The Drop

If you're looking for a solid, gritty, hard-edged crime thriller, a good place to start is author Dennis Lehane. Just some of his film adaptations include Mystic River, Gone Baby Gone, and a great read removed from the crime genre, Shutter Island. Back to basics, Lehane turned his short story 'Animal Rescue' into a feature length screenplay for 2014's The Drop. Remember it? Not many people have even heard of it.

Working at his cousin's bar in a beat-up Brooklyn neighborhood, Bob Saginowski (Tom Hardy) lives a quiet, peaceful life, a self-imposed quiet, peaceful life. He lives by himself in the house he grew up in, goes to the same church service each day and tends bar for Cousin Marv (James Gandolfini), a former small-time mobster now trying to scrape by. One day walking home from the bar, Bob hears wimpering from a closed garbage can and finds a bloodied, beaten pit bull puppy inside. He meets the owner of the garbage cans, Nadia (Noomi Rapace), and agrees to take care of the puppy until a better alternative comes along for both Bob and the displaced dog. As for the bar, it's not your ordinary bar. It is a drop bar where money carriers working for the Chechen mafia can drop off their gambling money, all of it piling up in a safe before being picked up. That's the set-up at least...until two low-level hoods walk in one night brandishing shotguns and looking for all the money they can find.

If there's a relative complaint to make about this movie...well, it's not necessarily the fault of 'Drop' itself. The issue more is that crime budgets seem to be hitting theaters at an all-time high, and most of them star Liam Neeson. I kid! I kid! I love Liam Neeson...but it's true. From Belgian director Michael Roskam, 'Drop' is an excellent flick featuring an interesting cast, well-told story and a generally somber, moody outlook on life. Calling it 'familiar' isn't necessarily accurate, but this isn't a film that breaks a ton of new ground. Don't get me wrong -- I'm giving it an easy recommendation -- but don't expect anything world-shaking.

None of this is a huge, deal-breaking criticism. I enjoyed the movie a lot and read Lehane's fleshed-out story too that was released as a novel (check it out HERE). Like the best crime thrillers, you feel thrust into this world Lehane's screenplay/story has created. It's a run-down neighborhood in Brooklyn with crime and crooks around every corner. The movie clearly does not have the most positive outlook on life. It rests on the assumption that people are generally pretty nasty, always looking out for themselves no matter the impact on others. Visually, the movie looks crowded, even claustrophobic, with scenes often shot in deep focus. It works. You feel like you're part of the scene. It is a bleak, gritty world, composer Marco Beltrami turning in a solid, mood-setting score. This is a lower middle class world, and there's nothing flashy about it.

Tom Hardy is fast becoming untouchable in my eyes. The guy finds something new with each new role, some new spin or new energy. Reading Lehane's story and knowing Hardy played the Bob character, I was intrigued, but curious in a good way. Hardy manages to make the part his own including an accent that I just can't place! This is one interesting main character. His Bob minds his own business and blends in with the scenery. Something from his past clearly hangs over his head, but we don't find out what until late. The most accurate thing I can come up with is that Hardy delivers a very human performance. Not necessarily sympathetic, but VERY human. Some little touches, some physical awkwardness, his quiet conversations, they all add up to make this a great lead character. As for Hardy, I can't wait to see what he does in the upcoming Mad Max reboot.

Leading the rest of the cast, Gandolfini is his imposing, intimidating self as Cousin Marv, the bar owner who holds quite a lot of resentment over how he lost total control of the bar. Gandolfini tragically passed away before the film was released so this was the actor's last film appearance, and while it isn't flashy, it's a key, solid supporting part. In a role that reminded me somewhat of her part in Dead Man Down, Rapace does a good job as the tortured, beaten-down woman. I think she's an above average actress, but with the Girl With the Dragon Tattoo series, she's getting typecast a lot in that wounded woman character. There's also key parts for Matthias Schoenaerts as Eric Deeds, an unbalanced local man who's a threat to all around him, and John Ortiz as Detective Torres, an investigating officer in the robbery.

