“The Taking of Pelham 123”

Rated R for violence and pervasive language

In 1974, the first film version of John Godey’s novel, “The Taking of Pelham 123,” was released. It became a minor film classic. It starred Walter Matthau and Robert Shaw.

In the original version, the feel of New York is gritty, seedy and grimey. Film critics love that. There was a TV version that starred Edward James Olmos and Vincent D’Onofrio but I am going to ignore that one. So, 1.) why would anybody do a remake of a “classic?” and 2.) how could the story be told differently?

Simple answers: 1.) for the money and 2.) to add car crashes and explosions.

Look out the window. It is summer, right? The original was released in October. What does that tell you? The remake is like an exciting roller coaster ride in any city with a subway while the original is dark, gritty, and 100 percent New York City when it was at its nastiest.

This new version stars John Travolta (bad guy Ryder) and Denzel Washington (good guy Walter Garber). To camp up their characters, Travolta got a Fu Manchu mustache and a prison tattoo on his neck and Washington porked up by 40 pounds to look like most desk-bound, middle age bureaucrats.

Another reason to do a remake: fill the cast with Class A actors and let them carry the movie. If the testosterone levels drop — inject 1.) more shooting, 2.) cool technology, or 3.) bigger and more car crashes. I have another reason: I watched the original and I have to say, Bad Guy Robert Shaw’s English accent was easier to understand than the New York ones. A new version could be in Middle American accents.

Garber is under investigation for taking a bribe. He has been temporarily demoted to “guy who directs subway traffic.” Unlucky shlub is on duty and in charge of the subway train that gets hijacked by a team of bad guys (headed by Travolta). These guys want $10 million. (In the original, the bad guys demanded $1 million — talk about inflation!)

How do the bad guys intend to get away with this? Well, who cares as long as there are spectacular crashes, booms and two stars squaring off and engaging in a spitting contest. (OK, I was indulging in a little symbolism with that spit reference … don’t take it literally.)

I admit that the new version of “Taking Pelham 123” is totally pedestrian and pure summer fare. It is, what I would consider a “guys movie.” No giggling and kissing or tearful moments when romance triumphs … just tension, with crashing, shooting, and cussing. This is a red-meat-sizzling-on-the-grill-outside kind of movie.

Also, if this film had been made without 21st century cowboys John Travolta and Denzel Washington, we would call it a dud. I doubt if this film is going to be a “minor classic” like the original, but it is good, solid, summer fun; forgettable in the long run but still entertaining. It is predictable but still holds the attention. And if you promise not to tell any other film critics, I will confess that I liked it more than the original, but then again, I was never fond of the 1970s: the hair, the cars and the doubleknit. Ugh!

Thirty-five years from now, if they make another “Taking of Pelham 123,” this version will be mentioned in passing, but the 1974 version will probably be the one to which remake # 4 will be compared. Glitzy never trumps gritty in film school.

“Taking of Pelham 123” earns three bow ties out of five.