Gritty, Grimy, and Graffitied: The Taking of Pelham One Two Three (1974)

The Taking of Pelham One Two Three movie poster

 

Plenty of genre movies have been set in New York City, such as Roman Polanski’s Rosemary’s Baby (dev­ilry on the Upper West Side), Wal­ter Salles’ Dark Water (ghosts on Roo­sevelt Island), Guillermo Del Toro’s Mimic (ver­min in the sub­way), and Spike Lee’s Inside Man (thiev­ery on Wall Street). The Tak­ing of Pel­ham One Two Three, directed by Joseph Sar­gent from the novel by John Godey, is one of the few New York movies seem­ingly made for New York­ers. Plenty of the world’s cities have under­ground tran­sit sys­tems, but this par­tic­u­lar story could be set nowhere else. It’s a potent premise that has been remade twice, first as a TV movie in 1998 and again in 2009 as a big-budget star vehi­cle for John Tra­volta and Den­zel Wash­ing­ton, directed by Tony Scott. It was even an indi­rect inspi­ra­tion for the famous color-coded crim­i­nal aliases used in Quentin Tarantino’s Reser­voir Dogs.

The Tak­ing of Pel­ham One Two Three is a time cap­sule, full of curiosi­ties about how the New York City sub­way looked and func­tioned in the 1970s. It also reveals a great deal about how the city itself was per­ceived and por­trayed in pop­u­lar cin­ema at the time. The cityscape is gritty, grimy, and graf­fi­tied. Women are just now begrudg­ingly being let into the M.T.A. work­force. A cyn­i­cal City Hall is will­ing to nego­ti­ate with ter­ror­ists if it means more votes in the next elec­tion. Hook­ers and pimps share the sub­way with drunks and robust eth­nic stereo­types. The unhealthy filth of mil­lions of peo­ple liv­ing in close quar­ters is evi­denced by a cold going around (which becomes a key plot point).

Walter Matthau in The Taking of Pelham One Two Three“Some­body down there knows how to drive a train. You don’t pick that up watch­ing Sesame Street.”

The movie’s racial pol­i­tics are dated, but per­haps more hon­est towards flawed human nature. Lt. Gar­ber (Wal­ter Matthau) is openly con­de­scend­ing towards vis­it­ing Japan­ese offi­cials study­ing the M.T.A. He’s flatly racist in a way no hero in a mod­ern film would ever allowed to be (he calls them “mon­keys”). But in fact, he actu­ally does get his come­up­pance. Matthau is, to say the least, an odd cast­ing choice for the hero of a thriller. But he was prob­a­bly about the cor­rect age for a Tran­sit Author­ity detec­tive, and had the right air of sar­donic dis­il­lu­sion­ment for a believ­able lower-level civic employee of the bleak New York City of the 1970s.

Speak­ing of roles that would never be con­ceived the same way in today’s Hol­ly­wood, the bad guys remain very effec­tively dis­guised through­out. Char­ac­ter actors Robert Shaw and Mar­tin Bal­sam were never exactly super­stars, but how many actors today would will­ingly dis­guise them­selves for most of a movie? I can really only think of Clive Owen in Inside Man and almost any­thing Gary Old­man does. Unsur­pris­ingly, no attempt is made to obscure the very expen­sive face of John Tra­volta for one frame of the 2009 remake. Note that Shaw unmask­ing is spoiled by his promi­nent appear­ance on the DVD sleeve.

Robert Shaw in The Taking of Pelham One Two Three“Excuse me, do you peo­ple still exe­cute in this state?”

Made decades before 9/11, The Tak­ing of Pel­ham One Two Three is nev­er­the­less a minia­ture night­mare sce­nario of one of the Manhattan’s myr­iad vul­ner­a­bil­i­ties to ter­ror­ism. In the 1970s, the famil­iar form of ter­ror­ism was to hold hostages for remu­ner­a­tion or to espouse a cause. Scott’s 2009 remake had to face 21st cen­tury audi­ences (many sit­ting in New York City movie the­aters) for whom ter­ror­ism means mass mur­der. But Scott takes the con­ven­tional route and boils down the plot into a con­flict between two men, on a per­sonal level. Scott’s choices high­light how much the orig­i­nal actu­ally bucks cliché.