So, yeah, things feel a tad familiar at times. Along with Hardy's lead performance though, the strongest aspect of 'Drop' is its mystery. You don't always know where it is going. We meet a lot of characters, a lot of situations, and though they may seem unrelated....well, they be related. If you find the story to be a touch frustrating -- it does feel like it is meandering at times -- my biggest recommendation is that you should definitely stick with it. There is a genuine twist that works so, so well in the finale because it's just there. It isn't meant to confuse or trick you, but IT WORKS. A highly recommended flick. It wasn't in theaters long and didn't make much money, but 'Drop' is definitely worth catching up with.

The Drop (2014): ***/****

Killing Them Softly

As an author, the name George V. Higgins doesn't set off trip wires and alarms about all the classics he's written. His fans love him though, love him for his bestselling crime novels that brought the darkness, reality and extreme violence and betrayals of the criminal underworld to life. I'd seen -- but haven't read -- The Friends of Eddie Coyle and liked it. One of Higgins' novels, Cogan's Trade, received a big screen adaptation last year, 2012's Killing Them Softly.

With the help of a businessman, Squirrel (Vincent Curatola), an ex-con, Frankie (Scott McNairy) and a drug addict acquaintance, Russell (Ben Mendelsohn), have a plan to net some easy money. Frankie and Russell will rob an illegal high stakes poker game run by Markie Trattman (Ray Liotta), the owner of a ring of illegal games. In his past, Markie secretly took down one of his own games, and Squirrel intends to set him up as the fall guy for his upcoming job. The actual robbery goes down pretty smoothly, but the fall-out is severe. With mob ties to the card game, a feared enforcer, Jackie Cogan (Brad Pitt) is called in to handle the situation. He's got to find out who was involved, who was behind it, and who's lying to him. Brutality, intimidation, straight murder, Jackie isn't afraid to pull out all the stops to find out what he needs to know and get paid in the process.

What I liked most about this film noir-like crime flick is simple. Based off a novel Higgins wrote in the 1970s, 'Killing' feels like those down and dirty crime dramas of the 1970s. There is a throwback feel to it that works on an effortless level. Some of the style, especially Pitt with his slicked back hair and duded up look, has that retro feel. Mostly though, it's that ever-present sense of doom. In this criminal world as the movie presents, there is no hope, no light, no potential for happiness in the end. Anyone and everyone is trying to look out for No. 1. Betrayals, murder, backstabbing, all are fair if it helps you get somewhere or something. That ultra-dark cynicism plays well. We know from the start that none of what we are about to see will go down smoothly. Blood will be spilled and money will be made, but at what cost?

That sounds like it's right up my alley, doesn't it? An almost artsy feel of a 1960s/1970s French crime drama mixed with the tones of a barebones American crime drama from the 1970s? That's got to be good, right? Well, it never amounts to much. This movie plays like a dirtier, far more foul-mouthed version of something Aaron Sorkin would have written. 'Killing' is absolutely obsessed with dialogue. When written well, that can be enough to carry a movie, but the dialogue here gets tedious and serves no real purpose at a certain point. How many times can we hear Frankie and Russell talk about their sexual preferences before we just become numb to it all? I appreciate a slower, more character driven story that doesn't focus exclusively on action, but it's got to go somewhere. We get a long dialogue scene.........and another.........and another. An already short movie (in running time at least) at 97 minutes, it feels far longer, and I was using the fast forward option liberally.

What ends up being the biggest waste here is the cast. There's lots of dialogue here, but it feels like actors showing off but without any substance. Pitt is a bright spot (not a surprise) as brutal, quiet and effective Jackie, a man who has a special skill -- enforcing/killing -- and puts it to his advantage. McNairy and Mendelsohn are appropriately slimy while Liotta isn't given much to do unfortunately as Trattman, a marked man. James Gandolfini plays Mickey, a down on his luck hit man who Jackie recruits for another job, hamming, whoring and drinking it up. Richard Jenkins is maligned and beaten down as Driver, Jackie's link to the mob. Sam Shepard makes a bizarrely quick one-scene cameo as Dillon, an older enforcer with the biggest reputation around.

