Usually, when dealing with a film that has been remade a few times, I include the year of its release in the title to differentiate it from subsequent takes on the story. In the case of The Taking of Pelham One Two Three (1974), however, it has one thing the others do not: spelled-out numbers instead of numerals. It is a small thing, but it saves me a few keystrokes. It is not that I wish to expend as little energy as possible in writing this review. As a Catholic, I can appreciate any movie in which the good guys win and the bad guys lose, and I suppose I should apologize if that is a spoiler. Instead, call it an homage to a plot that moves along at a good pace, and hopefully that will translate into a solid review for you to read.

A routine afternoon on the New York City subway turns into a crisis when four armed men board a southbound subway train, thus beginning The Taking of Pelham One Two Three. Concealing their identities behind similar coats, hats, glasses, and false mustaches, and calling themselves Mr. Blue (Robert Shaw), Mr. Green (Martin Balsam), Mr. Grey (Héctor Elizondo), and Mr. Brown (Earl Hindman), they seize the front car, force the motorman from his controls, and uncouple it from the rest of the train. While the rear cars and their passengers are released, the hijackers hold those remaining in the lead car hostage in a tunnel beneath Manhattan. Blue, the calm and calculating leader, radios the transit command center to demand one million dollars in cash within one hour, threatening to execute a hostage for every minute the payment is late. Transit police lieutenant Zachary Garber (Walter Matthau), initially occupied with showing visiting Japanese officials around the control center, takes charge of communications with the hijackers. He and his colleagues struggle to understand how the men could possibly escape from a subway tunnel with the money, particularly when the train’s movements can be followed on a central display. Garber quickly realizes that at least one hijacker must know how to operate a subway train, and he asks fellow officer Lieutenant Rico Patrone (Jerry Stiller) to investigate former transit employees. The criminals, meanwhile, reveal their different temperaments. Blue is a former British military officer who approaches the crime with ruthless discipline, Green is a nervous former motorman suffering from a persistent cold, Brown follows orders, and Grey is an impulsive gunman whose appetite for violence threatens the plan. Their differences become deadly when transit supervisor Caz Dolowicz (Tom Pedi), furious at the disruption to subway service, ventures into the tunnel and refuses to retreat. Grey shoots and kills him, proving that the ransom threat is no bluff. Aboveground, the city’s ailing mayor (Lee Wallace) must decide whether to pay, while police officials mobilize officers and snipers around the stalled train. On the advice of his wife, the mayor authorizes the payment, but collecting and transporting so much cash within the deadline becomes an ordeal. A speeding police car carrying the ransom flips while trying to avoid a pedestrian, forcing the authorities to arrange another delivery. With the hour nearly expired, Garber buys precious time by misleading Blue about how close the money is to reaching the train. He also notices Green’s repeated sneezing over the radio and responds automatically with “Gesundheit,” an apparently insignificant exchange that will become crucial later. When officers finally carry the ransom down the tunnel, a police sniper fires prematurely, provoking a gun battle. Blue retaliates by killing a hostage, but the money is nevertheless handed over to the hijackers. The criminals divide the cash and demand that the subway’s electrical power be restored, the signals cleared, and the police kept away from the route toward South Ferry. Garber remains baffled by their apparent intention to ride the train into a station where they could easily be arrested. Unbeknownst to the authorities, the hijackers have arranged for the train to move without a driver by defeating the safety mechanism that ordinarily stops it when the operator releases the controls. They set the car in motion and slip into the tunnel, leaving the hostages aboard a runaway train. An undercover police officer (William Snickowski) among the captives escapes from the moving car and pursues the criminals. As the men prepare to discard their disguises and weapons, Grey refuses to surrender his gun, and Blue kills him rather than risk the operation. The undercover officer then shoots Brown and exchanges gunfire with Blue, while Green manages to escape through a street-level exit with his share of the money. Piecing together the train’s strange movements, Garber realizes that the hijackers have abandoned it and races back to the tunnel. He confronts Blue before the criminal can kill the undercover officer, but Blue refuses to surrender. Instead, he deliberately touches the electrified third rail and dies. The driverless subway car continues hurtling toward South Ferry, its terrified passengers powerless to stop it. At the terminal loop, however, the train’s excessive speed activates automatic safety equipment, bringing it to a violent but survivable halt. The surviving hostages are shaken and bruised, but the immediate danger has passed. Garber is not finished, however. The dead hijackers do not include the former subway operator whose expertise made the scheme possible, so he and Patrone work through a list of dismissed motormen. Their investigation leads to the apartment of Harold Longman, the man known as Mr. Green, who has returned home and hidden his share of the ransom. Harold maintains an indignant show of innocence as the officers question him, and Garber prepares to leave, promising to return with a search warrant. Just as he closes the door, Harold sneezes. Garber instinctively replies, “Gesundheit,” recognizes the sound from the radio conversations, and opens the door again. His knowing look at the startled Harold provides the film’s final moment and makes clear that the last hijacker’s luck has run out.

Though we do not get to see an arrest made at the end of The Taking of Pelham One Two Three, it is the kind of stylistic conclusion that makes the film a satisfying one. In a real sense, too, we always want to see justice done. During Mass today, my pastor’s homily offered a subtle reminder that such desires are not always ours to determine. His specific discussion concerned Church teachings on abortion and immigration, for example, and how what our Faith tells us and what society all but demands can sometimes come into conflict. He brought this up in connection with a story about Jesus found in the Synoptic Gospels, but not in John, concerning the payment of taxes. Seeking to trap Jesus, the Pharisees ask whether it is lawful to pay taxes to the Romans who are oppressing them. His response to render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s, silences the Lord’s critics, at least for the moment. You may be reading this and wondering how it applies to a heist movie. What I am referring to is how one might react to the film. I am sure there are some good people who would watch it and hope that the hijackers get away with their scheme. After all, the mayor’s office seems concerned about the safety of the hostages only insofar as there are potential votes to be gained from saving their lives. Further, one could sympathize with Harold, who had lost his job after being framed for a crime he did not commit. By our own standards, we might find ways to justify the criminals’ actions. However, to again echo my pastor, God holds us to a different standard. Was it terrible for the Jews of Jesus’ day to live under Roman rule? History tells us that it was, in fact, an oppressive arrangement. Yet Christianity ultimately outlasted the empire that persecuted its followers. In the film, Harold’s greed leads him into a scheme that leaves several people dead and results in his own presumed arrest. Those are the immediate consequences of his actions, but God’s justice is not necessarily the same as our own. We may sympathize with a person’s circumstances without excusing the choices he makes. Ultimately, it is God who will judge us all.

In the end, it is always good to see an original like The Taking of Pelham One Two Three. There are some dated moments, so be aware of potentially offensive material. Otherwise, this is about as tight a movie as you are going to see.