In the orig­i­nal, we know prac­ti­cally noth­ing about the per­sonal lives of Gar­ber or the vil­lain­ous Mr. Blue (we may guess he’s some sort of ex-mercenary or sol­dier of for­tune, but he gives no hint of his ide­ol­ogy or moti­va­tions). In con­trast to the ice-cool Mr. Blue, Travolta’s char­ac­ter is manic and unhinged, and rants in a bar­rage of f-bombs. Just as Sargent’s old school run­away train sequence is more thrilling than Scott’s rapid-fire edit­ing and CGI flair, the orig­i­nal also outscores on pure cynicism.


Buy the DVD from Ama­zon and kick back a few pen­nies to The Dork Report.


Generation Kill

Generation Kill poster

 

The HBO minis­eries Gen­er­a­tion Kill comes from David Simon and Ed Burns, the mas­ter­minds behind the superla­tive series The Wire. Simon him­self is a for­mer jour­nal­ist, the state thereof being a pri­mary pre­oc­cu­pa­tion of the fifth sea­son of the The Wire. So it makes sense that he would be drawn to a war story seen through the eyes of a fel­low writer. Gen­er­a­tion Kill is based on the non­fic­tion book by Evan Wright, a Rolling Stone reporter embed­ded in the US Marine Corps 1st Recon­nais­sance Bat­tal­ion, the first boots on the ground dur­ing the 2003 inva­sion of Iraq. Actor Lee Terge­sen plays Wright as a wide-eyed inno­cent among per­verse killers, delight­edly scrib­bling the marines’ col­or­ful boast­ings in his note­book, when not dodg­ing sniper fire. The most quotable is the manic dri­ver Cor­po­ral Josh Ray Per­son, well-cast as James Ran­sone, basi­cally repris­ing his char­ac­ter Ziggy Sobotka from The Wire sea­son two.

The marines’ lingo flashes back to pop cul­ture circa 2003, which already seems so very far away. A rumor spreads that J-Lo is dead, remind­ing us of the brief period when Jen­nifer Lopez was the most desired woman on the planet. Everyone’s a “dog” or “bra” (not as in the under­gar­ment but as in “bro”). In between har­row­ing bat­tles (which the war­riors long for but hate when they arrive), much of their expe­ri­ence is com­prised of long stretches of bore­dom. They sup­ply their own sound­track, rec­ol­lect­ing what lyrics they can and recre­at­ing every part of a song a cap­pella with great enthusiasm.

Generation KillCpl. Josh Ray Per­son: “When my band opened up for Limp Bizkit in Kansas City, we fuck­ing sucked. But then again, so did they. The only dif­fer­ence is that they became famous and I became a marine.”

After exhaust­ing the con­ver­sa­tional value of their bowel move­ments and each other’s alleged sex­ual ori­en­ta­tions, there’s noth­ing but time to talk about the ori­gins and moti­va­tions of the war. One pop­u­lar the­ory is that it is a noth­ing but another race war. As one sol­dier puts it, it’s “White man’s des­tiny to rule the world” and “White man won’t be denied.” Or is it to clear the ground for more Star­bucks fran­chises? Or maybe it’s a war over the scarcest resource of all: virgins.