The story itself has some flaws, but I think director/writer Andrew Dominik makes a really bad style decision. Any transition scene -- car driving, men walking, whatever -- has a voiceover being played over the visual. We hear George W. Bush and Barack Obama talking about the economic crisis, country unity, working together. It all comes together in the end in the final scene, but it's not worth the payoff we get. Instead, it comes across as a heavy-handed, obnoxious stylish storytelling device that handicaps the movie. As a film, it just can't quite figure out what's going on. Is it darkly funny? Just dark? A metaphor for something bigger, more profound? All of the above, none of it? If you're going to tell a crime story, do it. Don't get all mixed up in a message about America's current economic state.

Too bad overall. Lots of potential, and when it works in small snippets, it reminds me of a mix between The Departed and No Country for Old Men. Too often though it doesn't do enough to give it a recommendation (even a mild one). Sorry to report I came away disappointed in a big way.

Killing Them Softly (2012): **/****

Zero Dark Thirty

With her 2008 film The Hurt Locker, director Kathryn Bigelow created a film that was timely, moving, unsettling and in the end, especially memorable. She would have been hard-pressed to duplicate or improve on that formula, but her follow-up film tackled an even bigger topic, the decade-long hunt for terrorist Osama bin Laden, and tackled it well. Gaining the early buzz for a handful of Oscars is 2012's Zero Dark Thirty.

In the months following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the CIA takes a new mission on; tracking down and capturing Osama bin Laden, the al-Qaeda terrorist behind the attacks. Among the agents and operatives in the process is Maya (Jessica Chastain), a young agent who while highly intelligent is rightfully a little stunned and taken aback by the hunting process. Days to weeks, weeks to months and months to years, Maya and countless other agents work toward capturing bin Laden, but it is a tedious, monotonous process that entails pursuing countless leads and rumors. The terrorist seems to have receded back into the Earth, disappeared like he never existed. Maya continues the hunt, following a lead involving a possible courier, Abu Ahmed, who may have a link to bin Laden. Will the never-ending hunt amount to anything? Will Maya be pushed beyond the brink as the hunt becomes an obsession to her?

Tackling a movie detailing the decade-long hunt for Osama bin Laden is a mammoth, gargantuan task that had to be at least a tad bit intimidating for Bigelow in the director's chair. Somehow, she didn't even manage an Oscar nomination for her work. I didn't love the movie -- I don't think you're supposed to love it -- but Bigelow deserves credit where it's due. 'Zero' is far from conventional, and that's most definitely a huge positive. In a story that spans 10 full years, a ridiculous amount of information, names, places and people are thrown at the viewers. The development is linear, but it's almost episodic in execution. We see the developing hunt through ups and downs, theories, doubts and conspiracy theories, clues that result in nothing, others that lead to a dead end, and that one perfect little tidbit that will produce an actual lead.

Along with Bigelow's directing, the best thing going for 'Zero' is Jessica Chastain as Maya, a role that's earned her a Best Actress nomination (one I think she'll win). We're introduced to her as she arrives at a CIA Black Site as a veteran agent/interrogator, Dan (scene-stealing Jason Clarke), as he starts the long process of breaking down a detainee. Trained and intelligent, she's nonetheless surprised at first at what she sees. As her investigation continues though, we see Maya develop as a character, a driven, frustrated, even obsessed agent who will stop at nothing to catch bin Laden, even when everything and everyone around her doubts the effort. Chastain creates a great lead character, one that comes into her own as the hunt continues and the years pass. When she finally finds a clue, she's the only one who believes it will lead anywhere. Another impressive performance from an actress who keeps climbing onward and upward.

