Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.

Lachlan Coulson This is a gorgeous movie made by a gorgeous spirit.

Darin One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

writtenbymkm-583-902097 Okay, first the good things. Robert Shaw was good as the main hijacker. Walter Matthau was fairly good as the subway cop who was frustrated by everything (including, I'd guess, the plot). Photography was good. I liked the musical score. Now the bad things. SPOILERS AHEAD. The whole plot boils down to this: bad guys hijack a subway car filled with riders who become hostages, and demand one million dollars or they will murder the hostages. That's it. That's the plot. And it just does not work. I knew from the very beginning that the hostages would never be murdered. I knew from the start that the hijackers would not get away with it -- either they would wind up dead or arrested, or they'd lose the money. That was the entire basis of the "suspense." So for me, there was no suspense. This made the entire remainder of the movie an exercise in futility. I can hear the director and producers saying, "How many different complications can we stick in this movie to keep the audience worried? Let's have the hijackers demand a million dollars in an impossibly short period of time, so that it's obvious it won't be delivered and all the hostages will be killed. Let's have the mayor sick and weak and stupid and unable to make a simple decision, unable to decide to pay the ransom and save the lives of innocent hostages. Let's make the main hijacker (Robert Shaw) really really smart, but so stupid that he makes one impossible demand after another, despite the fact that what he supposedly wants is the million bucks. When the cops finally try to deliver the ransom, let's put every conceivable roadblock in their way, literally, to make it appear that they will never reach the subway on time. Meanwhile, let's inject a lot of absurd "comic relief," like maybe having some Japanese people visit and be treated in a racist manner. When the hijackers finally leave the subway car with their money, let's not end the movie there, let's have the subway car become a runaway car, so now the audience has to worry about whether they will all be killed when the car crashes. Let's not end it there, either -- let's have a shootout at the subway corral, and then the hero (Walter Matthau) can get the drop on the bad guy (Robert Shaw). No, wait, what if the bad guy refuses to give up, and instead electrocutes himself on the notorious third rail? Wow! No, wait, let's not end it yet -- what if one hijacker is still at large, the one who sneezes all the time, and Walter Matthau tracks him down and thinks he's innocent until he sneezes? Bottom line, I can't believe I'm in such a tiny minority here, I can't believe people were entertained by this stuff. One of the most irritating, unbelievable, and annoying "thrillers" I've ever seen.

Scott LeBrun Joseph Sargent was a well respected director of mostly television, but he also helmed a number of feature films over the years. This may very well be his best. (I won't hold "Jaws: The Revenge" against him.) It's a masterfully directed, well plotted crime thriller, and one of the finest of that genre to come out of NYC in the 1970s. It doesn't boast wall to wall action, instead focusing on telling an actual story, but when the action scenes do take place, they're utterly gripping and nail biting. Best of all, the movie does have a good sense of humor, paying itself off in a couple of ways.Robert Shaw, Martin Balsam, Hector Elizondo, and Earl Hindman play a quartet of ruthless men who hijack an NYC subway train and hold almost 20 passengers hostage. Their demand? One million dollars in cash (back then, it would have been a lot of money), to be delivered in ONE HOUR. Otherwise, the passengers start getting executed. Intrepid Transit Authority lawman Zachary Garber (Walter Matthau) is the calm, level headed Everyman hero who tries to appease the bad guys while ensuring the hostages come out of the situation unscathed.Sargent and his top notch filmmaking team (including such luminaries as cinematographer Owen Roizman and editor Jerry Greenberg) craft a well paced bit of entertainment, enhanced by a dynamic and forceful music score by David Shire. There are some fun quips among the dialogue, and the performances are all right on the money. There's no scenery chewing here - even loose cannon Mr. Grey (Elizondo) is fairly low key while causing an overt amount of trouble for his co-conspirators. Shaw is a smooth villain, while Matthau is as amiable as he's ever been. In addition, there's a steady parade of stars and familiar character actors filling out a great many roles: James Broderick, Dick O'Neill, Lee Wallace, Tom Pedi, Beatrice Winde, Jerry Stiller, Nathan George, Kenneth McMillan, Doris Roberts, Julius Harris, Alex Colon, Michael Gorrin, Christopher Murney, Sal Viscuso, Bill Cobbs, Joe Seneca, and Tony Roberts. Most impressive!"The Taking of Pelham One Two Three" is a truly great thriller, one that reels you in early on and scarcely takes a breath until its satisfying, blatantly humorous denouement.Remade for TV in 1998, and for theaters in 2009.10 out of 10.

edwagreen How did these 3 misfits first meet to plan such a dastardly action? I just kept wondering about that as I continued to watch this engrossing film regarding terror on the subways.A New Yorker can really identify with some of the characters here- foul mouthed, crass, abusive, but all working together for the common good of trying to save the 18 hostages, innocent victims, all of whom happened to be in the wrong train at the wrong time.Robert Shaw is a standout in a cold-chilling performance as an indifferent conspirator, who shows no regard for human life yet alone decency. Marty Balsam is the former MTA motorman angered over his dismissal and the third culprit, Hector Elizondo, is literally along for the ride, only to be victimized by the vicious Shaw character.A totally realistic view of New York with a mayor concerned with sagging poll numbers and how this event can affect that. Doris Roberts has little to do in the role of his wife.Walter Matthau is the hero transit officer official, who can be common but has the brains to ultimately outwit the culprits.A memorable film showing the darker side of New York City.

Wizard-8 I found an old copy of the original John Godey novel when I was a teenager, and after reading it I immediately sought out the first filmed version of the novel. I remember thinking the movie followed the novel fairly well. Decades later, I found a DVD copy of the movie in my local library, and decided to give it another look. While my memories of the novel have faded, I thought the movie was still a great thriller. There isn't a wasted moment - it gets right to business very quickly, and the rest of the movie unfolds at a brisk (but wisely not TOO fast) speed. The cast is very good, with Robert Shaw finding the right tone to portray a bad guy who is very smart and dangerous. Walter Matthau also does well in a mostly serious role, though he adds some subtle humor to his words on occasion to make sure the movie doesn't get too serious for its own good. Definitely a lot better than the remake with John Travolta, which was too slick and loud for its own good.