Marines are trained to deper­son­al­ize and vil­ify the enemy, all with the aim of being effec­tive killers. So they are essen­tially ill-equipped for a 21st cen­tury war in which they are expected to request per­mis­sion before engag­ing any tar­get, and for sit­u­a­tions in which they must deal diplo­mat­i­cally with the civil­ian pop­u­la­tion — some of which may be threats in dis­guise, but most often are just peo­ple who either need their help or would rather they just leave. When the marines do wish to offer com­pas­sion, they are thwarted by their com­mand or by cold hard real­ity — often­times there’s noth­ing they can do. They’re also fatally under­equipped in a lit­eral sense: they’re issued less body armor than Wright was able to pur­chase on eBay, they have state-of-the-art nightvi­sion gog­gles but no bat­ter­ies, and as if they didn’t stand out enough, they’re clad in the wrong cam­ou­flage style. They sub­sist on only one M.R.E. (Meal, Ready to Eat) each day, sup­ple­mented with copi­ous caf­feine pills, Skit­tles, Hus­tler, and Skoal. But as one marine quips, “Sem­per Gumby — always flex­i­ble.” As char­ac­ter­ized here, these Marines never miss an oppor­tu­nity to bitch, but pride them­selves on being able to “make do.”

Generation KillLt. Col. Stephen ‘God­fa­ther’ Fer­rando: “What’s fore­most in Godfather’s mind? We’re still very much in the game, gentlemen.”

Aside from the frus­trat­ingly elu­sive Iraqi army or sui­cide bombers, there are few antag­o­nists marines hate more than Reservists, the Army, and their own incom­pe­tent com­mand. But they grad­u­ally learn that their supe­ri­ors are often far wiser than they real­ized. Lieu­tenant Colonel Stephen “God­fa­ther” Fer­rando (Chance Kelly) (so nick­named because of a hoarse voice derived from lung can­cer) nearly causes a mutiny by refus­ing to aid a fatally injured Iraqi boy. In a rare def­er­ence from a man that has no need to explain him­self to his sub­or­di­nates, he explains in detail why he made his deci­sion: it was lit­er­ally impos­si­ble to save the boy. Later, he reveals to the reporter that he is always fully con­scious of inef­fec­tive com­man­ders like the grossly incom­pe­tent Cap­tain Dave McGraw (Eric Nen­ninger), known to his detrac­tors as “Cap­tain Amer­ica.” God­fa­ther can’t always act on every sin­gle infrac­tion, lest polic­ing his peo­ple become his entire role in the mil­i­tary machine. Even the rep­re­hen­si­ble Sergeant Major John Sixta (Neal Jones) turns out to be more canny than any­one sus­pected; he knows his job is to make him­self into a car­toon vil­lain against which the men can direct their frus­tra­tions. His role is part of the time-tested marine tra­di­tion: a morale-building fig­ure. And for audi­ences of this series, a bit of comic relief (“That hel­met is the prop­pity of the Yoo-Ess-of-Ay!”).

I found the series to be dis­ap­point­ingly frac­tured, no rival at all to Simon and Burns’ mas­ter­piece the Wire. Only the sub­lime final scene rises to the vaulted heights The Wire reg­u­larly reached. One marine had spent weeks shoot­ing and edit­ing a home movie of the inva­sion. When the com­pany finally reaches Bagh­dad, they find they lit­er­ally can­not watch the com­pleted movie. Each walks away, in silence, one by one. In the tra­di­tion of The Wire, this clos­ing mon­tage is set to a per­fectly cho­sen piece of music (Johnny Cash’s apoc­a­lyp­tic “When the Man Comes Around”) and sends shiv­ers down the spine.


Offi­cial site: www.hbo.com/generationkill

Buy the DVD from Ama­zon and kick back a few pen­nies to The Dork Report.


A Clash of Faiths: Ridley Scott’s Body of Lies

Ridley Scott

Body of Lies movie poster

 

Rid­ley Scott’s fol­low up to the gen­tle com­edy of A Good Year (read The Dork Report review) and the crime drama Amer­i­can Gang­ster (partly mod­eled, I think, on Michael Mann’s epic Heat), returns to the politically-themed yet still action-oriented ter­ri­tory he first vis­ited in Black Hawk Down. The key dif­fer­ence here is that, like Peter Weir’s The King­dom and Pete Travis’ Van­tage Point (read The Dork Report review), Body of Lies is set in a fan­ta­sy­land safely divorced from the very, very real events that inspired Black Hawk Down. All of these films have the air of gritty real­ism, but still indulge in the wish ful­fill­ment of a very cin­e­matic war on terror.

