Cool News
Denzel -vs- Travolta!! THE TAKING OF PELHAM 123 Trailer...
Merrick here...
Earlier this week, we got a look at the wholly unsatisfactory poster for Tony Scott's THE TAKING OF PELHAM 123 (HERE). Now a trailer for the film is now online.
SEE IT HERE!!!
After seeing this, I'm still not sure why the film was remade - Joseph Sargent's 1974 original still works well on many, many levels and there's little about the concept to "update".
The most significant impression I carry away from this trailer is: Travolta doesn't seem to be trying here. We sure don't need the "overacting" Travolta, but it would be nice if his character in the film had a pulse. This concept won't work without charismatic/compelling captors. Hopefully his full performance will shake out better when we see the whole movie...there's not enough here to judge with fairness/certainty. Just an impression.
And, for those who missed my previous comments on the matter, it's hard to believe Harry Gregson-Williams is gonna equal or best David Shire's hard driving, badass theme music for the original, embedded below for your consideration:
You can watch the original film in its entirety via the space alien controlled Hulu - HERE.
And, below, you'll find the trailer for the original film for fun/comparison:
SEE IT HERE!!!
-
+ Expand All
-
Looks like shitty shit poop
-
That's the Last time he was interesting.
-
And sure do they look as if they ate a lot these days...
-
Looks like it's a beat-by-beat remake...the mayor being involved in the story, the cop car getting slammed during the delivery of the money, etc. And no way is Travolta's mail-in gonna come close to the maniacal character that Shaw created in the first one. Denzel plays Denzel again...this pile deserves to be dumped in February, not June.
-
Needs to learn that he really could play someone that isn't Denzel if he tried.
-
Shit on this movie.
-
We've seen travolta do this act many times before - my fave being Broken Arrow. Sometimes, you can cast something just TOO well.
-
Are you serious? These guys will remake any old film because doing so takes care of having to come up with an original idea. Also, when old school film fans hear that an old favourite is being remade, it immediately creates a buzz around the film, good or bad. Discussing these remakes in terms of "necessary" or not is a little ridiculous... no-one in Hollywood sits around debating which old property "deserves" an update or a remake...
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEoNCWPH1fERemove the space in that link.
-
I'm guessing not, by the lack of a lengthy talkback here.But it does have Tony Scott at the helm, his films always look good with a bit of camera madness."YEEAAA! Camera madness.!"
-
Has he made one film worth a damn since Pulp Fiction? Maybe I'm missing something.
-
They should have kept some notes from the original score, it has such a gritty NYC feel to it. Film scores are in a way the soul of a film. I Have no idea how this film is going to play, but Walter M. was casted perfectly as a regular guy who is in over his head. We have seen Denzel kick ass in many films, and the same with Travolta so this comes as no surprise to me.
Basically the trailer for this, is called count the close ups. -
Feb 13, 2009 9:07:05 AM CST
The trailer of the real film is better than this whole remake wi
by jackpumpkinhead
In fact, better than everything Tony Scott will ever puke out.
By the way, isn't it funny that when you have nothing to show, you're forced to open the promo with "A Tony Scott film"? The usual line these days is "From the director of...", but what can you put there in this case, when all you have is the tool remembered for Being Ridley Scott's Brother? "From the director of several shitty generic videoclips that always looked and felt the same comes another shitty generic videoclip that looks and feels the same!" doesn't quite cut it.
-
Feb 13, 2009 9:08:13 AM CST
Actually, they should try "FROM THE BROTHER OF RIDLEY SCOTT!"
by jackpumpkinhead
It certainly would have more power of attraction than "From Tony Scott".
-
were that the bad guys looked look everyday people... but the actors gave them character that just made them creepy.
-
He seems a lot better here than his usual sneering, screaming overacting self he usually is. I actually found myself wanting to learn more about his take on Robert Shaw's character..
-
or maybe it's that Tony Scott is now a tired parody of himself. He was interesting maybe twice in his career anyway and more for incorporating music video stylings in feature films. Now I think we all agree that music video stylings in films is really just another way of saying "i'm not that talented, so I'm going to shake the camera, edit quickly and change camera stock so you can't tell I have no talent." Anyway, there's not anything inspiring or original in this trailer. Sad. On the plus side, maybe more people will check out the original which is really darned good!
-
Why not just rob a bank?