Chastain is the constant in the movie as the story moves from year to year and location to location. Bigelow's storytelling technique is almost documentary-like in its execution. We're taken from CIA Black Sites to CIA headquarters in Langley, isolated locales to crowded markets in countless Middle Eastern cities. The story highlights further terrorist attacks following 9/11, and it all leads to an ending that we all know, but is sickeningly interesting to watch develop. Through all the clues, leads and informants, Bigelow's best decision is a complete lack of opinion. It's a perfect choice. She presents the hunt, the name and the background, and that's it, reflecting that documentary-like storytelling. 'Zero' doesn't vilify bin Laden (it doesn't need to) or try to create a bigger picture of what's going on in the world. This is the hunt. This is what we need to see, and that's all Bigelow's film is trying to do.

The documentary/episodic story allows for some solid supporting parts around Maya's ever-continuing hunt and obsession. I especially liked Clarke as Dan, the underplayed CIA agent who shows in such subtle fasion how to interrogate/torture someone, always keeping them guessing and unsettled in a horrific way. Kyle Chandler plays the U.S. station chief in Pakistan, needing to complete objectives but the odds are against him with Jennifer Ehle and Harold Perrineau as two fellow in-country agents. Along with Clarke as a field agent, Edgar Ramirez is excellent as Larry, a CIA operative working to pursue a lead Maya has found while Mark Strong is also a scene-stealer as George, a CIA supervisor who has to work down the middle, working with his agents while also appeasing his own superiors. Also look for James Gandolfini as the CIA director and Stephen Dillane as the National Security Advisor.

If there is an issue with 'Zero,' I would say that at 157 minutes it feels long at times, especially early as the groundwork is set up for the second half of the story. Not dull, not boring, but a little sluggish maybe. Things pick up in a quick way when Maya's investigations lead to a heavily fortified compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. The whole hunt is transfixing to watch, but upon the arrival of Seal Team 6 into the story (headlined by Joel Edgerton and Chris Pratt) goes up a notch or two. We don't see their training, just the night of the raid on the fortified compound that supposedly hides bin Laden inside. It is an incredible extended sequence as the SEALs fly into Pakistan, land near the compound (with one major issue) and then efficiently move into the compound. Intense doesn't begin to describe this true-to-life sequence. The nighttime raid is filmed with both night vision and shadowy, foggy darkness. You know where the scene is going, and it's still almost unbearable to watch.

'Zero' has its fair share of moments like that. It is a movie to watch and appreciate more than one you love and watch once or twice a year. It has taken some flak for any number of things -- a pro-torture stance, possible help from the Obama administration on some details -- but none of the issues are enough to detour an otherwise excellent movie. We get an excellent look into the intelligence underworld that feels authentic from beginning to end. Definitely worth checking out as award season goes into full swing.

Zero Dark Thirty (2012): ***/****

Get Shorty

With his role in Quentin Tarantino's 1994 movie Pulp Fiction, John Travolta burst back onto the Hollywood scene in a big way.  He was in the Look Who's Talking Movies up to that point, but not much else over a 10-plus year time span. But starting in 1994, Travolta seemed to be marketable again, someone audiences wanted to see in theaters.  Over the next several years, he starred in Michael, Phenomenon, Face/Off, and in one of his best parts, 1995's Get Shorty.

Not to sound smarmy or condescending, but from director Barry Sonnenfeld, this is a movie about movies...literally.  All the characters are working toward (and against each other) about a supposedly can't miss script which we discover little about, which then turns into another movie.  It is stylish and fun with a story that does its fair share of twisting and turning as characters turn on each other over and over again. But more than that, it is a self conscious movie -- in a good way. The story quotes other movies, characters appreciate movie history (especially Travolta), and the movie even ends in a film within a film. Don't be confused though, it all works nicely.

