The Taking of Pelham One Two Three (1974) - Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau movies, with Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau, or one or the other

"There's no way you can get away with this. You are underground in a tunnel."

Director
Joseph Sargent

Cast
Walter Matthau - Lt. Zachary Garber
Robert Shaw - Mr. Blue
Martin Balsam - Mr. Green
Héctor Elizondo - Mr. Grey
Earl Hindman - Mr. Brown
James Broderick - Denny Doyle
Dick O'Neill - Correll
Lee Wallace - the Mayor
Tony Roberts - Deputy Mayor Warren LaSalle
Jerry Stiller - Lt. Rico Patrone
Tom Pedi - Caz Dolowicz

I'm shifting my attention from comedy films starring Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau, or one or the other, and watching a thriller crime movie starring Walter Matthau. Maybe I'll find one with Jack Lemmon. 

The crime drama "The Taking of Pelham One Two Three" stars Walter Matthau, Robert Shaw, Héctor Elizondo, Earl Hindman, and Jerry Stiller, and is based on the novel by John Godey. 

It's a somewhat underrated movie but still garnered two remakes. 

The movie begins as four shady guys trying to appear inconspicuous but certainly failing at it board a six-car New York City subway train, Pelham 1-2-3, as it stops at different platforms. They're carrying guns despite any New York gun laws that may have existed in 1974. 

Each of these guys are using code names. Mr. Blue (Robert Shaw) seems to be the ringleader of this clique of miscreants.
Mr. Green (Martin Balsam), Mr. Grey (Hector Elizondo) and Mr. Brown (Earl Hindman) make up the rest of the hijackers.

They take over the subway train and hold several people hostage all in one car. There happens to be an undercover cop among these hostages. 

The subway dispatch crew and everyone else involved in subway operations don't know at first why this train has suddenly stopped. 

Mr. Blue makes radio contact with New York City Transit Police lieutenant Zachary Garber (Walter Matthau) to let authorities know what they're planning and demand a ransom of $1 million. Mr. Blue demands that money be hand-delivered in exactly one-hour or else he will kill one hostage for every minute past that hour. 
Things go from dangerous to deadly as Mr. Grey shoots and murders transit supervisor Caz Dolowicz (Tom Pedi) as he approaches the stalled train unaware of the seriousness of the situation. 

The movie does a great job building the intensity and threat right from the beginning. The idea of four terrorists taking over a subway train seems ridiculous and unusual.  Where will these guys go? How can the possibly escape an underground tunnel? How can this possibly work. 

The story makes it work. It makes the entire insane scheme work! 

These guys separate the car with the 18 hostages from the train. 

Robert Shaw (left) as 'Mr. Blue' in 'The Taking of Pelham One Two Three

Then they keep in contact via radio with the subway dispatch along with Garber.

Matthau plays it rough and unshaken as Robert Shaw's character cooly but angrily tries to get what he wants while threatening the lives of the innocent people on the train. 

The movie is both realistic without feeling forced in the least. The movie pulls it off amazingly. 

On top of that, I took interest in what was happening or going to happen to the characters. I was glued. 

There was quite a handful of danger films set in all manner of transportation - The Poseidon Adventure, the Airport movies, even the elevator in Towering Inferno. 

The movie does follow a bit of a formula, but as I mentioned, it pulls off the scenario with much believability and interest. Though the characters seem a bit too cut-out and typical, they still manage to be believable as well, representing a different faction of New York City (authority, government, and pedestrians) and how they would react in such a situation. 

The hostage situation is only part of the premise. The story is just as much about their plan to hold a subway train, underground, with not much of a way out, and how they plan on pulling it off and escaping. It's a far-fetched plan, but the genius is that they're able to make it work and not appear so far-fetched after all. 

It's pulled off masterfully, with intensity that snowballs logically. 

I get the impression this movie is saying something about the leadership of New York City at the time, and how inept and impulsive it is. So much so, that it takes hardly any effort for four thugs with guns to hold a subway car of all things for ransom. Based on how the movie depicts the New York City mayor and even NYPD, these guys could just as easily hold an elevator car for ransom and get away with. Well, in this movie everyone wants something from the ordeal. 

Even the mayor's wife tells him, “If you ransom those hostages, you’ve got 18 sure votes.” 

Walter Matthau doesn't strike me as a leading man, though he's been a leading man in several movies. It's not that he couldn't pull off being a leading man. Far be it from me to dare suggest such a thing about Walter John Matthau.

It's that Matthau has a common man persona in this role. I was hoping to see Matthau's character really let the criminals have it, at least verbally and really grind his anger and frustration into these hostage takers. He does put of a no-nonsense, matter-of-fact performance. And he's perfectly suited for this role. 

I didn't dislike his performance. However, kept thinking he was about to tap into his role as Oscar Madison from "The Odd Couple" and that his comedic self would appear unwillingly through the slits. But shame on me for questioning Matthau's acting know-how and not giving him the respect he deserves.

Matthau is the ordinary man. He looks ordinary. He talks ordinarily. He still has some charm despite all that. He's relatable. He loves women! I love women, too, so I can relate. 

Dick O'Neill (left) and Walter Matthau. 

He's the guy you'd see on the bus or subway in the morning or at the end of the day, reading a paper and just waiting to be through with tomorrow, too. Seeing a guy like that makes me wonder what his ambitions are. What are his worries? What are his likes and interests? What mistakes has he made? What's motivating this guy? What has this man seen in his past? What has he accomplished? Where did he fail? What do his friends, his wife, his children think of him? Who did he piss off? This fellow looks ordinary, but he could be a king in exile for all I know. That wouldn't surprise you because there's something under that drab and callous looking exterior that's likeable. It's maybe even admirable. That stranger doesn't want to be bothered, though. But unlike that guy on the bus heading to work or heading home just like he does every day, Monday through Friday, Walter entered a field where he wants to be, and he's still bothered. Walter is a favorite actor of mine; in case you missed my previous Walter Matthau (and Jack Lemmon) reviews. 

All in all, I enjoyed his performance in "The Taking of Pelham One Two Three" but I wouldn't mark it among my favorite roles of his, nor would I include it in, say, my top five Matthau performances. 

As for the movie itself, it's fantastic. It stands out to me among other disaster movies of the period, which seemed to be the trend of the time, each one seemingly trying to out-disaster the other disaster movies. "The Towering Inferno" (1974), "The Poseidon Adventure" (1972), "Earthquake" (1974) "Rollercoaster" (1977), "Avalanche" (1978) and those Airport movies starting with 1970's "Airport." Jack Lemmon, by the way, stars in the second film of that series, "Airport '77." 

By the way, since I previously mentioned it, "The Taking of Pelham One Two Three" got a remake in 2009 with Denzel Washington and John Travolta, which I haven't seen, but hopefully will at some point. It received rather mediocre reviews.

There's also a 1998 made-for-tv remake starring Edward James Olmos, Vincent D'Onofrio, and Donnie Wahlberg.