The first time I saw the trailer of the Taking of Pelham 123, my first question was why Denzel Washington didn’t sport his usual trim appearance. My next thought was that it would be a formulaic Hollywood movie: hostages taken, a ransom demanded, threats given in case the requirements were not respected, the delivery delayed, some casualties in the process, the money would arrived, the criminals would escape but then would get caught or killed in the end.
The movie was indeed faithful to the pattern. The weight gain of Denzel even becomes clear when I realized that he was a playing the role of a middle-aged, regular guy who is working hard to pay his mortgage and give his kids a good education. Thus, it would have been so easy to just shelve the movie into oblivion and just wait for the next one that could provide another momentary diversion. Unless I let myself look beyond the superficial and see what I can learn from it.
The movie is a political satire. It was bitterly funny to see how the movie poked fun at politicians, politics and public affairs. The mayor who did not know the reason behind the ransom amount of $10M (cash limit that can be availed of within the day by the city comptroller). The policemen in their vehicles (a car and motorcycles) which figured in accidents on their way to deliver the ransom money whereas a helicopter could have been more practical (as later thought of by the mayor). The preoccupation over his appearance instead of in pacifying the people through a 30-second public statement. The journalists who were more interested in the mayor’s marital affairs than the current crisis (hostage situation and falling stock market). When the mayor easily chose to appease the passengers of the metro he was in instead of taking stock of the urgency of the hostage situation whereby he would have chosen to make the train an express one (popular opinion versus political will). Then, there’s the incompetence of the mayor’s adviser/s when they did not think of using the chopper to deliver the money and in telling Garber to lie to Ryder to get out of a difficult situation (better to lie to get what you want). The negotiator, up on a chopper, mentioned that the view reminds him of what he is fighting for. Do the others know what they are fighting for? Even with the superior of Garber who enjoyed putting people down but proved himself incompetent when he assumed the duties/responsibilities of Garber. Even in the rare moment when the mayor slipped and admitted to not being a Yankee fan (unimaginable in his position!).
Ryder’s role is very crucial here because he personifies scorn. Even in how he played his cards well by scamming the city into feeling fear and thereby, making the stocks plunge and the value of gold to go up. He ridiculed anything and everything. He exposed human frailties and beliefs and discredited them. He made fun of the mayor who gets a dollar for his monthly yet wears a costly coat. He focused on the alleged mistreatment of Garber by his employers. He taunted the mayor (and what it represented) when he offered the deal of exchanging the 17 hostages. Religion and life were not left unscathed with his remarks about the purpose of people’s lives and the simplicity of just following his orders. Or in considering the passengers as commodities with a price.
The first few minutes of the movie swiftly showed the seemingly random, almost blurred pictures of people on the platform of the subway. Their lives, miserable or happy, appeared to be detached from one another. In an instant, it was revealed how easily each existence could be or is linked to the other. The student minding his own business while talking to his girlfriend online. The technology he was using becomes the window for the authorities to see who they were dealing with. Garber is only considered as a demoted train dispatcher but his presence has become necessary in keeping the passengers alive. As Ryder shifted from one topic to another, from religious to political, to ordinary, to economic, to carnal, to financial, it really is clear for me that everything is connected to one another. The action of one will directly or create a ripple, albeit small, effect in the life of another.
There were other thoughts in my head. Was the black guy (former airforce) really being courageous or he took the easy way out by choosing to die (at least he saved another person’s life in the process)? It is often easy to judge when we do not see beyond what is obvious. We are sometimes forced to do things that we do not want. The question is do we really have a choice? The mayor could have agreed to take the place of 17 hostages if he really wanted to. It is difficult to be objective because everything we do is affected by our personal issues.
It is interesting to note that an individual can embody two seemingly clashing forces. Garber was a good, regular guy. We hoped that he is honest and principled. But for a moment, he became corrupted when he was faced with the need to provide for his family. Yet, he revealed that he really wanted to do right when he chose to personally run after the criminals (to redeem himself or not). It is also interesting to see how the perception of the people around him changed when they realized that he did what he did only because he wanted to send his kids to college. They forgave him the means (accepting the bribe) for the ends seemed noble.
I am trying to analyze Ryder but I am not sure I am successful. Was he really evil that he could easily kill people in order to get what he wants? There is contradiction when he allows someone to pee yet chooses to point a gun towards a woman who is with her son. Was he just being sarcastic? How can he kill a man in cold-blood because he can’t talk to the guy he wants and yet later allowed this same person to shoot him in the chest? Is Ryder simply scornful of religion or did he believe some of the things he said? Was he mocking God for he believed that it is man’s answer to poverty or did he have an issue with God when he discussed faith (or fate) and luck, purpose on earth (security woman to conduct the passengers to the platform), and simplicity of life (for the motorman to just do what he says)? When he said that he wanted to talk to God (pray) but was in fact overwhelmed by the increasing value of his gold, we know that he was being fake. Yet he kept on harping about owing God a death which made me sad. Because I believe what Garber believes… that we were blessed by God with a life. Up to the end, I am not quite sure if Ryder encourages us when he declares Garber as his hero for in fact, he might just have be like a puppeteer controlling a puppet so that he won’t need to go back to jail.
In all these, there is a regular guy caught within a situation yet he rises up to the demands of the events and becomes a hero. He goes back to his normal life which he learned to appreciate more (though he already knew its value because of what he did). Once more, we are encouraged to know that in each one of us, even when fall, there is a good side which would choose the right path. I enjoyed watching the movie. The action scenes, the play of words (financial terms), the bantering about issues that face the common man, the topics that haunts us who live in this modern day and age. More importantly, it is a movie that should make us think about our beliefs and perceptions.
