Posted by Josh Lipovetsky in 
In the Taking of Pelham 123, there is an intense psychological battle between 2 characters. It sounds similar to many movies, but there is one important difference: Both characters have done wrong. Walter Garber (Denzel Washington) has taken a bribe, and Ryder (John Travolta) has hijacked a train and taken many people hostage. Obviously, taking a bribe is less of a crime than killing people on a train, but both characters learned from their mistakes. Walter could take his lesson with him throughout his life, but for Ryder, it was too late.
Walter wanted what was best for his family. The train company offered him money to select their design, and he did. In this sense, taking a bribe is not a very moral thing to do. Garber’s life was heading down south. He was falling down rapidly, until he met Ryder.
Ryder was a white collar criminal, turned into blue collar after prison time. He sought revenge against New York, and the mayor. By hijacking the train, he knew what he was getting himself into. Ryder knew that his day was not going to end well, and he accepted it completely. When he talked to Garber about the bribe, Ryder gained great admiration for him, and for committing a crime in order to help those you love.
At the end of the day, when all was said and done, 2 bad characters (Garber and Ryder) grew tremendously over a common situation. Both woke up that morning with a certain degree of moral corruption. By the end of the day, that corruption had faded in both of them. Ryder had realized this before he died, and recognized Garber as his hero. Garber was brave enough to go out there and stop Ryder. Not many people would do the same, especially the kind of people who take bribes.
One more quality about Garber, is that he has his own way of doing things. If he feels that another persons method/strategy is not good, he will make his own. An example from the movie, is when his wife urged him to bring home 1 gallon of milk. Walter thought this was a bad idea, so he brought 1/2 gallon instead. This says a lot about his character. For one, he does not care what other people think of him. No matter how much people urge him to do something, he won’t do it if he doesn’t want to. He wanted to take the bribe for his children, but he did not want to buy the full gallon of milk. A very simple metaphor, with a very powerful message.
Originally, we think that the 2 main characters are opposites. However, throughout the film we find out that they have more in common with each-other. Both have committed a crime, and both are seeking redemption for their actions. The difference between Walter and Ryder is the way that they seek this redemption. One through violent actions, and one through a brave act. Both get their redemption in the end. One was willing to die for it, and one was willing to live for it.
More Articles!:
I Couldn’t agree more with everything you wrote. What a great piece of film! Great job with this article!
Erik, thank you very much! I really appreciate your comment. I had thought that I didn’t do a particularly good job on Pelham 123. For me, the film was very difficult to comprehend. It was a big challenge for me to write this article, and it feels great to know that you enjoyed reading it!
Thank you,
Josh Lipovetsky.
Thanx for the explainations, i did guess some of them but i didn’t catch the real goal of Ryder? Why was he checking the NYSE?
Why Ryder was looking at the NYSE
It was part of his ‘plan’, in terms of money. I believe that he wanted to disguise his true intentions, and pretend that earning money in the stock market was his #1 priority. So he was checking the NYSE to see how much money he had made due to the publicity of his threat. In reality, he knew that things weren’t going to turn out well for him. He really wanted to shake things up, in the city of New York. He felt that he had been wronged, and desperately wanted out of his life.