MovieChat Forums > The Taking of Pelham 123 (2009) Discussion > John Travolta's performance

John Travolta's performance

posted 14 years ago by drjimmyjam
41 replies | jump to latest

Travolta's 'Ryder' was a spoilt whining, winging, little infant in need of a bitch slap or two in comparison to Robert Shaw's Superior, thorough, intelligent 'headmaster' type of villain. Wow. If your villain/antagonist whatever just shouts and acts impatiently throughout the whole damn film, then he's not in control. We need to feel he's in control of the situation as it 'ups' the danger, and makes it less likely the hero will prevail, which makes a good ending so rewarding when he inevitably does. This is BASIC *beep* I like John Travolta, but on the evidence of this tripe, he needs to retire.
Shame.

[–] raythorne2005 13 years ago

Both me and my Dad liked his performance. He can act so well as a bad guy, it's freaky.

[–] surround_sound 13 years ago

i put this down to bad writing it's as if you say mofo you are evil and if you don't say mofo you are not. so you get the mofos in early so people know.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Vytis 12 years ago

I thought he played a very good psychopath

[–] RoscoeSD 12 years ago

Travolta's performance was bad. I didn't like it. 'Nuff said.

Good job by Gandolfini though. Damn, do I miss the Sopranos.

[–] Doc110894 11 years ago

[–] charlotteelizabetth91 10 years ago

Every time he said mother******, i cringed.

[–] grrrdevin 10 years ago

As another comment said, Travolta's Ryder seemed like a pretty accurate depiction of a pure psychopath/sociopath. Otherwise I prefer Shaw's take a million times over.