Unstoppable: Review By slysnide

But it was! Director Tony Scott released his thrill a minute remake of "Pelham 1 2 3" (2009) and then ten weeks later went into production on another ensemble train thriller. Or at least from a subway train to an actual train. Except this time there are no hostages, no hostiles, no guns, no demands by hoodlums, just a runaway 'ghost' train that's miles away from approaching a sharp hairpin turn it can't make...with numerous cars of radioactive material aboard!

Sounds exciting? Well, I myself wasn't too sure, given that if the railway is cleared of traffic, then the train could theoretically be fine until it hits the hairpin turn. Fortunately, this point was never brought up. And the tension was kicked up a few notches by featuring some dangerously close calls. Yet with the yardmaster (Rosario Dawson) stuck in the yard, and a few relatively unreliable guys attempting to chase down the train (Lew Temple/T.J. Miller/Ethan Suplee), then whom does that leave us with as our main characters?

Enter veteran railroad engineer Frank Barnes (Denzel Washington). An old timer type of guy who uses old tricks rather than complex calculations to solve problems. On this particular morning when Triple Seven ghosts down the track, Frank is training rookie conductor Will Colson (Chris Pine) whom is disliked due to the perks he gets for being the son of someone important--the classic awkwardness for rookies and veterans--The problem of course is that they're towing a few extra cars then they should have been due to Will's miscalculation, and are on the verge of disaster with Triple Seven racing down the track.

To kick up the tension and suspense, Tony did a few things. Some good like Triple Seven being under full power with no airbrakes, or the business thinking VP's (Kevin Dunn) good and horrible plan to stop the train. But also the ever annoying emotional anchor, being Will's marriage problems, which by the way have nothing to do with the plot, and can't change their situation in any way, shape, or form. So why have it? The classic rookie/veteran dilemma is enough, so why not expand on that to get the duo on their nerves in their train rather than employing some totally unnecessary romantic issues? Why? Well, the answer is simple: Studio Execs demand it. Frequently they insist on adding such ridiculous things into films because they think it'll garner a bigger audience (no matter how shallow it is) or make the hero more likeable. Always disregarding the fact that in films like these, you don't need such dilemmas to make your heroes likeable or sympathetic. They're two guys on each other's nerves in the path of a runaway train with nowhere to go. How much more sympathy can you give them that's related to the plot?

Of course, the whole film can't hinge on avoiding collision, so the notion of the heroes coming up with a dangerous plan to stop the runaway train always helps. Typically in such films the squabbling duo are in danger for half your story, then unite to place themselves in bigger danger to outwit the menace that they're not responsible for. And this is no different, except with the aforementioned notches to the tension--excluding the romance--with a decent runtime that doesn't drag allows it all to flow nicely. For example, Tony's previous film entered climax mode 59 minutes in. Whereas here you never feel that cause there's always some new problem lurking, be it the outlandish ways to stop the train, the squabbling of the yardmaster & VP affecting the chances of a safe outcome, and the heroes debating their plan of action in a more civilized manner, despite being very much on the fly.

Oddly enough, the "inspired by true events" text in the beginning is very accurate. More so than most times, as an incident of the same nature occurred in the same way with a train traveling 51mph for 66mi in 2001, carrying the same toxic chemical, albeit not as flammable as played up in the film. Add in a few reasonable changes to notch up tension in the film such as the NTSB not taking months to review an incident before releasing reports publicly; creating the back story of the rookie conductor & veteran engineer; creating the argumentative relationship between the VP & the yardmaster; add in a few dangerous outcomes, and you've pretty much got the story in a nutshell.

So this was worth a Netflix, and about just as good as Tony's previous effort with "Pelham 1 2 3," in that he and the team exceeded in writing, pacing, editing, and photography. The only ridiculous part about the whole thing was Denzel Washington's outlandish salary of $16,000,000 or just a bit less in comparison to Director Tony Scott's mere $6,000,000.