'Why didn't we use a helicopter?'
Because the writer is a dumbass
sharethat bugged me the whole time too.. especially when they got in the accident.
share
MovieChat Forums > The Taking of Pelham 123 (2009) Discussion > 'Why didn't we use a helicopter?'
But the writer wore that line. :-)
They didn't use one because that wasn't used in the original movie and was part of the story. If they zipped over in a few minutes it wouldn't have the relation to the original movie.
Have to disagree. The original didn't have cell phones and web cams, etc. either but they were in this one.
IMO, not using a helicopter was a HUGE WTF. If they wanted to preserve some of the tension (would the money make it in time?), they could have adjusted how long it took to get the money ready and when they finally agreed to pay and otherwise tinkered with the timeline such that the helicopter's flight would have arrived -- technically -- just a little late like the "ground method" did.
And there are at least a dozen things they could have had happen to the copter to add further tension drama (e.g., it experiences mechanical failure part way there and has to emergency land, forcing the $ to be carried the REST of the way by police car... SOMEthing for Pete's sake). That would have eliminated that gaping plot hole because they would have at least TRIED to use the helicopter.
Instead, I imagine this bit of dialogue at a writers' conference:
Writer1: Won't many in the audience question why the city doesn't use a helicopter?
Writer2: Yeah, but I got a date tonight. F--k it, just have the mayor ask some flunkie why a helicopter wasn't used. That will let the audience know/think we're in on it with them. Bye!
I doubt it, screenplays are written and re-written, draft after draft. It's not like they are working at some minimum wage job and just dash off anything to claim they are done. Screenwriting is a very tough business to make a living and if they aren't great at their craft they don't work again. The truth is, the screenplay was done by Brian Helgeland with a huge list of credits.
The whole thing was a wink and a nod to the original. Just like in the Superman movie where it shows him going to a phone booth and there isn't one available that is enclosed like it was in the old days.
They didn't use one because that wasn't used in the original movie and was part of the story. If they zipped over in a few minutes it wouldn't have the relation to the original movie.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't buy that when there was no "Gezunheid" moment or suicide on the live rail, two of the most memorable incidents in the original.
How did the kid talk to his girlfriend ("I love you soooo fcking much!") after the battery on his laptop died?
Why didn't they just have the SWAT team shoot Travolta and his guys before they started offing people?
Would the price of gold increase 150x if someone hijacked a subway car? Really?
Any my final question, was this remake really necessary?
Mwuhahahahhaaa!
Yeah, I had all the same questions. This is the only one I could come up with a reasonable answer for:
Why didn't they just have the SWAT team shoot Travolta and his guys before they started offing people?
We saw the snipers had a lock on Ryder and Ramos, but did they on the other two? It was the big guy in the back who killed the first person - the cop. I don't recall seeing him in their sight.
How did the kid talk to his girlfriend ("I love you soooo fcking much!") after the battery on his laptop died?
I couldn't really tell. Was he talking to her via the computer or cell phone? I thought he had an earpiece. If via computer mic, how the hell was he talking to her from across the train - where he was in a seat and the computer was on the other side of the train on the floor.
“If they let Jack do it his way the show would be just 12” – snorgtees.com share
i think the kid had a blu tooth. possible mistake done on part of the filmmakers to increase dramatic tension.
SWAT is only used if there are no other options. They didn't really have any eyes or ears in the train car. the scenarios are endless. Another HT, they don't know about, a bomb etc.
I thought about that in the remake and in the original as well. Meh. Cool car crashes though.
shareye but the guy from the sopranos asked his staff why didn't we use a helicopter and they all looked at him like oh we never thought of that which i personally thought was hilarious and why i came on this board in the first place plus the car driving across town to get the money there in time was pretty cool
shareAnd the fact that a procedure failure occurred doesn't make it a plot hole. Mistakes are made in real life too.
shareI didn't think the helicopter was a big deal at all. Its not like they have those helicopter landings everywhere. And the moment they actually show the cops leaving with the money and the time they get there wasn't even that long anyways. The cops leave the brooklyn reserve with 21 minutes left, so its not like they took a full hour just driving the money around.
shareI thought that line was intended to show the Mayor as the knob he had already shown himself to be up until that point in the film - it showed he clearly hadn't been involved in the decision-making before then so although it was a good idea to have used a helicopter it came too late
Hmmmm puzzler. Bit of a puzzle.
It was meant to be a joke. It wasn't a plot hole.
share