In this post-9/11 world, not only has more attention been given to infrastructure and mass transit, but technology has also evolved in a way that allows us to keep constant watch over it all like never before, and this year’s The Taking of Pelham 123 plays up that element to great effect. Cell phones, security cameras, wireless laptops are everywhere, giving us the ability to lay eyes on just about any corner of our world, making the concept of a hijacked subway train in a tunnel under the city both far more ominous than it was in 1974. When every move you make on the streets is prone to being recorded, what better place to go than underground? There’s no reception to call for help and even if you could, there’s no help nearby. Or at least that’s the idea.

In Pelham 123, lowly dispatcher Walter Garber (Denzel Washington) is put to the test by a group of men who’ve commandeered a subway train on his watch. The mastermind behind it all, “Ryder” (John Travolta), makes his demands for money and threatens to kill to start killing passengers hostage if it doesn’t arrive by his deadline, all the while laying out a moral justification for his actions. The premise seems simple enough and unfortunately, like a hundred movies we’ve already seen before. Kudos to screenwriters Brian Helgeland and David Koepp for trying to make the story more relevant and infusing the villain with a bit more motive, but in the end, this remake zigs when it probably should have zagged.

Without fail, Pelham 123 is almost entirely undone by Scott’s notorious visual style. Full of technique, including overcranking, undercranking, whip pans, quick cuts, zooms, dolly shots, freeze frames–just about every camera trick know to man–the film borders on overload. Just making it through the opening scenes feels like a challenge unto itself and yet adds no extra momentum to the setup of the story. Not that Scott’s seizure-inducing aesthetic has ever added anything to his films in recent years, but Pelham 123 is probably the one film that suffers the most because of it, and it took going back to the original to understand why.

Based on the John Godey’s 1973 novel of the same name, the writing in 1974′s The Taking of Pelham One Two Three doesn’t pull any punches, not just for its references to women as “broads”, Japanese visitors as “Chinamen” or even an English lilt as that of a “fruitcake”, but for also giving us a revealing look behind the scenes of subways and how they operate. We get to see the chain of command and how various city offices interact together, from the mayor to the transit cops in the tunnels. Characters are painted with broad strokes, but it’s the performances by Walter Matthau, Robert Shaw, Jerry Stiller and even a devilish turn by Hector Elizondo that bring them to life.

With steady direction by Joseph Sargent, Pelham One Two Three also establishes a confident visual style that still feels contemporary even to this day. Veteran cinematographer Owen Roizman (The French Connection, Network) builds a palette and look that’s been seen in a hundred other films by now and aside from some vehicles and fashion choices, the film looks like it could have been made in the last decade or so.

All things considered, the very idea that someone would hijack a subway train seemed ridiculous in 1974 and for the most part Pelham One Two Three plays it as such–to a fault. With Shaw’s Mr. Blue as a calm, professional villain, witness how dispatcher Correll (Dick O’Neill) reacts to the situation.

Flash forward to 2009 and the exchange is very different. These days we know you can’t berate and underestimate a potential madman who takes hostages no matter what his demands are. Watch how Garber sensibly handles Ryder’s demands.

Personally, I’d say that the newer version plays out more like we might imagine it really would on Garber’s end, but Ryder’s demeanor, rife with cliché and megalomania, throws the scene off balance. Looking at the two films side by side, you can see how the tension in the scene is different and how it affects the rest of the film. In the original, Mr. Blue isn’t amiable or openly engaging–he’s not anyone’s pal. He and his men are a mysterious bunch and you never just assume that they might actually succeed with their plan. In the remake, because Ryder is such a chatterbox, we see that he’s on top of things from the very beginning, throwing all suspense out the window and making us wait for the ending when we just know he’ll be caught because that’s what the formula calls for.

One thing’s for certain, The Taking of Pelham One Two Three is a story about New York to it’s core. Depending on your experience, one of these two movies is a more accurate vision of the city and its people–either it’s a den of hard-nosed, politically-incorrect wise-acres or it’s a claustrophobic, fast-paced metropolis that revolves around politics and money. Neither of these are entirely true, of course, but maybe the latter works best for the story at hand. In that regard, Tony Scott’s Pelham 123 is probably more technically accurate but it foregoes all the charm and grit of the original in favor of visual excess. Witty banter and even the classic “Gesundheit!” moments are now replaced with flashy camerawork and all-too-familiar action movie tropes. If you’re interested in seeing a veteran filmmaker who still hasn’t learned to embrace the story he’s telling but rather insists on pushing the envelope even when it’s unnecessary, then by all means, check out Pelham 123. Otherwise, see the original and if nothing else, look back on a time when a businessman wearing a hat was the last thing on your mind when you took the train–or so the New York Metro Transit Authority would like you to believe.