3.5/5 popcorns

Tony Scott is one of the few major directors with an identifiable style that has never garnered any acclaim. If his most recent work, ‘Unstoppable,’ is any indication, the 66-year-old director should finally get his due from critics.

Beginning with ‘Man on Fire’ in 2004, Scott adopted a style that consists of aggravatingly brief takes, headache-inducing discoloration and laughable slow-motion shots. Scott’s ‘Domino’ (2005), ‘Déjà Vu’ (2006) and ‘The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3’ (2009) are made in the same stylistic vein, frequently wasting the talent of his favorite leading man, Denzel Washington. With ‘Unstoppable,’ Scott has finally found the perfect property for his chaotic style, and the result is arguably the most accomplished of his 16 films.

One of the newest employees of the Allegheny and West Virginia Railroad, conductor Will Colson (Chris Pine) is paired with veteran engineer Frank Barnes (Denzel Washington) on one of his first assignments. Just as Colson and the world-weary Barnes come to like one another, Barnes is alerted of an unmanned train that is traveling at a high speed directly toward the highly populated town of Stanton, Pa. The train is the size of the Chrysler Building and is loaded with toxic, combustible chemicals that could easily decimate a large city.

Displeased with the attitude of the Allegheny and West Virginia Railroad higher-ups who only care about how much money they might lose, Colson and Barnes take matters into their own hands. Determined to prevent the unmanned locomotive from leveling Stanton, Colson and Barnes gun their train in reverse to latch onto the locomotive and eventually take command of it. The blue-collar workers are suddenly tasked with saving thousands of lives and selflessly, perhaps foolishly, endeavor to halt the missile-like vehicle.

Though the templates of Scott’s most recent projects certainly suited his chaotic style, never has he directed a film that actually required his choppy aesthetic. The premise and plot of ‘Unstoppable’ practically demand a director with as short an attention span as Scott, who derives unbearable tension from Barnes and Colson’s quest to quell the speed of the runaway train.

Washington is expectedly great in one of his least demanding roles, possessing a tough but wise disposition that all but forces the viewer to respect him. An unfortunate casualty of the production is the waste of Pine’s considerable talent in a role that, while heroic and stirring, suppresses his greatest strengths. Pine is capable of projecting a rare combination of masculinity and flamboyance most actors would die to emulate, but in ‘Unstoppable’ he is saddled with a role that is simply too bland.

Though the intolerable suits that run the Allegheny and West Virginia Railroad could be called the villains, ‘Unstoppable’ presents a relatively new antagonist in the form of the runaway train. Though the train itself is not necessarily at fault because it cannot think on its own, it is hard not to affix some anger onto the piece of machinery that could cause so much damage. In all likelihood, the train does not represent anything beyond its physical form, but imagining what it might stand for is almost unavoidable, which inflates its prominence in the viewer’s mind.

As one should expect from Scott, the actors’ tremendous talents are woefully underutilized. Barnes and Colson do not become fully well-rounded characters until they engage in a heroic effort. The trip is entirely engrossing, but the lack of character development is somewhat nullified by the excitement of the chase.

And for Scott, the chase is what it’s all about.

smlittma@syr.edu

Published on November 17, 2010 at 12:00 pm