MOVIE: Unstoppable

[CPSK]

Being a railfan, I am automatically interested in a movie like this. But every railroad related movie I've seen Hollywood produce over the last 15 years has always had too much of what makes most movies... explosives, and speed.
I'm not going to rush out and see it on Friday. I'll wait until a some of the guys here have seen it, and read Roger Ebert's review.

What I fear the most about movies like this is that there will be too many incongruities for those of us who know something (or a lot) about railroading, and the entire film will then seem to be a waste of time.

I enjoyed the first "Taking of Pelham 123", but the remake left a lot to be desired. You know what I mean. Too much glitz, not enough story. I somehow suspect that Unstoppable will fit very neatly into this category, but I'll give it the benefit of the doubt until I have read some reviews.

FW

[davebdawg]

I always thought that trains had a deadmans feature whereas if it is'nt acknowledged every so often that the train would automatically come to a stop, or something like the remote kill switch that I see on Baitcar. But don't be too elaborate as I have'nt seen the movie yet too!!!

[daylight4449]

I always thought that trains had a deadmans feature whereas if it is'nt acknowledged every so often that the train would automatically come to a stop, or something like the remote kill switch that I see on Baitcar. But don't be too elaborate as I have'nt seen the movie yet too!!!

most locomotives pre-2005 do have a deadman switch, but it has to be activated manually. i'm not saying some older locomotives aren't equiped with an automatic deadman switch, but many have to be deactivated manually, unless they're MUed together, then they would have to be deactivated from the leader.

[MNCRR9000]

Found this review on msnbc.com.

By CHRISTY LEMIRE
The Associated Press
updated 11/10/2010 5:39:29 PM ET 2010-11-10T22:39:29

Review

Finally, we've found the ideal use for Tony Scott's hyperkinetic, headache-inducing filmmaking style: a movie about a runaway train, barreling through small Pennsylvania towns filled with hardworking, unsuspecting people, at 80 mph. And threatening schoolchildren. Oh, and the train is a half-mile long and it's carrying hazardous material.

Sounds insanely implausible, but that's part of the fun of "Unstoppable": How many layers of danger can they pile on here? Scott starts slowly and steadily cranks up the tension, and given the escalating action, his trademark tricks make sense. The grainy camerawork and various exposures, the snap zooms and quick edits all enhance the incessant sense of motion (and Scott actually tones it down here compared to some of his recent films like "Domino" and "Man on Fire," which were borderline incomprehensible). The train rumbles and growls, rattles and clangs, and we're in the middle of it all — on the tracks, between the wheels, underneath and on top of the cars.

It's overwhelming — but in a good way. And this time of year, when there's so much serious-minded awards bait out there, "Unstoppable" provides a welcome escape.

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/40116287/ ... rtainment/

[LIRRMEDFORD]

I went to see this movie and absolutely loved it. I'm not gunna sit here and point out all the flaws but it is definatly something I am getting to own when out on DVD

[amtrakhogger]

Saw the movie tonight. Uh, yeah.

[RussNelson]

Actually, I wouldn't mind learning about the worst of the railroad gaffes ... just so I can be smarter. Well, or more knowledgable anyway.

[Tom6921]

I saw it yesterday. It was pretty good though in one scene, they say the SD40 Denzil Washington's character is using to chase down the runaway train has 5000 HP. (Almost double what a real SD40 has). Even if an SD40 did have 5000 hp, it still can't match two AC4400s!

It appears they borrowed a scene from Runaway Train (when the train hit the caboose). However in Unstoppable, a boxcar took the damage instead.

If I'm correct, this is the first time since 1976 in which repainted CP diesels were leading a runaway train on a fictional railroad! I'm sure you can guess what movie I'm thinking of.

[Gilbert B Norman]

OK; time for a little "we report, you decide":

Roger Ebert

Times

Journal

Incidentially, HoBO On Demand is presently offering a 12 minute "Making of Unstoppable". FWIW, the railroad, I would guess a Short Line, on which it was filmed is not given any production credit - maybe they didn't want it.

