MovieChat Forums > The Taking of Pelham One Two Three (1974) Discussion > That Great Propulsive Opening Credit The...

That Great Propulsive Opening Credit Theme by David Shire

posted 4 years ago by ecarle (14979)
5 replies | jump to latest

When you want to talk about opening credit theme music that really LAUNCHES a movie...with a certain excitement that gets you into the story before the first frame of the story appears on film...there are a lot of good choices.

Bernard Herrmann gave Hitchcock quite a few like this: The Man Who Knew Too Much(56 version), Vertigo, North by Northwest, Psycho.

I'd single out John Williams themes for Superman, Star Wars, and Jaws...and even The Towering Inferno.

And perhaps the cool Lalo Schfrin "thriller-jazz" music that opens "Bullitt."

But high on the list can be and should be:

David Shire's opening credit music for The Taking of Pelham 123...the original (accept no substitutes.)

Its a movie about bad guys hijacking a subway car underground in NYC and holding 18 people hostage for ransom. Its ABOUT the NYC subway system and about rough and tough and grimy(but caring) NYC in 1974.

And the music knows this. Its got a percolating jazz beat cut perfectly to the sound (in music only) of...a subway car!...chug-chug-chugging down the track in locomotive syncopation. But the music builds on this basic motif...its thick and muscular and driving. There are horns that suggest honking(NYC bravado) and a good touch of "Shaft"-like urban beat, too. (Tre 70s.)

We're rolling down the track with this jaunty music as the credits play against a black background. No shots of the city to get in the way to listening to this great jam.

And...all the way at the end...as the movie reaches its absolutely perfect final note of comedy(after movie of high tension and some deaths)....the theme comes up again, to make us laugh a little and then to luxuriate in the memory of this great thriller, this great New York movie, and this great reminder of a time when hangdog ol' Walter Matthau could believably anchor a suspense action picture.

Best of all: when the music ends(in the very last seconds of the movie), it ENDS. Big and brash and full of bravado....like the movie itself.

PS. I do not believe that they used this theme for the Denzel/Travolta remake. I don't know if they used it for the TV movie in between the two theatricals.

[–] christomacin (4655) 4 years ago

I agree, it's a fantastic piece of music. As I recall, in the remake the Martin Balsam character is killed very early in the film, meaning the original's memorable ending isn't going to happen. I can't even remember how the remake ended... so bad idea. Travolta's version of the Shaw character is an unhinged hot head instead of the cool, collected professional in the original film. All of the changes from the original are ill-advised and don't work that well. Since the remake was a post-911 film, naturally New York City and the mayor were positively portrayed, in stark contrast to the laced-in-acid cynicism of the original film. Now, we're right back to the cynicism of the 70's - perhaps ever more so. If they remake it again the hijacking will be a "false flag attack by the Deep State". LOL

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

I agree.

[–] ecarle (14979) 3 years ago

As I recall, in the remake the Martin Balsam character is killed very early in the film, meaning the original's memorable ending isn't going to happen.

--

That's right, it doesn't. I'm not sure if Denzel's face in the doorway would have quite had Matthau's hangdog comedy deadpan. However, the "in between" TV movie remake elected to re-do the exact same ending...with TWO people's faces in the doorway as TWO cops: Edward James Olmos and Lorraine Bracco(Dr. Melfi from The Sopranos.) It was still a cute ending but...Matthau was The Man. A very particular, 70's kind of movie star. We'll not see (or hear) his likes again.

---

I can't even remember how the remake ended... so bad idea. Travolta's version of the Shaw character is an unhinged hot head instead of the cool, collected professional in the original film.

---

I like Denzel Washington and I like John Travolta. Both are stars who are/were willing to "tarnish their brand" a bit by taking big budget programmers for the cash. (Denzel, who can do Shakespeare and Broadway, has hung in there as a star, Travolta fell again after a comeback with Pulp Fiction.)

But both Denzel and Travolta are defeated by a script that takes the taut, cool simplicity of the original and complicates their two characters with all sorts of messy backstory that, rather than improving the movie, makes it more ridiculous and irritating.

CONT

[–] ecarle (14979) 3 years ago

And indeed, Travolta replaces Shaw's ice-cold psychotic with an unhinged screaming wacko routine that seems to insult the entire TONE and the entire POINT of the original, which was anchored by Matthau and Shaw as two deadpan professionals pushed to emotional upset due to Shaw's merciless madness and Matthau's regular-guy empathy. (Plus tht great score.)

---All of the changes from the original are ill-advised and don't work that well.

---

Exactly. Giving Denzel's character some past corruption just sort of got in the way and made the story into something it could not support: a character study. Travolta, too, was given a backstory for the cops to "solve," like a mystery, but it was a bit "trendy." (He's a former Wall Street whiz gone broke, to prison, and crazy with vengeance.)

Luis Guzman is a great modern character guy, but in for Balsam he was given far less to do and killed off early. There is no substitute for Hector Elizondo's wise cracking psycho who was "kicked out of the Mafia" for HIS madness. (He and admittedly non-descript hijacker Earl Hindeman were traded in for two extremely terrifying and big foreign brothers -- I'll admit they were scary dudes, but the story lost the humorous edge of the original -- they are monsters who don't speak English, no reasoning with them.)

Rather as with ANOTHER Denzel thriller remake -- The Manchurian Candidate -- the modern Pelham 123 takes a fairly simple and straightforward thriller and gussies it up with so many plot twists and character quirks that the original pretty much disappears, replaced by a "gimmick machine" in each case.

CONT

Since the remake was a post-911 film, naturally New York City and the mayor were positively portrayed, in stark contrast to the laced-in-acid cynicism of the original film. Now, we're right back to the cynicism of the 70's - perhaps ever more so. If they remake it again the hijacking will be a "false flag attack by the Deep State". LOL

[–] ecarle (14979) 3 years ago

Worst:

In the original, when Matthau and Shaw finally meet -- in the subway tunnel -- their confrontation is cool, quiet and a bit witty, and the ice-cold military man Shaw does something quietly in character to end the confrontation perfectly.

In the remake, Denzel and Travolta spend a LOT of time together for the climax, yelling at each other , stretching out a script that refuses to "end it" as neatly as with Matthau/Shaw. Its overlong, overdone, overacted(by Travolta)...just an insult to Shaw and Matthau.

Not bad:

It was fun to see James Gandolfini, a couple of years removed from The Sopranos, playing a sympathetic Mayor of New York City (the mayor was a flu-ridden goofball in the original.) HE was a star , too; you can't say that the remake of Pelham skimped on the major names. (In a great side moment, someone asks Mayor Gandolfini if an affair he had with a hot chick that scandalized his administration was worth it; Gandolfini charges around dealing with the hijacking and then yells out: "YES!")

As I recall, the ending of the new Pelham was not as sharp and witty as the original, things just sort of wound down(Gandolfini was part of the ending) and a small joke about getting home to the wife ended it.

Also: no great theme at the end. Or at the beginning, either.