Bryce Zabel's MOVIE SMACKDOWN!

The Taking of Pelham 123 (2009) -vs- Crimson Tide (1995)

The Smackdown.  People trapped inside the cold steel of big machines. Check. Ticking clocks relentlessly counting down to disaster. Check. Battles of will between A-list actors. Check again. Director Tony Scott must have known he had a good thing in 1995's "Crimson Tide" and was looking to repeat it with this year's re-make of the classic "The Taking of Pelham 123."  As far as action directors go, Scott (brother of Ridley) is in the very elite. He makes movies that are almost always worth the price of a ticket at the cineplex. The best are tense, scary, hard-edged ones where his screenwriters give him high stakes and the dialogue to support them (often for Denzel Washington) and then he paces the hell out of the film itself. We have a real fight on our hands with some Scott-on-Scott violence.

The Challenger. The 2009 "The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3" takes its inspiration from the 1974 film "The Taking of Pelham One Two Three" which took its inspiration from the same novel written by John Godey. In the hands of current screenwriter Brian Helgeland, the central idea -- bad guys board a New York subway and take the passengers hostage while demanding a huge ransom -- remains the same. He's given us a few new twists, like the lead hijacker, Ryder (John Travolta) is now an ex-con and the negotiator, Walter Garber (Denzel Washington) is now a transit executive. Then director Scott bends and twists it through pacing, tone and special effects. In this film, Travolta drives the action but it's Washington who gets put on the spot in one particularly tough moment when, without benefit of waterboarding or other enhanced interrogation techniques, the hijacker gets the negotiator to confess to a crime of his own. It's one of those "what would you do" moments and particularly effective as played by Washington.

Moon (2009) -vs- Solaris (2002)

THE SMACKDOWN.  Spending a weekend in, say, Fresno can challenge your sanity so just imagine what spending three years, alone, on the Dark Side of the Moon could do to scramble your sense of reality. "Moon" is the latest little film that could -- made for $5-million -- about a very big idea. It comes to us direct from commercial director Duncan Jones who, helpfully I'm sure, is David Bowie's son. Dad's "Space Oddity" came out in 1969, the year that Neil Armstrong did the original moonwalk, and the year after "2001: A Space Odyssey" was released and blew the minds of a generation of stoned college students.  Besides being compared to the granddaddy of science-fiction, Jones's sci-fi thriller also references such films as "Silent Running," "Alien," "Outland," and even, in one key element, "Blade Runner." We've thrown our share of space films into the Smackdown ring against Stanley Kubrick's masterpiece," but it seems a fresher and more appropriate opponent for "Moon" is Steve Soderbergh's re-make of "Solaris." Both "Moon" and "Solaris" serve up disorienting helpings of the isolation of space, the sense that things are not what they seem, romance bent by quantum physics and leading men who think that, just maybe, they are losing their minds.

THE CHALLENGER. Although there are a few other characters, "Moon" is pretty much a one-man show starring Sam Rockwell who plays an astronaut finishing a three year contract to mine Helium-3 on the moon to ship to an Earth that's using it to achieve glorious clean energy independence. There is also a robot named Gerty to keep him company, one with the same flat energy of HAL from "2001," voiced this time by Kevin Spacey. The problem is that Rockwell's Sam Bell is nearing the end of a three-year shift and he's pretty much falling apart, physically and mentally. The facility is new enough, complete with videos, ping-pong (against yourself) and other diversions, but the antennae to communicate to back home is broken and all he can do is send "message units" and dream of having a real back-and-forth conversation some day soon. Then he discovers that he's not the only thing that's a little off and the story kicks into another gear that is unexpected, odd and uniquely human.

The Taking of Pelham 123 (2009) -vs- The Taking of Pelham One Two Three (1974)

  Keeping the Trains Running (Out of Time)  

The Smackdown.  Thirty-five years ago Joseph Sargent's successful blend of suspense, drama and thrills (and even some comedy) set the bar high for action directors to follow, a precursor of films like Quentin Tarantino's "Reservoir Dogs" or Jan de Bont's "Speed."  Inspiration is one thing, though, and a re-make is another challenge altogether. This time out it's director Tony Scott who tackles the film adaptation of the novel by John Godey.  And Godey's premise is a goody -- four gunmen hijack a New York City subway train and demand a huge ransom be paid within the hour.  The money must not be late in arriving because for every minute thereafter, one of the hostages will be shot.  No exceptions.  What ensues is a deadly cat and mouse game of verbal sparring between the leader of the highly armored gang and the unlucky transit official who must do everything possible to delay the inevitable. It's said that Benito Mussolini kept the trains running on time.  Does Tony Scott do the same for the New York Transit Authority?  Or is the original the better ride?  It's time to get out the subway tokens -- all aboard!