There was one line of script between the Engineer and Conductor within the "trailer' suggesting that the producers did not do much research regarding the seniority system for awarding Agreement jobs. Also, it would appear to me the role of Yardmaster was uh, "slightly miscast'. While every movie needs a little 'eye candy' to put the "copper in the hopper', and many a road employs "Yardmistresses" today, couldn't the producers found a "fortysomething' actress (Jayne Mansfield's daughter?) and not having her "on the runway' - in short, dress her for the job. In common with any other "Hollywood goes a railroadin' fiasco (worst "Silver Streak II") I have been exposed to over the years, I'm sure this one will no no different.

Oh well, since HoBO is airing this "Making of..' feature, it would appear that they have acquired the cable TV rights to Unstoppable. From what I saw, I think it can wait the year until it's time for a "your HoBO subscription dollars at work" moment.

Finally, here is a report regarding the incident on which the movie is based.

More (source questionable)

[RailsEast]

Caught it last night....I'll give it an 8 out of 10. It had some good 'real-world' railroading stuff, as well as alot of 'Hollywood' railroading stuff. Denzel Washington did a nice job as the 'chase unit' engineer. The wife & 11 y/o stepson enjoyed it very much as well, lots of action, and no slow, boring spots to put you asleep. All in all, worth the $9.50/ticket (in NJ), IMO...................
Chris

[Jtgshu]

As an engineer, I was actually VERY impressed with the movie and how accurate they made railroading life. In the first few scenes, they did a great job capturing the 'attitude" of some railroaders, i.e. the lazyness and cockyness, and the scene with the welder in the diner being late to work really cracked me up.

I was surprised with the amount of RR terms used, and used correctly, by the various characters, not just the eng and conductor. Some of the sounds didn't quite match up (sound of EMDs idling when its a pic of the GEs for example) and some of the various shots were incorrect - using the automatic brake handle when he is saying use the independent, ammeter showing power instead of dynamic braking, but they are pretty few and far inbetween.

I think a better job could have been done with the radio transmissions to make them sound a little more believable, and the one news helicopter in all the scenes was really annoying - hahhah

All and all I give it a 3.5 out of 4 stars. Its a good story, BASED on a real life event, but they did a pretty good job showing what could and did happen (not the throttle moving on its own, tho...).

However, the movie was made for the general population, and I think they did a GREAT job capturing and showing railroading in the US today. I could relate to many scenes in the movie from my own personal experiences and images of certain co-workers of mine came to mind when i saw a scene or a charater.......hahahahah

And it pretty damn cool when what you do for a living is brought into mainstream USA like this, and for once the engineer and conductor are the heros! Maybe now because of this movie people will get the terms engineer and condcutor correct..........hahahah

So go out and see it, its lots of trains, and lots of train noises and lots of action and its fun!!!

[RussNelson]

FWIW, the railroad, I would guess a Short Line, on which it was filmed is not given any production credit - maybe they didn't want it.

Sure they were. The WNY&P along with two PA railroads were credited. It was way at the end of the credits.

[RussNelson]

SPOILER ALERT!



Watched the movie last night. A few railroady things that confused me (I'll ignore the things done with cinematic license):

• I thought the engineer jumped off the train to flip a misaligned trailing points switch, but it SURE looked to me like the switch was properly aligned.
• Why, when they had the two engines in front, couldn't they have had an engineer jump onto 777?
• Why could one engine at the rear slow it down when two in the front could not?
• Why would the first two engines take the switch but the two unmanned engines not, nor the rest of the train?
• Why would the engineer not just hook up the air hose from the hopper car to his engine? Seems much more dangerous and time-consuming to tie down each car.
• Why did the grain suddenly start to come flying out of the hopper car? Obviously it got damaged, but in what way, and is it realistic?
• Why was it necessary to put police at every crossing? It's not as if a manned engine has any more ability to change what happens at a crossing.

Aside from these questions, I think the movie was well-made, had realistic interactions between the men and machines, did a good job using real railroad terms without clumsily defining them, and had a good ending.

[CPSK]

I was wondering about the air hoses myself. Unless the cock was opened at the lead end of the train, the loco at the rear could have pumped air into the train to stop it.
Then, if that had happened, there wouldn't have been a movie.

The grain seemed to be just for effect. It looked cool flying all around like that. Good thing it wasn't coal!

FW

[CPSK]

Anyone know where the bridge and the curve is? I'm looking at GE trying to find it in Scranton, but don't see it there. Maybe Reading? The river looked pretty big. Could have been the Schuylkill.

Edit: Did some Googling, and found it was in Bellaire, OH. Can see the bridge and curve on GE.

FW