A mobster and loan shark based out of Miami, Chili Palmer (Travolta) is feeling the wrath of new boss and possibly nuts mobster Ray 'Bones' Barboni (Dennis Farina). Palmer heads west after an unpaid debt, finding out that someone who owes him money defrauded the insurance company out of $300,000 and is now in Los Angeles after a successful trip to Las Vegas.  Chili quickly and easily finds the man, but in the process meets B-movie director/producer extraordinaire Harry Zimm (Gene Hackman) with who he quickly hits it off through their appreciation of movies. Harry has a can't miss script on his desk and enlists Chili to help him get it made with all his "talents." Not so easy though, even with Chili's ability to get things done because another loan shark, Bo Catlett (Delroy Lindo), wants in on the movie and isn't worried about ruffling some feathers.

With how wrapped up celebrities and the movie business can get with themselves, it is always nice to see those celebrities poke fun in their own direction. Sonnenfeld's movie paints a big target and rips anyone and everyone involved with the movie business, but it never comes across as mean-spirited or cruel humor, just an honest look at a shady business.  We meet primadonna actors, has-been and never will-be stars, past their prime directors, and loan sharks with an eye for a quick and easy payday.  More than anything though, it is a fun dig at all these people and professions.  If you're going to do that, you'd better have a lot of talent on-board, and Sonnenfeld assembles quite a cast to do so.

I have always liked John Travolta as an actor. The man can act, but when he is at his best, I like to think it is because of his presence, his ability to ham it up at times as his character requires.  His Chili Palmer is a strong mix of both so we get a chance to see Travolta act but also have a lot of fun with a part that allows him to explore some.  He is supremely confident in his abilities but never cocky or arrogant.  He knows he will get a job done.  Most importantly though in his line of work, he is one persuasive S.O.B. but never in an intimidating way. He just has a knack for convincing you that what he needs is what you need to do. The change Chili makes is great too, trying to sell his story of what he's doing at the moment (chasing down a debt) as a feature film. Loan shark and mobster maybe, but he's a movie fan above all else, quoting everything from John Wayne to Bette Davis. Good to see you back, Mr. Travolta.

With Travolta's Chili Palmer, you have a character capable of carrying a movie, and at times, he does, dominating his scenes with ease.  Of course that's not all the movie got. Hackman is perfectly cast as Harry Zimm, a veteran aging director looking for one more hit. I'd like to think this is a spin on Roger Corman, but I could be off-base.  Rene Russo plays Karen Flores, a B-movie scream queen who never quite reached stardom but is still a recognizable face in the movie. Danny DeVito is hilarious and beyond perfect as Martin Weir, an actor's actor, a method actor who wants to BECOME the role he's playing. His scenes with Travolta are priceless as Martin tries to become a loan shark. Farina and Lindo get to milk their bad guy roles, hamming it up as the relatively bad guys with James Gandolfini playing Bear, Lindo's henchman and a former stunt man himself. It would be easy for a cast like this to fight it out for screen-time, but this group has an ease working together that never throws the movie off. Watch out late for a quick but perfect cameo from Harvey Keitel in the finale too.

I'm looking for more to say but coming up with nothing. There is nothing really new or groundbreaking about Sonnenfeld's well-made, stylish comedy. But every weekend when you see really stupid comedies and lazy remakes hitting theaters or being released on DVD, it is nice to see a movie like this. There is an abundance of talent involved, and they're having as much fun making the movie as we are watching it (hopefully at least, I enjoyed it). It is smart and funny right from the start. Now as for the sequel that came 10 years later, 2005's Be Cool? I'll let you know about that one.

Get Shorty <---trailer (1995): ***/****

The Last Castle

In about a year and a half or so I've written over 350 reviews while trying to cover a wide range of movies and actors from all sorts of different genres.  Some names come up more than others, but I feel really bad about missing one in particular, the always cool Robert Redford.  In 350-plus reviews, I didn't do one Redford movie. It wasn't an intentional slight, and all I can come up with is that I've tried to review movies I haven't seen in the past.  Looking at Redford's filmography, I've seen about half so that explains it to a certain point.  So anyways, here goes, a Redford review starting with 2001's The Last Castle. 

