As friend of my saw it yesterday and assessed it very similarly.

I can't speak with any authority since I've only seen the trailer, not the full film... but then again, I'd guess that statistically, the majority of people will only see the trailer and will never see the movie...  anyway, it seems to paint the picture that trains are dreadfully dangerous and doesn't reflect reality.   Yes, the movie was "loosely" based on a true situation, but it certainly appears to have had a lot of Hollywood added to it.    

Denzel lost a few notches of respect from me for doing a schlock movie like this.  

The funny thing is, what RR would participate with the production company to make a movie that paints RR's so negatively?    I guess they flashed enough cash under somebody's nose. 

Being not familiar with the area and all the various railroads involved; I went on You Tube and entered

" Unstopable' and got quite a number of individual videos, and some of the official trailers:

The two SD-40(?) in one file showed being rolled in Emporium, Pa

Some of the evacuation scenes were shot in Tyrone, Pa

There is a video of the three AWVR units in Columbus, Oh

and some video being shot around Martins Ferry, Oh.

Well, You get the idea!

Its out for the public now. Thoughts?

I just saw the movie and loved it.  I'm a pilot, and I always nitpick aviation movies, so I'm sure rail fans will nitpick this movie, but I liked it's emphasis on blue collar rail roaders and really trying to do an accurate job and not dumb down the movie too much.

Saw the movie tonight and I have to say I thought it was pretty good.  I do think they were allot of holes in terms of RR operating procedures, but they got the lingo down pretty good such as calling a siding "the hole." Finally It's Hollywood I think they did get some railroad consolation but like all things Hollywood it was exaggerated. 

A basic rule of watching movies: if you know anything at all about the subject, watch as if it were a comedy.  I was a road racing official for 30 years and what they do to most racing movies is amazing.  I cannot watch most racing movies, after a while I give up. TV is even worse.  On one "Quincy" episode they had a crash start at Riverside and end in Pheonix.  And that was realistic compared to other scenes.

Good racing films? 

"Grand Prix" - hackneyed romantic plot line but realistic race scenes.  Filmed at the sites of the races in Europe.  Only film I have seen of the banking on the old Monza banking.  Funny thing is that some race incidents in the film, which seemed overdone, were replicated in reality the next year, including Lorenzo Bandini's death.

"The Last American Hero" - Early career of Junior Johnson, NASCAR legend.  From bootlegger to successful racer.  Soundtrack by Jim Croce.

The best of them all: "Le Mans" -  Same basic romantic plot as "Grand Prix" but much better done.  Except for two quick crash shots, all the race action was shot during the actual race.  And, almost at the end, Steve McQueen utters the basic truth about racing: "It's a professional blood sport.  It can happen to you.  And then it can happen to you again."

Jack

Saw this yesterday, great action flick w/ lots of train shots. Sure the more rabid foamers will be all over this for inaccuracies, but most people will just see this as a fun popcorn action film, read the Yahoo User reviews, which are posted by you and me not pro critic and it was getting solid A & B scores, even the pro critics were giving it good reviews including the main newspaper film critic here who hates everything, thats quite an achievement for what is basicly a train film!

Go see it you wont be dissappointed

Its too bad Denzel forgot it was a railroad movie. Little things, such as not using the cab radio and instead using a portable, just make it painful to watch from that standpoint. AND STOP USING THE TERM COASTER!