Body of Lies can be seen as com­plet­ing a kind of Mid­dle East tril­ogy for Scott, after the afore­men­tioned Black Hawk Down plus the Cru­sades epic King­dom of Heaven (read The Dork Report review). Screen­writer William Mon­a­han wrote both King­dom of Heaven and Body of Lies (adapted from the novel by David Ignatius). But of the three, Body of Lies is clearly the least serious.

Russell Crowe and Leonardo DiCaprio in Body of LiesMesopotamia, and step on it!

No doubt movie stu­dio exec­u­tives have cal­cu­lated down to the last cent that world audi­ences are still too sen­si­tive to actual ter­ror­ist attacks like Lon­don and Madrid in order to buy tick­ets for dra­matic recre­ations on the big screen. Instead, most main­stream terrorism-themed movies are basi­cally enter­tain­ments that only have the feel of seri­ous import, and none of the sub­stance. Body of Lies invents anal­o­gous ter­ror­ist attacks such as a sleeper cell blow­ing up their Lon­don flat, and later, the bomb­ing of a U.S. marine base in Turkey (I hope O’Neal — Demi Moore — from Scott’s G.I. Jane — read The Dork Report Review — wasn’t sta­tioned there). Van­tage Point is a lit­tle more cre­ative in imag­in­ing a worst-case-scenario of a pres­i­den­tial assas­si­na­tion, but has no inter­est in the reper­cus­sions beyond a Rashomon-like recount­ing of the imme­di­ate aftermath.

So audi­ences get films like this, where shad­owy CIA oper­a­tives sneak around Iraq and Jor­dan, sav­ing the world from Islamic fun­da­men­tal­ism. They have seem­ingly lim­it­less resources but no gov­ern­ment over­sight, and any­thing is pos­si­ble with a lit­tle com­puter hack­ing. Mean­while, more seri­ous and real­is­tic movies are ignored, like In the Val­ley of Elah (read The Dork Report review) and the truly excel­lent but emo­tion­ally dev­as­tat­ing United 93. In com­par­i­son, Scott’s Black Hawk Down was unafraid to recre­ate actual events still raw in the Amer­i­can public’s mem­ory: the cat­a­strophic marine incur­sion into Soma­lia in 1993. And even to limit the scope to Scott’s own oeu­vre, King­dom of Heaven is a much smarter con­sid­er­a­tion of the clash of faiths in the Mid­dle East.

Leonardo DiCaprio and Golshifteh Farahani in Body of LiesLeo meets cute with an Iran­ian nurse (Gol­shifteh Farahani)

Body of Lies is Rus­sell Crowe’s fourth film with Scott, fol­low­ing Glad­i­a­tor, A Good Year, and Amer­i­can Gang­ster. Here, he packs on some seri­ous poundage to enter the same schlubby mode he debuted in Michael Mann’s The Insider, sea­soned with a lit­tle of the crass bas­tard he played in A Good Year. Leonardo DiCaprio, on tem­po­rary loan from Mar­tin Scors­ese, sports a scrappy beard but still looks like a teenager. The pretty boy is con­stantly get­ting beaten up, cut, bruised, and los­ing fin­gers. But he meets cute with pretty Iran­ian nurse Aisah (Gol­shifteh Fara­hani), so that’s alright, then.