-
A few people seem to think it's the thing to bash on Tony Scott, and yes while I will agree he is no Ridley Scott, his films are not horrible.Even the muck of Domino was at least inventive and interesting to watch (if not acid tripping anyway). But how can you forget the most excellent Man on Fire. I was very impressed with the choice subtitles in that flick. I know it is a little thing, and there are far better things in that flick. It's a small detail people don't necessarily notice or care about, but it shows the man thinks outside the box. And I'll take a little experimenting any day over the normal, tired dreck we have to endure. Give him a little credit, you're talking about him as if he were Uwe Boll. Come on!
-
in the original trailer? Pre-"Manzier" I guess
-
Film looks alright too (though I don't think I saw the original)
-
I remember it coming and going pretty quickly in the mid-70s. And it didn't exactly light up the video shelves years later, as some "lost classics" have. My point being that, other than us movie geeks, I'm thinking a LOT of people haven't heard of, much less seen, the original. So, if it IS a good story, why not try remaking it for today's audience? This makes a lot more sense than remaking something like Psycho or Friday the 13th or any other flick that just about everyone has already SEEN. And I kinda liked the trailer...
-
Travolta doesn't seem too be trying here. Yeaah u can see that after 1 minute footage. Looks fine to me. Try to destroy a movie before it even gets out? Sometimes I think they should rename this website...
-
movies I am looking forward to this summer. Scott will deliver with this cast and an R rating to boot. I will take this over Transformers or friggin G.I Joe any day. I predict the interplay between Denzel and Travolta will be great, and Luiz Guzman is also in this movie. That is always a good thing.
-
I hate to piss on a movie that I have never seen, but Shaw and Matthau look like their taking naps in that movie. And as far as Travolta goes, he looks fantastic. Shit, I'd watch Travolta and Washington make pancakes for two hours if Tony Scott Directed it. Looks great.
-
Cause you cropped a 1/3 of it off to make your point..dumbass
-
Yeah...you have no idea what you're talking about. Probably should see the original movie first, because it's a kick-ass film that stands the test of time. While the Tony Scott crap will be forgotten five minutes after leaving the theatre. And Blanketman, your memory is wrong. I was around as well and the film did very well and has grown in reputation and with video rental over the years. At least among movie geeks who know what they're talking about. It's not about how many people saw it anyway, it's about the fact that if it was done pretty much perfectly the first time around, there's no need for a remake or updating. And trying to be "different", they usually make it even shittier. There are too many examples to list.
-
...although that was for tv a few years back. I think this mught have been more interesting if travolta ans washington had switched roles. Didn't Denzel just do this kind of thing in Inside man? Still, having watched both trailers, am eager to see the original again.
-
But that looked pretty good to me. I think it will work for those of us less-informed...
-
to the Street Performer...to the Janitorial Staff of Grand Central Station...To the Meter Maid...To the Broadway Producer...To the Ombudsman...To Donald Sutherland as the Clumsy Waiter...Can any of them HANDLE PELHAM 123?"
-
he chopped up and showed us HALF THE POSTER and then called in Harry for backup. When you see the REAL poster (which Merrick cowardly continues to link directly to), its actually artistically done.
-
he chopped up and showed us HALF THE POSTER and then called in Harry for backup.
When you see the REAL poster (which Merrick cowardly continues to link NOT directly to), its actually artistically done.
[EDITBUTTONFAIL] -
SEEMS HE ROCKING HIS ACTUAL HAIRLINE IN THIS. TOO BAD HE DIDNT KEEP IT THAT WAY. LOOKS WAY BETTER AN NOT SO GAY AS HE USUALLY LOOKS WITH THE RUG.
-
i thought travolta was dead?
-
but I'm not going to constantly bitch about it. I just won't watch it. Oh who am I kidding...of course I'll constantly bitch about it.
-
After watching both trailers, and seeing both posters I can honestly say that anyone not liking the new one is merely nostalgic. How many re-makes really need re-making? None. They're a nice way for filmakers to express their vision of the material, but they don't always work. They're also a nice way to introduce a new generation to a classic story. Watching an old movie that shows its age is not on everybody's to do list. I like them because of the nostalgia factor. But I know for a fact that if my GF had a choice between a new version and the classic, she'd pick new. Lots of people would. Why is this such a travesty to re-make this film? The trailer did not show enough to determine if this will be good or not. And the bonus is, if it sucks, you still have the old one to enjoy.
-
The poster I "chopped up" was an EXCLUSIVE for another site. It would've been uncool to reproduce someone else's exclusive here in its entirety.
