Audiences who have seen the old version will probably be impressed by the last scene of the film: the protagonist played by Walter Matthews pushed open the door and poked his head in, with a mocking expression! What makes it so impressive, and even dubbed by some fans as one of the best endings in movie history, is the subtlety of the motif that makes the robber's final moments reveal itself. Unlike those devices that force the viewer's attention to the existence of the motif (wind-blown curtains in "The Lakehouse", lampshade in "The Ypcress File"), it is explained to the viewer from the beginning and It recurs repeatedly, but it is so natural and inadvertent. So much so that the audience has almost forgotten its existence. But it is precisely because of such a low-key layout that the dramatic tension released in the final outbreak is even stronger!
There is no doubt that the old version of the classic motif concept has brought great trouble to the remake. If it were left as is, the film would be boring because the suspense would be lost. And what about looking for an equivalent replacement? Whether the creative skills can keep up is a big question mark. Of course, the director of the 09 version can only choose a replacement. But it turns out that the wireless erotic window with the characteristics of the era did not add luster to the film. We put aside technical issues such as whether the connection can always be maintained. Just the fact that Nuoda's books are facing the aisle of the carriage and the hijacker repeatedly walks without even noticing it is enough to pronounce the death penalty for this transformation! Although he used to find an excuse for them that the robber was computer illiterate, when he saw that Brother Travolta was still monitoring the fluctuations of the stock market and the progress of the police action with his notebooks on the Internet, alas...
Writing here suddenly reminded me of the shooting at a Mexican subway station not long ago. At that time, the real-time surveillance cameras on the platform recorded the entire shooting process, and even the faces of the criminals were clearly discernible. The development of modern high technology has indeed contributed a lot to the police handling cases and maintaining social order. But for movies, or more precisely for crime-themed screenwriters, it's not necessarily a good thing. Because when criminals are more easily exposed to the broad daylight, the space for creating suspense and tension will be greatly compressed, and the film will be fast and reasonably taken over by car chases, gunfights, and fighting plots - all faces. It's clear, what are you still guessing! Perhaps it is for this reason that some genre directors go back decades to find creative inspiration. Take Statham's "The Great Bank Robbery." If the police had modern mobile communication tools at the time, the best part of the film seems impossible.
back to the video. In their first phone conversation, Travolta mentioned that the other had been charged for allegedly accepting bribes from the Japanese. And this seems to be seen as a tactful echo of the old version. Because the old version also has a Japanese-related episode: Matthew leads his Tokyo subway counterparts to visit the New York subway company. During the visit, the guests nodded and smiled frequently but never said a word. Matthew thought that these little Japanese people could not understand English at all, and began to make fun of them with some insulting words. But then, the robbery broke out. The Japanese guests were very polite - they stepped forward and said goodbye in fluent English, which made Matthew look embarrassed. In addition to this happy bridge section, which is talked about by fans, many of the dialogues in the film are very humorous. Even the motif was mentioned above, and it was performed with a sense of joy. It's a pity that all these have been lost in the new version.
Why is the style of comedy disappearing so quickly from today's Hollywood movies (mainly suspense, thriller, action)? In addition to the lack of comedic talent in most actors, the high cost of creating comedy scenes may be an important factor. Because relatively speaking, whether it is a car chase gunfight or a bed scene, similar routines can be used repeatedly, and the audience often enjoys it. Even if some people think it's cliché, they have something to say: aren't shooting and having sex just those few actions? Not so with comedy. This kind of thing can't be stereotyped. If you try to insert a scene in the new film where the villain pulls out the three-section stick from the back viciously and then turns it into a pair of hangers, the audience will definitely be disdainful: Cut ~ old stem!
Since it is forced to throw away comedy and not exaggerate, then the film can only go in the direction of realism. The problem is that the genres that Hollywood loves are anti-realistic. Therefore, in recent years, American film and television works have begun to frequently appear such a strange feature: on the one hand, the tension created by the atmosphere is suppressed, and the characters in the film are all serious and tight. It was as if everything was real, the nuclear bomb was going to explode, and the daughter was going to be shot by terrorists; but on the other hand, the plot twists and turns are still going the old way of drama. The villain has the opportunity to attack but doesn't shoot, so he has to wait for the opponent to suddenly counterattack; the smoke is filled with bullets, but the protagonist can never be hurt... And this film provides an example of such a sudden feeling, a mouse that jumped out of nowhere , actually contributed to the gathering of the two heroes! Just like Gu Tianle in "Eavesdropping". Is your son sick? no! You have a terminal illness yourself! Anyway, must go to malfeasance!
Although I hold a negative attitude on the whole, I still appreciate one of the changes in the new version, that is, the duel between the two heroes at the end. The ransom was paid, and the robbers took Washington to escape the subway tunnel on foot. When a train passed by, Washington took the opportunity to escape. The method is not novel enough, but it takes care of the place where the story takes place and the professional characteristics of the protagonist. Next, after chasing the car and running wildly, Washington finally caught up with the bandit leader Travolta, and took out a gun to designate the other party across the iron net. Just then another train came. Pay attention to the details of Washington's actions at this time: he crosses the rails and crosses the tracks before the train, without giving the opponent any opportunity to repeat the old drama. Twice the train passed with very different results. What a "my site I call the shots"!
View more about The Taking of Pelham 123 reviews