Offi­cial movie site: www.body-of-lies.com

Buy any of these fine prod­ucts from Ama­zon and kick back a few pen­nies to The Dork Report:

 


Vantage Point

Vantage Point

 

Van­tage Point is an awe­some tech­ni­cal achieve­ment, and I don’t mean to damn it with faint praise. Direc­tor Pete Travis and writer Barry Levy demon­strate excel­lent plot­ting, spa­tial sense, edit­ing, logis­tics, and con­ti­nu­ity. As a thriller it moves for­ward relent­lessly, and feels com­pre­hen­si­ble, self-contained, and very satisfying.

Van­tage Point is struc­tured around a sin­gle gim­mick, but it’s a good one. As one of the cin­e­matic chil­dren of Rashomon (includ­ing The Usual Sus­pects and Courage Under Fire), it retells the same event from mul­ti­ple points of view. An assas­si­na­tion attempt on the US pres­i­dent in Spain is foiled by vet­eran Secret Ser­vice agent Thomas Barnes (Den­nis Quaid) and civil­ian Howard Lewis (For­est Whitaker). The advan­tage of the struc­ture is to with­hold infor­ma­tion and cre­ate sus­pense. The first time we spot Lewis, from the hyper-cautious Barnes’ per­spec­tive, he seems to be act­ing fishily. But when we soon see the events from his point of view, we learn he’s an inno­cent. But the struc­ture works the other way; almost a full hour passes until we see fel­low Secret Ser­vice agent Taylor’s (Matthew Fox) side of the story, and the sim­ple fact of his pro­longed absence causes the audi­ence to sus­pect him. At about the one-hour mark, the rigid, neat struc­ture breaks down and we begin to see sliv­ers of each character’s expe­ri­ences mixed together, as they all draw to a sin­gle time and place for the climax.

Vantage PointA turkey in every pot and a thriller in every multiplex

But the cru­cial falling-down point of the movie is the trumped-up assas­si­na­tion plot itself, which is seem­ingly crafted for max­i­mum sto­ry­telling drama and not real-world ter­ror­ist effi­cacy. Would an actual suc­cess­ful assas­si­na­tion be so hi-tech and com­plex? This plot relies on lots of wire­less tech­nol­ogy, split-second tim­ing, black­mail (coerc­ing some­one to per­form key tasks bet­ter off done by some­one the plot­ters could count on) and at least two inside men (one of whom must have spent almost a life­time prepar­ing). This is how ter­ror­ism works in the movies. Real-life assas­sins tend to be lone gun­men who man­age to slip through secu­rity with their sheer unpre­dictabil­ity, and ter­ror­ist attacks like Okla­homa City and 9/11 didn’t depend on tech­nol­ogy more com­plex than fer­til­izer and box cut­ters. While we’re on the sub­ject, what are these par­tic­u­lar assas­sins’ moti­va­tions, exactly? It becomes clear they don’t wish to kill the pres­i­dent but to cap­ture him. What­ever they hope to accom­plish, they seem quite pleased with themselves.

Vantage PointOK, every­body skootch in a lit­tle… say cheese!

All of these ques­tions are negated in the end by a news broad­cast that claims that a lone assas­sin has been shot and killed. This con­clu­sion plays to the public’s lust for con­spir­acy the­o­ries than con­tin­ues to plague 9/11 (an inside job? please, spare me) and the JFK assassination.

Extra obser­va­tions:

• One of the biggest plot twists is spoiled in the trailer.

• Barnes is a cliché we’ve seen before, played by Clint East­wood in In the Line of Fire.

• There’s an oddly tiny role for Sigour­ney Weaver as tele­vi­sion news direc­tor Rex Brooks. Was there more intended for her char­ac­ter? Per­haps she took the role for an oppor­tu­nity to spend a few days in Spain.

• Hey, it’s Hollywood’s go-to mid­dle east­ern guy, Saïd Tagh­maoui (from The Kite Run­ner and the Iraqi tor­turer in Three Kings). He does turn out to be a vil­lain, but so do two white dudes, so the movie totally isn’t racist.


Offi­cial movie site: www.vantagepoint-movie.com

Buy the DVD from Ama­zon and kick back a few pen­nies to The Dork Report.