One of the biggest stars of the 1960s and 1970s, Redford has stepped back from the limelight over the last 15 years, content to direct more than act while also organizing the annual Sundance Film Festival.  At 74 years old, he is one of those few actors you could really call a 'movie star.' He has aged gracefully without any sort of controversy or media event to scar his career, and he is as cool as ever.  In 'Castle,' he was making his first on-screen appearance in three years, and even though Redford is typically strong in the lead, the movie just can't sustain any sort of momentum before derailing in the final act.

A decorate army general, Lt. General Gene Irwin (Redford) has been court martialled and sentenced to serve a 10-year team in a military prison.  It is a maximum security prison full of the dredges from all the armed forces with a brutal commander, Colonel Winters (James Gandolfini), in charge, doing his best to remain order while also having some fun at the prisoners' expense.  Early on as he begins to serve his sentence, Irwin is content to sit back and let the days go by.  But soon enough, he sees Winters for what he really is; a sadistic commander watching over his prison like a puppetmaster, making the prisoners do things for his entertainment.  Irwin refuses to go along with what he sees and puts a complicated plan into action for ousting Winters.

Prison or P.O.W. movies have a popularity all to themselves, and because of that there's a tried and true formula to follow.   'Castle' does deviate from the formula in one big way; the prisoners aren't trying to escape.  As military criminals, they realize to a point where are they really going to go?  So with any escape plans out the window, the story settles into a battle of wills between two type-A personalities, Redford's Irwin and Gandolfini's Winters.  While obviously not as good a movie overall, the dynamic here reminded me of The Bridge on the River Kwai with the struggle for power a key ingredient to the story.

At the age of 65 making this movie, Redford looks like he's about 45, maybe 50 if you push it.  Since he started directing movies in the early 90s, he's acted less so it's always good to see him in front of the camera.  As Lt. General Irwin, he's clearly the more sympathetic character.  We find out midway through the movie why he was court martialed and therefore why early on he just wanted to do his time and avoid any of the politics of a general being in a military prison.  Seeing Winters play his mind games with prisoners and generally manipulate the facility for his enjoyment finally pushes Irwin too far, including one incident with a marine (Clifton Collins Jr. in a great supporting part) where unnecessary violence is taken to a new level by the commandant.

Right in the middle of his huge success as part of The Sopranos, Gandolfini does his fair share of scenery-chewing as the prison commander.  He butts heads instantly with Irwin when he overhears a comment about his military antique collection and it goes downhill from there.  What works so well with this dynamic is the egos involved.  Both men want to prove they're better than the other, even when the situation is escalated to a whole new level.  I'm not a huge Gandolfini fan, but he is a really fun actor to watch.  Also in the cast is Delroy Lindo as General Wheeler, an old friend of Irwin's suspicious of what's really happening in the prison, Mark Ruffalo as Yates, a prisoner no one likes who may or may not be playing both sides, and Steve Burton as Capt. Peretz, Winters' aide.

Through the first hour of 'Castle,' I was liking where the story was building to if not loving it.  After that, the whole movie rolls over a land mine, derails, hits a wall, whatever you want to call it.  Pushed too far, Irwin -- a master of command and strategy -- leads a coup from inside the prison against the heavily outnumbered guards.  On a purely action scale, the last half hour is everything you could ask for.  But from where the story is coming, it comes out of nowhere with no warnings or explanations which would have helped fill in some holes.  It's just a weird ending that made me realize what a weird movie this was as a whole.  Take away the performances from Redford and Gandolfini, and this movie is pretty bad in a cartoonish way.  Go figure.

The Last Castle <----trailer (2001): **/****

The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3

Asking movie fans about remakes can be a touchy subject. I tend to agree most of the time that remakes aren't necessary depending on the movie and studios should just come up with new, creative ideas instead of going back to the well repeatedly. On the other hand, I don't get it when fans are against ANY remake. If you don't want to see it, don't. I've rarely gone into a remake thinking, "Hey, I bet this is better than the original." I'm usually looking for an entertaining story with some alterations to the story, casting, whatever. I got that with the new The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3.