http://trn.trains.com/Railroad%20News/News%20Wire/2010/11/Unstoppable.aspx

Unstoppable: Now barreling toward a theater near you

Denzel Washington charges across the top of a moving tank car in the movie “Unstoppable,” in theaters today. Photo by Robert Zuckerman, Twentieth Century Fox Unstoppable is not a train movie; that’s the first thing you should know. It’s an action movie, just like every other suspense-filled Hollywood blockbuster you’ve ever seen. The only difference in this film is that the central premise is not a sinking ship or a burning building or a crippled airliner, but a runaway train, one that more than lives up to the movie’s title.   Don’t enter the theater expecting a documentary on railroad operations. You need to go into Unstoppable with a Mission Impossible mindset, not the mindset of a railroad rules examiner. The movie took the kernel of a possible scenario, layered it with every plot cliché in the screenwriter’s handbook, and wrapped it up in full-blown testosterone-driven Tinseltown action. As visceral action entertainment, Unstoppable delivers, even though as railroad propaganda, it’s kind of misses its mark.   Of course, that dichotomy between what’s real and what’s fiction has the railroad industry concerned. Those who work in or follow railroading know about the industry’s exemplary safety record. The general public might not. How much of an issue this becomes remains to be seen. The Federal Railroad Administration, Operation Life Saver, and Association of American Railroads have yet to comment, perhaps because they haven’t seen the movie.   Unstoppable says right up front, it was “inspired by actual events.” And that’s true. On May 15, 2001, CSX SD40-2 8888, assigned to yard duty, left Stanley Yard in Walbridge, Ohio, with 47 cars — two of them loaded with molten phenol, a combustible liquid — and no one on board.   The air brakes had been bled off (deactivated), as is common in a freightyard environment. The engineer, seeing a switch ahead was not lined correctly, got out of the cab, lined the switch, and prepared to reboard. Unfortunately, before alighting, he’d accidentally put the throttle in Run 8, its highest setting, and the train’s speed had built up to the point he was not able to get back aboard. The independent (locomotive) brake he’d applied deactivated the engine’s alerter, which would otherwise have stopped the train after a period of inactivity. The runaway traveled 69 miles at speeds reaching above 40 mph before a CSX trainmaster was able to climb on after another train crew coupled a locomotive onto the rear and slowed it down. There were no collisions or derailments. End of a story that didn’t need to happen.   From that event, Unstoppable’s filmmakers let their imaginations run wild: Let’s ramp it up several hundred notches past Run 8. Let’s make the runaway about the same number of cars, but make eight of them loaded with highly toxic ingredients used to make glue, increase the top speed to 70 mph, and put every conceivable obstacle in its way, including a horse trailer stuck on the tracks (with a rearing horse that forms the spitting image of the Norfolk Southern thoroughbred), and a local freight train just a few cars too long for the siding it was hastily switched to. Oh yes, did I mention the passenger special filled with young children on a fieldtrip to learn about railroad safety? And a railroader deftly running at full speed from car to car at speed in an attempt to get to the locomotive? This is the same as six-shooters that never run out of ammunition, horses that gallop without stopping hour after hour, and pioneer women closing their eyes before firing – and hitting – the bad guys.   One potentially eye-rolling moment occurs when local law enforcement and National Guard troops start shooting at the fuel cutoff switch as the runaway train roars by.  It’s incredible, but that actually happened during the real incident.   To the rescue is actor Denzel Washington, playing a grizzled, 28-year railroad veteran of the fictitious Allegheny & West Virginia, and costar Chris Pine, playing a four-month-on-the-job newbie. Are you seeing the elements of a buddy movie subplot here? You bet you are. But don’t think Romy and Michelle’s High School Reunion. Think of a railroad version of Saving Private Ryan, or perhaps The Blues Brothers.   After some deliberation, this dynamic duo decides to go after the runaway using the SD40-2 they've been assigned for a local freight. Their actions get support from a local yardmaster, and flak from clueless upper management.   Actually, for all of the backlash the railroad industry is set to unleash on this film, most of the working-day railroaders portrayed on screen are safety-conscious and invested in doing the right thing. They are portrayed as everyday heroes with difficult jobs and an abiding commitment to an industry that has nurtured them and their families for generations. The railroad atmosphere is abundant, and much of the terminology rings true, even as the event itself becomes more improbable.   The film’s director, Tony Scott, is a master at keeping audiences glued to their seats, using a constant barrage of quick cuts, almost nonstop music-video-type pacing, and high-contrast images, all of which serve to enhance the overall urgency and immediacy of the crisis.   Scott got bitten by the train bug while directing his last film, “The Taking of Pelham 1-2-3,” which Washington also stars in. Unleashed from New York’s confining subway tunnels, Scott makes the most of his full-sized train set. The movie’s production cost came close to $100 million, and might have been even more without the generous tax breaks provided by Pennsylvania and Ohio, where virtually all of the on-location filming took place.   In Unstoppable, Scott avoids using miniatures and employs computer graphics imaging sparingly, opting instead for real equipment and on-location filming in places that might look familiar to Northeastern train-watchers. Those are real AC4400s and SD40-2s being raced, blown up, and reined in.   And the Santa Fe Warbonnet once again asserts itself as the most iconic railroad paint scheme of all time.   If strict adherence to railroad protocol is your milieu, forget it. But if you want to enjoy a visual romp through a railroad fantasy world with characters that might remind you of some real railroaders you know, take a chance.   Behind the scenes of Unstoppable Principal photography for Unstoppable began in Brewster, Ohio, on the Wheeling & Lake Erie on Aug. 31, 2009.  After a week of filming, the production company headed north to Pennsylvania, setting up offices in Bradford, Pa., about five miles south of the Pennsylvania-New York border.   Every day, the production crew traveled to the Western New York & Pennsylvania destined for Port Allegany, Eldred, Turtlepoint, Blanchard, and Emporium as well as north to Olean, N.Y., for photography.   On Oct. 10, the company moved their base to State College, Pa., and shot on the Nittany & Bald Eagle before moving to southeastern Ohio and back onto the W&LE, including Bellaire, Martin’s Ferry, Mingo Junction, and Steubenville.  Production wrapped principal photography on Dec. 18. In Emporium, the company created an actual train derailment, a huge special effects sequence that closed the main intersection of the small hamlet for more than five hours. The movie used eight locomotives, including four AC4400CWs from Canadian Pacific (both sets numbered 777 and 776, the units on the fictional runaway train) and four SD40-2s (at least two numbered depicted as the 1206 used by Denzel Washington and Chris Pine) from W&LE, as well as about 60 freight cars.

