The Taking Of Pelham 1-2-3, anamorphic? (1 Viewer)

[Malcolm Cleugh]

I would be very suprised if these are anamorphic.
They were released by MGM in late 2002 at the same time as the UK release from MGM. This is definitely 2.35 letterbox and NOT anamorphic as I have it.

All versions have the same language tracks English, French, German, Spanish and Italian. Based on other MGM releases this looks like one of their pan European back catalogue releases. I can't see why it would be anamorphic in some countries and not others as MGM just use same disk master across Europe.

Edit : Added

The Japanese DVD is also almost certainly only letterboxed. CDJapan use a naming convention of 16:9 LB cinemascope if anamorphic whereas this is labelled as LB cinemascope. From what I have seen of their other titles the ommission of 16:9 in the description means it is letterboxed rather than anamorphic.

 

[RichardCrowther]

I should be noted that the European R2 version not only suffers from player-generated captions, but, to add insult to injury, one of the captions has accidentally been left off. Also, I beleive the R1 comes with a booklet the R2 doesn't have.

If you want this film as it was intended to be seen, it would seem that the R1 version is the only way to go at present.

 

[Micah Cohen]

Considering what just happened in London's Tube System, I think it's interesting that so many Brits are logging in about this film. I hope all is well there.

If you think about it, this film is really the grand-daddy of DIE HARD-like "hostage" dramas, and quite chilling to watch today, with the world in this state.

Didn't mean to get political, just wanted to observe that this film is still pretty current (even as a "1970s period piece").

Fun Story: The artist who painted the film poster for PELHAM, William Kunstler (also a famed painter of American Civil War paintings), lives near where I grew up on Long Island. After I was able to buy an original one-sheet, he was nice enough to sign it for me (and point out where on the original he hid his signature!). So, I have a signed original one-sheet hanging in my office.

And it is true that the book is just as good as the film, something you can very rarely claim.

Here's wishing for an "SE." (And I'd like to know more about the supposed "commentary" on the Japanese disc.)

MC

 

[John Hodson]

Life goes on; and I draw absoloutely no parallels here, this is just a brilliant heist movie with an added twist. The other, well, let's not even go there shall we?

I'm just steamed that this is another great film in MGMs vaults (now Sonys) that's been treated with more than a little contempt. I'd be amazed if the other European releases were anamorphic, and while I normally set my face against paying those breath-taking Japanese prices, even I, the king of parsimony, might be tempted if anamorphic and a commentary is in the offing.

 

[Martin Jeeves]

I liked this movie too. Mr Green!

 

[Gordon McMurphy]

Yeah, Pelham along with Thunderbolt & Lightfoot are the two MGM titles that I really want to see given new anamorphic transfers and perhaps some extras. Both are weak non-anamorphic discs from waaaaaay back in DVD History. Now that Sony are in control.

Joseph Sargent (NNDB listing), although 80, is still a prolific filmmaker, altough now in TV. As you may be aware, I love these old pro journeyman directors-for-hire. Sargent is a prime example of a veteran Hollywood craftsman who never became an auteur, most likely due to him not being an intellectual 'artiste'. But as you can see from his resume, he directed many well-crafted, highly popular film and TV movies. Pelham is his best film. Very 'French', perhaps inspired by Jean-Pierre Melville's Le Samouraï and Un Flic, in its cool austerity and subway locations. Sargent was born Giuseppe Danielle Sorgente and started making films at 11 in 8mm.

A similar film to Pelham is The Incident (1967, 20th Century Fox). I'd love to see this released on DVD.

 

[JohnEF]

In reading the above comments and only having seen the film on television some years ago I was reminded about an incident concerning the original novel that the film is based on. I must state that I am only repeating a story told to me by a candidate for a job (I worked in personnel in a hospital) and I have no independent verification but if true it shows what a dirty business publishing is.

This candidate during his interview stated he was a writer on the side and had written a novel that was accepted for publication. At the last minute the publisher (I can't remember who but it was a known name company located in NYC) decided it would not publish his book and returned the manuscripts.

Some months later a very similar book was published which had, according to the candidate, whole sections identical to his manuscript. The publisher denied his accusations but when he began a lawsuit they settled out of court for some thousands of dollars. The name of the book was The Taking of Pelham 1-2-3. If this story was true, the candidate not only lost money from sales but also a movie deal.

John

 

[RoyM]

Thanks to the OP (and others) for taking us down memory lane by bringing up memories of another great, gritty 1970's crime drama that I had forgotten about. I'm a HUGE fan of 1970's films, and I now realize that I must add The Taking of Pelham 1, 2, 3 to my collection. How it slipped by me all this time, I'll never know, but with so many great 1970's flicks on DVD, I guess it's bound to happen. I only just recently picked up The Three Days of the Condor, so slowly but surely I'm getting there.

Now how about seeing another favorite gritty 1970's crime drama finally get released on DVD: Report to the Commissioner. It has a very similar look and feel to TOP123 and would make a great double feature.

 

[Geoff_D]

I love this movie. David Shire's music is soooo cool, and seeing Hector Elizondo as a psychopathic thug is a treat. Great stuff from beginning to end, and I'm another who's longing for a better DVD version.

