What I loved most: The cast

What I really hated: Could've been brainier

I normally hate Tony Scott, but thankfully he reins in his trademark visual excesses here and just lets his actors do the work. It's a rote script, to be sure, but Washington, Travolta and the fine supporting cast elevate the material and Scott keeps everything snappy, delivering an entertaining enough thriller.

What I loved most: Excellent acting

What I really hated: Predictable ending

'The Taking of Pelham 123' is a remake of the 1974 heist thriller under the same title, with similar plot premises and characters, but given a new-age and modern reconfiguration. John Travolta's Ryder is the hijacker of the titular train and has replaced Robert Shaw's beanie look with a slicker and meaner appearance. Dressed in gloomy black and wearing shades which hide the feral and menacing look in his eyes, Travolta emanates a foreboding presence, making it all the more believeable that his character is capable of exacting cold-eyed and dispassionate slaughter without battering an eye. Having collaborated with director Tony Scott in previous projects such as Crimson Tide and Deja Vu, Denzel Washington is clearly familiar and comfortable with the style and demands of Scott, able to settle into the role of the subway dispatcher turned unlikely hero with ease. Augmenting the on-screen gravitas is James Gandolfini's portrayal of the odious and obnoxious mayor, a duplicitous snake who panders to the media while surrepititously impervious to the situation at hand. Plot convolutions aside, the script is genuinely sophiscated and sapient, exploring themes on sin and redemption, with its best dialogues featured in the witty exchanges between the two charismatic leads. It is a pity therefore, that whatever suspense and intrigue built up in the first half dissolve amidst the shootouts and cat-and-mouse chase sequences in the second half, as is typical of Scott's productions. What could have been an erudite and cerebral analytical crime drama propelled by a battle of wits has been relegated to a trite and pedestrian action thriller, complete with a hackneyed and conventional ending. Near the end, you may also question the sheer incredulity of Washington's character, the extent to which he risks his life to apprehend the criminal mastermind. Still, the class-A acting will more than cover up for these pitfalls, so go watch it, if just for the acting alone. 'The Taking of Pelham 123' is a remake of the 1974 heist thriller under the same title, with similar plot premises and characters, but given a new-age and modern reconfiguration. John Travolta's Ryder is the hijacker of the titular train and has replaced Robert Shaw's beanie look with a slicker and meaner appearance. Dressed in gloomy black and wearing shades which hide the feral and menacing look in his eyes, Travolta emanates a foreboding presence, making it all the more believeable that his character is capable of exacting cold-eyed and dispassionate slaughter without battering an eye. Having collaborated with director Tony Scott in previous projects such as Crimson Tide and Deja Vu, Denzel Washington is clearly familiar and comfortable with the style and demands of Scott, able to settle into the role of the subway dispatcher turned unlikely hero with ease. Augmenting the on-screen gravitas is James Gandolfini's portrayal of the odious and obnoxious mayor, a duplicitous snake who panders to the media while surrepititously impervious to the situation at hand. Plot convolutions aside, the script is genuinely sophiscated and sapient, exploring themes on sin and redemption, with its best dialogues featured in the witty exchanges between the two charismatic leads. It is a pity therefore, that whatever suspense and intrigue built up in the first half dissolve amidst the shootouts and cat-and-mouse chase sequences in the second half, as is typical of Scott's productions. What could have been an erudite and cerebral analytical crime drama propelled by a battle of wits has been relegated to a trite and pedestrian action thriller, complete with a hackneyed and conventional ending. the film, you may also question the sheer incredulity of Washington's character, the extent to which he risks his life to apprehend the ciminal mastermind. Still, the class-A acting will more than redeem these pitfalls, so go watch it, if just for the acting alone.

What I really hated: Annoying girl on the webcam

What seems an ordinary day turns out to an exciting and event one for Garber, a once top man in USA's transport industry as he mans the despatch control centre of the subway system when he was suspected of taking bribes and suspended. John Travolta plays the ruthless, non-nonsense hijacker of the subway train in question. Racing against time to save the hostages and to bring the money to the anatagonists, 123 does well with the acting of both leads as well as James Gandolfini who carry the plot and movie which would otherwise have been quite run-of-the-mill.

What I loved most: Acting by 2 leads

What I really hated: choppy camerawork

Yet again, director Tony Scott and Denzel get together for a movie (Man On Fire, Deja Vu). Denzel does great when playing a not-so-perfect guy placed in a not-so-perfect situation and Scott seemed to have played on this for all he movies they've worked together on. And it works here too. Not either of their best but not Denzel's best is Still compelling viewing. Goes to show the depth of this great actor. This movie is a reworking of an old 1973 movie of the same title. Not watched that one so i can't say which is better. John Travolta does a fabulous job as the bad guy here. Though most of their interaction is thru a comms set, there is a chemistry between him and Denzel that keeps u watching the movie till the end. Ironically, my favorite scene is right at the end when the camera pans on a tired man going back home at the end of a harrowing day. Speaks more about the Denzel character than any of the other scenes in the movie. For me. Tony Scott, of late has this nasty habit of favoring teh MTV style, dizzying camera work. While it may work for some scenes, overall I felt that he over-utilises the technique, to the point that I had to close my eyes several times so that my head doesn't throb. Maybe I'm getting on in age! Anyway, all in all, I thought the movie was decent. Not edge-of-your=seat thrilling, but the acting from the leads kept me interested till the end.