The original Pelham One Two Three is a cult classic in its own right with Walter Matthau and Robert Shaw as the two leads with one big claim to fame, providing inspiration for Quentin Tarantino's Reservoir Dogs. So the remake, with bigger names headlining, still had some pretty big shoes to fill. Is it as good as the original? I'll have to think about that, but gut reaction, close but not as good.

The story is the same with a few slight changes. On a New York subway train, Pelham 123, four men led by Ryder (John Travolta) hijack a single car with its 18 passengers. Getting in contact with the Metro Transit Authority headquarters, they make their demands. They want $10 million in one hour or else they will start shooting a passenger for every minute they're late. At the other end of the radio at MTA HQ is Walter Garber (Denzel Washington), a former supervisor demoted to a desk job while under investigation for supposedly taking a bribe. What follows is a cat and mouse game as Ryder and Garber talk back and forth while NY desperately tries to put together the $10 million ransom.

The heist-like premise is a good one that quickly brings up interesting questions. They've hijacked a train, but how will they escape once they get the money? They're underground after all. It's a tense movie as Ryder, either the sanest villain ever or the craziest, I just can't decide, plays mind games with Garber and hostage negotiator Camonetti (John Turturro, good as always). A SWAT team waits at either end of the single car waiting for the order to take down the hijackers while inside the quartet are one push away from blowing away the hostages.

Enough has been changed that director Tony Scott left his mark on the movie to set it apart from the original. There's an element of technology added to the heist as Ryder has a wireless connection to Google his counterpart on the other end of the radio, and the aspect of the stock market comes up. The heist isn't as straightforward as the original with bigger plans at work, but with a reveal of Ryder's identity late in the movie the additions work. Scott's movies are often more known for their style and flash than story, and that's true here to a point, lots of slow motion blurry shots, quick cuts that can be hard to keep up with, but the director doesn't go too far with it.

There's a natural tension in the story that would be hard to mess up from the director's chair. An hour is not a long time, especially when talking about getting $10 million from a bank and then driving it through NY traffic with the time remaining. The mayor (James Gandolfini in a great part) does question at some point, "Why didn't we just use a helicopter?" Because Mr. Mayor, then we couldn't have the cool race through Manhattan as a squad car with motorcycle escort weaves through traffic.

Working with Scott for the fourth time, Washington is the heart of the movie. His Garber character is an everyman, John Smith trying to care for his family, go to work and pay his mortgage and his kids' tuition. It's the type of part that Washington could do with his eyes closed, and he doesn't disappoint. Most of the running time, all Garber can do is talk, desperately trying to stop Ryder or at least slow him down. There's a twist that works to a fault and does come as a surprise because well....he's Denzel Washington. Hamming it up as the villain, Travolta goes too far at times, but for the character his theatrics are appropriate. He's the bad guy you love to hate but can laugh at too with how off the wall some of his comments can be.

'Pelham' is Washington's and Travolta's movie. The rest of the cast makes the most of smaller parts, especially Turturro and Gandolfini, but other than those two parts no one stands out. One of my favorite character actors Luis Guzman is criminally underused in his part as Ramos, one of the four hijackers. The other two hijackers, Victor Gojcaj and Robert Vataj, are intimidating, but I don't even recall hearing their names. The two are characters with automatic weapons, and that's it, but I guess that is what the script called for. Michael Rispoli and Ramon Rodriguez are good in smaller roles as two members of MTA headquarters.

I didn't love the remake like I wanted to, but I did enjoy it. I can chalk up a lot of that to the trailer which really convinced me to see it. The ending is forced a little too much for me, but the build-up makes up for that. So overall, it lived up to my expectations of a remake. Good but not great, and worth a watch. I do recommend seeing the original, if for nothing else than to compare the two. Go see the Pelham remake, if for nothing else than Washington in a great part going toe to toe with villainous Travolta.