-
....Brian Helgeland, it's going to be good. He's far from perfect, but his work tends to have a nice dynamic, solid narrative, and wit. Tony Scott & Co can be competent when they're given the right material to work with, but it all boils down to who is in charge of the screenplay. All these geeks on this site who are creaming their pants over Star Trek and Transformers 2 seem to forget that they're being built on a base of fecal matter, provided by schlockmeisters Alex Kurtzman & Roberto Orci, who have a terrible track record. Everything they touch is crap, they have no sense of great storytelling. Brian Helgeland does, so as generic as the trailer may look, at least it'll be a decent film.
-
Meh, I say
-
Feb 13, 2009 1:33:23 PM CST
95% of the general public has never seen the original
by liberty valance
That's why it was remade. It's a 35-year-old oddity that got a lukewarm reception, failed at the box office and didn't win any awards. While film buffs may know and adore the original (and rightly so), very few people have seen the 1974 version, as evidenced by the paltry 6500 votes it has on imdb. As a general rule I'm against remakes, but this one os far less offensive than most.
-
And do a little more, I'll trust. Just call this film "Business Decision #123."
-
"where the DPs at"
-
After 5,000 years i'm free! time to punch out moms!
-
THAT'LL be the day...!
-
Feb 13, 2009 5:18:48 PM CST
Well, at least Chris Partlow and Tony Soprano are in this
by jack d. ripper
THAT is a showdown I'd like to see. Fuck this Travolta-Washington act, only ONE of those guys is a real actor, the other is just a name.
-
he went on to make Jaws 4 - the Revenge!!!!!!!!!
-
he's been doing since broken arrow. fuck sakes.
-
...but I don't think this looks bad. Probably about as unnecessary as a remake can get, however not terrible.
Though I'd rather see Danny Trejo as the heavy instead of John Travolta playing Danny Trejo. -
When I just saw all of it in the trailer...?
-
See the original. Instead killing sharks Robert Shaw steals a train. Awesome.
-
I have yet to see a trailer that sits at the bottom of the pond like this one does translate into a good film. This looks like catfish crap.
-
C'mon it seems they have all of the casting wrong in the film. I think James Gandofini should play the hero and Denzel Washington should be the brilliant villain in the movie and Travolta should play the chief of police. Think about the setting now for the film.
I don't like the trailer for the new one. It's too LOUD.
In comparison to the original the film feels like a thriller and acts like one. Tony Scott is a horrible director, he seems to be using some new narcotic for every movie he does now. His films don't appear coherent. I think John McTiernan would have been a better choice for director to helm this picture. His head and heart is in the right place for this kind of material. -
Love the pre-LaFontaine voice style for the original trailer. (Kentucky Fried Movie? Anyone? Anyone?)
-
Why do all of the AICN writers always sound like a bunch of d bags? They always have to bitch and whine about something. Boo hoo! They're remaking some movie no one has watched in years. Who cares? Let the movie speak for itself. You're judging something you haven't seen yet! I love the movie info nuggets you guys dig up, but I hate wading through your stupid complaining. It's a movie that pits John Travolta against Denzel Washington! Are you retarded? I'll be there on opening night. Sheesh...
-
The original was one of the best movies of the 70's. This one looks like complete bloated modern-day moviemaking SHIT. And the original didn;t have to spell out the 'relationship' between Robert Shaw and Walter Matthau. My God this new remake is going to be a flop. Thank God.
-
It'll probably just be another mediocre Denzel thriller.
That guy needs another Training Day.
And Travolta is never good. -
ensemble cast working at the top of their craft. You don't get that from the trailer as much, but there was a dark comedic tone that made it almost a Dog Day Afternoon. Besides Matthau, Shaw and Stiller, you had Martin Balsam, Hector Elizondo, Tony Roberts, Kenneth McMillan and a bunch of other New York character actors playing this on the level of a Paddy Chayefsky satire. Just watching the city administrative wheels turning slowly to get the ransom is at least a quarter of the film.
I think Helgeland is up to this but I don't know if Tony Scott will sacrifice that kind of sublety to make pretty pictures that go boom prettily. "True Romance", "Man On Fire" and "Domino" are decent, but not much else he's done.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 273 total posts 271 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 92 total posts 92 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 160 total posts 69 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 151 total posts 63 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 67 total posts 59 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 60 total posts 57 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 484 total posts 49 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 69 total posts 42 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 120 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 183 total posts 24 posts