When I first spun the R1 I got a bit worried, because the credits sequence looks terrible. Then I realised that this sequence was duped (natch) and as soon as the credits are over the transfer settles down nicely.

"Gesundheit."

 

[Ted Todorov]

I saw it a couple of years ago with a brand new, beautiful 35mm print at the Film Forum. The elements have obviously not been lost, it's only the DVD that sucks bad.

I remember looking at some screen-caps from the DVD right after seeing the film, and the colors looked totally off as well. My advice: stay away from this AWFUL DVD until something better comes along.

Ted

 

[Kenny Neal]

Why stay away? It's a fantastic movie, and the current DVD is the best it has ever looked in any home-viewing format. Yes, it's non-anamorphic, but it's totally watchable.

Not buying the current disc will maybe save you long-shot double-dip, but I really doubt leaving it on the store shelf will do much to light a fire under Sony to restore the elements and release a special edition. I just don't see that being high on their list of priorities.

It's a great flick, and can be had for cheap. If you like the genre, I say get it.

 

[Ted Todorov]

Judging by the beautiful 35mm print I saw, there is NO restoration needed -- they just have to do a proper transfer.

Sure I agree with you that they may not redo the DVD anytime soon, but why reward their negligence? Has everyone really run out of good movies to watch, which happen to also have fine transfers, that we have to start rewarding studio laziness & incompetence?

Besides, if nothing else it will be out in some HD format in a few years. Have patience, and watch Point Blank in the mean time.

Ted

 

[Gordon McMurphy]

Ha ha! Yeah, Warner did a great job with one of my favourite films recently.

 

[Kenny Neal]

You make a good point Ted, and I do understand this is a dilemma in this forum-- studios should release films in their best possible condition. But is there a threshold beyond which principle needs to be balanced with pragmatism?

You're right, there are plenty of other great films to watch (Point Blank is a great example). But I want to watch this film, and to a reasonable point, the current DVD is my only option for the foreseeable future. Never again seeing a film I love because the studio dropped the ball just doesn't make sense.

You were fortunate to see a restored 35mm print in a theatre-- that's the ideal, of course. But for home viewing on DVD, we are already accepting less-than-optimal conditions, no matter how monster your set-up is. Since the acceptable presentation quality threshold is already lowered, each person has to decide what works for them.

I live near the AFI Silver Theatre, and had the chance to see Raiders of the Lost Ark the other week on the big screen. The print was in pretty bad shape for much of the opening sequence (it got better). It bugged me, but I wasn't going to leave or ask for my money back (if anyone had, I wouldn't hold it against them). But I wasn't going to pass on the chance to see one of my favorite movies in a theatre.

And just so you know I'm not a complete studio punk, despite my acceptance of this mediocre DVD (of a great movie), I do support OAR. There are DVDs I'd love to own, but are only available in pan & scan or open matte. So I pass on them and hope for a better version later on.

Anyway, I'm just trying to be realistic. If you love Pelham and want to see the film, I say get the DVD, enjoy it, and hope sales will spur an improved release. If you only want pristine presentation in your home theatre, than yeah, you'd better pass on this film (and many others), and select from a short list of DVDs that make optimal use of the format.

 

[Robert Saccone]

I'm glad I own the DVD no matter how lousy transfer is. This film almost seems forgotten as I never see it run on any broadcast channels nor any cable channels anymore so without the DVD I wouldn't be able to watch it all. It used to run fairly frequently in the NY area back in the eighties but no more. Also thanks for mentioning that the soundtrack is available. I had no idea. I ordered one and it just came. If you haven't heard the score except as part of the movie you haven't really heard it because all the background noise in the film does drown out some of the passages.

 

[Kenny Neal]

That great, Robert, I'm glad you are enjoying the soundtrack CD. It's a great and very listenable score away from the movie, and I think every bit as good (if not even more interesting) than Lalo Schifrin's work on Bullitt.

 

[Gordon McMurphy]

Remember: You don't have to buy the DVD of Pelham - just rent it. And then, when a new anamorphic edition comes out, buy that one!

 

[Robert Saccone]

For the 3 -4 times a year I watch this movie, the ~$12 purchase price makes more economic sense for me.

 

[Micah Cohen]

Glen Head. That's funny. I grew up in Glen Cove, watching PELHAM on channel five or channel 11, rainy Sunday mornings... My dad would be like, "Hey, come in here! That movie with the trains, where he says, 'Right this way, Monkeys,' is on!" That cracked him up.

He was sort of shocked to see it on DVD with me -- it was the first time we not only got to see the widescreen of it, but also all that %$#@!X*$#! New York City language!

If you live in New York you should be required to own and watch this film just for the sheer classic New York of it. You should get a copy of the DVD with your driver's license, or better yet with your monthly Subway or LIRR pass.

Buy the disc. It's cheap. And it'll never get SE'd.

"It's what it buys, Albert, not what it weighs."

MC

 

[Mark Edward Heuck]

I wouldn't say it'll NEVER be SE'd, but they're running out of living people to participate. Director Joseph Sargent is alive and well, but the only cast members of significance still around are Hector Elizondo, Julius Harris, Jerry Stiller, and Tony Roberts, and I don't know if they would have enough to fill a commentary.