I'd say a high rental.

• August 03, 2010 at 9:42 PM, said ...

  Pelham 123 came on this morning on HBO. I sat down and watched it, a decent action flick. You absolutely have to agree with the Spill Crew on the breaking away from the Denzel-Travolta chemistry towards the end of the film. At one point, the last two bald thugs end up surrounded after lone warrior Walter Gerber Baby tips them off. Then they dedicate the scene to these two guys going suicidal and a hail of 1000 bullets fly into them, and you're like "Holy shit, this is some gross sh** watching this guy stand there with 20 bullet holes in him". Overall, it could have been a full price, but sunk to a matinee.

  
  
• 
  

  May 20, 2010 at 3:26 AM, Paul Monroe said ...

  I enjoyed watching this movie. I wouldn't say it is a great movie, yet it is a good one.

• November 06, 2009 at 10:42 PM, Aaron said ...

  I really liked it. I've seen the original 74 film and it's fantastic and the 98 TV remake which was not that great. It's nowhere near as great as the original film but it's still a FULL PRICE movie.

  
  
• 
  

  September 22, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Mike said ...

  I liked this movie. Denzel I thought did a good job, and it was nice to Travolta. Last movie I liked of his was Swordfish, and this movie was pretty good compared to that. Movie Trivia

• August 23, 2009 at 2:34 AM, Kevin Mattocks said ...

  The ending was ridiculous. Travolta was quite menacing some of the time but a bit too over the top for my taste. The rest was okay but not great. Definitely check out the original. MATINEE

  
  
• 
  

  July 23, 2009 at 11:55 AM, steven cowie said ...

  tony scott is a blight on humanity....please see the original for fucks sake

• July 18, 2009 at 11:39 AM, spindrift68 said ...

  Upon 2nd viewing, I've completely changed my mind about it. Full Price.

  
  
• 
  

  July 17, 2009 at 2:14 AM, Louie Alonso said ...

  I <3 this movie so FULL PRICE, but I hadn't seen the 1970's version yet

• July 15, 2009 at 2:01 AM, Madison Luna said ...

  i'm sorry spill, but i have to disagree with you about the ending. i liked this movie a lot...i just saw it with my dad, and it was absolutely fantastic!!!!!! this is just a very, very high full price for me, almost better than sex!

  
  
• 
  

  July 12, 2009 at 3:45 PM, Freddy said ...

  Spill. You guys are right on with this film. The first act and the second act of this film were flat-out awesome and entertaining. The last act, was just generic and cliched. The ending, had no impact or even a lick of emotion. It ends very, very poor. Almost as if they did know how to end the film. High Rental.

• July 05, 2009 at 7:38 PM, Victor Ramond Camora said ...

  To be honest, other than the fact that Denzel put on weight, I was surprised that Joh Travolta was in it. I saw the trailer and I was confused. That ain't no motherf*ckin John Travolta! He always plays the sensitive guy! WHAT HAPPENED!?

  
  
• 
  

  June 29, 2009 at 8:25 PM, bill stack said ...

  i refuse to see the movie simply because the lack of bad 70's facial hair and creepy looking raincoats

• June 24, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Craig Larry said ...

  First of all this was a good movie, but not a great one. There was way too many Mother F*****'s in it, but I think it was used to develop the kind of character John Travolta is. Also, while I'm on him, who ever said that you can't see him as a bad guy, ever seen Broken Arrow, great movie in the 90's where he was the bad guy and did a great job of it. I love it when John is the villian. Tony Scott's director is a personal preference of mine. I loved him in Man on Fire, Top Gun, Deja Vu, this just adds to one that he did a great job in. Not everyone likes his style and that's okay.

  
  
• 
  

  June 23, 2009 at 9:23 AM, Brian (Darth Kal-el) Graybeal said ...

  Not Impressed! was expecting much much more and just never got it. I really hate it when studios hire idiot directors. why bother with john and denzel when you are making this.

• June 22, 2009 at 10:24 PM, Mark Hazleton Jr. said ...

  I thought the movie was quite enjoyable...but...Tony Scott sure did ruin some things with it. Much like Man On Fire's directing (except luckily not as much bright flashing every damn second). I do agree, the chase scenes that added that HEAVY ELECTRONIC TECHNO crap made me laugh so much...luckily not EVERY chase scene was like that, but most of them. It would be all dramatic, and maybe even touching, and then BAM. lol. The movie did have great chemistry between Denzel and John...but wow...Mother Fucker has never been so in-style!!! DAMN...MotherFucking MotherFucker.

  
  
• 
  

  June 22, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Juan J ortiz said ...

  using the word m%$#F*& always works on the net , how do you think people end up being piss off ? LOL at the police chase scene in a victorian era .

• June 20, 2009 at 9:17 AM, corey vire said ...

  The car carrying the money made no sesne and thewy make it a joke inside the movie. When the mayor ask '"why didnt we jus use a cchopper? " and they all look at hin like he's a geniuns who spoke up to late.

  
  
• 
  

  June 20, 2009 at 3:35 AM, Eli said ...

  Holy fuck that ending sucked! You guys weren't kidding. First of all, the climax was absurd; Denzel Washington has absolutely NO reason to chase John Travolta. What's his motivation? Why does he care? I hate it when Hollywood gets so hot and bothered to get to the showdown that they forget to even justify it. I know you guys liked Iron Man, but it did a bit of the same thing at the end. A climax only works if it feels like an organic part of the story, not a lazily added safety mechanism. What REALLY pissed me off, though, was the last five minutes. It's just assholes smiling and grinning with happy music playing. Even John Turturro flies by to give the thumbs-up. What the fuck? This wasn't just a happy ending, it was like an SNL parody of a happy ending. I was half expecting all those people that died to come back to life and start dancing while the credits rolled. If it was Tony Scott's intent to make us roll our eyes and groan at all this, then he did a great job. I'm assuming that he actually thought he was giving us what we wanted, though, which makes him pretty fucking cynical. There's no way I'd give this film more than a low, low "Rental."

• June 19, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Arkid Mitra said ...

  this should be fun i guess

  
  
• 
  

  June 19, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Arkid Mitra said ...

  looks good

• June 17, 2009 at 3:47 PM, James said ...

  Did they stop the production somewhere or have a Sopranos moment? The beginning keeps you going almost to the middle but leading up to the ending (no spoiler) you have to be kidding.

  
  
• 
  

  June 15, 2009 at 11:22 PM, spindrift68 said ...

  Rental.

• June 14, 2009 at 10:43 PM, Joey Vee said ...

  It is impossible for me to accept John Travolta as a bad guy in any movie he does. What if he took the Edna Turnbald character from Hairspray and remade Pelham 123 with her as the hostage taker. It could be like a Tyler Perry movie but instead of Madea going to prison, the transexual fat woman would hijack a subway train and shoot up ignorant crackas.

  
  
• 
  

  June 14, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Jason said ...

  A fat Denzel... its almost worth paying the movie full price just to see that. However I wont just because I am with you guys nothing piss's me off more then a director on red bull and smack shacking the camera around trying to make a car chase look dramatic.

Post Comment