The Challenger. As Chester A. Riley might say, "What a Travoltin' development this is!"  Blessed with mega-star power, Tony Scott's version features John Travolta as Ryder, an ex-commodities trader turned ex-con who masterminds a plot to steal even more money than that Bernie guy made-off with.  Talk about a low life.  On the other side of the tracks, the good side, is Denzel Washington, a Walter Mitty sort of fella who is a disgraced MTA official recently demoted to the position of a train dispatcher in the NASA-like central control room for the Big Apple's subway system.  Just his luck that he's the guy who fields Ryder's call for the ransom money.  The razor-sharp dialogue from screenwriter Brian Helgeland allow these two heavyweight actors to engage in a wickedly escalating two-person verbal dance as the clock enevitably ticks down.  Travolta's language is more foul than the waters of Lake Titicaca, but it is believable, edgy, realistic, and quirky -- his randy remarks about taking a Lithuanian ass model to Iceland is classic.  

The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor (2008) -vs- The Mummy (1999)

EDITOR'S NOTE: Ten years ago, "The Mummy" was packing the theaters with its re-imagining of the classic creature-feature. It went on to take $155-million at the box office here in the U.S. and a whopping $416-million worldwide. Given its budget of $80-million, its producers made a pretty tidy profit. In honor of that achievement, we present Tyger Torrez's 2008 Smackdown that put the original in the ring with the latest incarnation (pardon the pun).

 Who's Your Mummy Dearest? 

The Smackdown.  For years, everyone knew the Big Three of Classic Horror: Dracula, The Wolf Man, and Frankenstein.  That other Undead Dude, The Mummy was second-tier, a guy with a few flicks but not the endorsements ('Count Chocula', anyone)?   It's like he was the forgotten step-child.  All that changed, of course, when Universal decided to dust off the title to remake (sorry, 're-imagine') and cast Brendan Fraser (Link from the classic  'Encino Man') in the 1999 version of "The Mummy."  The re-boot made a load of dough.  Money means more Mummy Mayhem, namely: "The Mummy Returns", a sequel of-sorts; "The Mummy: The Scorpion King;" and recently, "The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor."  Four films in less than a decade.  Let's see how the original (well, the new original) holds up against the upstart, or our latest installment.  Let the mummification begin!

The Challenger.  The prologue to "The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor" starts in Ancient China where an Evil Emperor, Han (Jet Li) is conquering the known world.  He has a vast army and his priests have shown him how to shape shift and control the elements.  But that's not enough: he wants Immortality!  It just so happens there's a Witch (Michelle Yeoh) who knows the Secret. The Emperor wants her for himself but she's in love with his general.  She gets the point (literally) that Han's not a nice man and puts a curse on him and his army, turning them in Terra Cotta statues (because, apparently, in the Far East they didn't believe in wrapping their mummies in bandages).  The proverbial sands of time pass and Alex O'Connell, the grown Son of Rick (Fraser), finds the Tomb of the Dragon Emperor.  When bad guys awaken him, Alex is joined by his parents Rick and Evelyn (here played by Maria Bello) who are all too eager to quit their boring retirement and kick some mummy ass.   Rick goes three-for-three by putting down the Emperor with the requisite magic blade and saving the world (again).

Star Trek (2009) -vs- Star Trek: Wrath of Khan (1982)

 This Reboot's Made for Warpin' 

The Smackdown.  Reboots.  A familiar frontier. These are the voyages of the Hollywood business. Now if only I could go reboot the time I bested too many Jager shots and woke up at the campus bus stop twenty minutes before a Physics midterm. Now, it's easy to groan when Hollywood reboots yet another franchise.  Batman.  Hulk.  James Bond.  The list goes on.  Up this year is Star Trek, one of television's most enduring franchises, spawning spin-offs, films, video games, and Trekkies. With such a long history and devote fan base, it's scary to think what a reboot could mean for a franchise most believe reached its prime with Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.  Nevertheless, we boldly go tonight where no smackdown has gone before, with Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan locking phasers and photons with the reboot simply titled Star Trek.

The Challenger.  Facing down gospels of Star Trek canon, J.J. Abrams reintroduces the original crew of the USS Enterprise in their fledgling years at Starfleet Academy, centering the film around an arrogant and willful James T. Kirk and an emotionally-conflicted Spock.  But there's not much time for learning with these Starfleet cadets as a Romulan mining ship arrives from the future (of course, it's Star Trek) hellbent on revenge, thus demanding an emergency response from The Federation.  Star Trek benefits from the advances of modern technology and offers a visually-arresting action film.  In keeping with Abrams trademark storytelling, the film grinds its legendary characters through unrelenting plot twists, revelations, and reversals.  A faithful adaptation of a franchise mixed with a little bit of Apple, Star Trek is a summer blockbuster with the thrills and chills to please fans and newcomers alike.