User Comments

So, I hear it's good even with all the inaccurate stuff.  The article also answered many of my questions.  I was wondering if this thing was somewhat like Atomic Train or not.  Now that I think of Atomic Train, what exactly was the fluid that leaked in the beginning, and why did the train become a runaway?  I still never figured that out.

I also saw in a preview that some guy was remotely running the locos from within the nose instead of the featured engineer.  I just thought I'd pass along that behind-the-scenes bit.

I went to see it yesterday at the local Movie Tavern.  Almost missed it as my ticket stub had theater 5 on it, but theater 5 had another movie sign at the door with Unstoppable at theater 7.  Went to theater 7, and five minutes after the movie was supposed to start, I went back out to the hallway and asked an employee which theater it was in.  Turns out it was 5.  They'd just messed up on the signs.  Got in and found a seat just as the commercials were finishing and the trailers started.

I enjoyed the movie very much.  While there were some inaccuracies in regards to railroading and operating trains, I was able to overlook those and allow the movie to take me into the story and take me on an exciting ride of a movie experience.  I'm looking forward to the DVD when it comes out.

One thing I got to thinking about after the movie was how movies don't accurately portray some things regarding railroad operations, and I think there are two reasons.  One, they want to simplify things so that they don't lose their audience.  Two, they don't want to give out too much information on railroad operations that somebody might be tempted to use after the movie to do harm to railroads.

Kevin

My wife and I went and saw it last night (her idea).  Definately enough action to keep any action junkie paying attention.  Definately a couple of pieces of the story that had "artistic license" written on them, but this is not a documentary.  One of the more obvious 'oopsies': a 5,000 HP SD40-2?  WOW!

I'd say it's worth a watch, and we'll be looking for the DVD.

CNW 6000

 a 5,000 HP SD40-2?  WOW!

 

I.  Want.  One.

zugmann

CNW 6000:

 a 5,000 HP SD40-2?  WOW!

 

 

 

I.  Want.  One.

Here you go:

ChuckOp

I just saw the movie and loved it.  I'm a pilot, and I always nitpick aviation movies, so I'm sure rail fans will nitpick this movie, but I liked it's emphasis on blue collar rail roaders and really trying to do an accurate job and not dumb down the movie too much.

Frankly, I'm not sure most railfans are savvy enough to grasp all the inaccuracies of this movie.  I saw it last night and more than once leaned over to my wife and whispered, "That is SOOOO against the rules."  But I've been a rail for almost 16 years, just like your being a pilot.  I don't think I could nitpick an aviation movie even though I know a little something about airplanes.  I do know something about railroading, more than I ever knew as a railfan.  That said, it's still an exciting movie, never boring.

The best part about The Last America Hero is that they included real racing footage of Bobby Allison and Richard Petty banging on each other at Martinsville.

I think it would be great fun to watch this movie with a group of experienced railroaders.  The quips would undoubtedly be hilarious. 

ValleyX

I think it would be great fun to watch this movie with a group of experienced railroaders.  The quips would undoubtedly be hilarious. 

And, I think the same way when they do a film about airplanes. Hollywood has taken the same 'if it bleeds it leads' attitude as the media. The reporting of aircraft and railroads shows the lack of knowledge  the reporters have on the subject. Just my opinion, but most reporters of today haven't a clue what they are talking about.

If you are going to report on a subject you should at least have basic knowledge of it.

I went to see Unstoppable last night, and I thought it was overall a great film!

I enjoyed it immensely. The pace of the action was great, and the special effects were very convincing (although that one really huge explosion was both gratuitous and unlikely...) with the relative lack of CGI. Both Denzel Washington and Chris Pine were excellent, and played very believable characters. I also thought the level of back-story that was provided for each character was enough to get a sense of who they were, and why they were the way they were, but not so much as to detract from the pacing of the movie.

Some bits were hard to believe, and as someone who is reasonably knowledgeable about railroading, I could pick out plenty of little flaws. For example, as someone pointed out before, Denzel's SD40-2 is apparently rated at 5000hp! Or perhaps his presence in the cab adds about 2,000 horses...

While there were a lot of little things that I could just laugh off (like the references to train numbers by the locomotive cab numbers for example), I found the overall presentation of the railroad's operation in this case to be dramatically better than your average Hollywood representation. For example, I was glad to hear them use plenty of railroad specific terminology (correctly) without feeling the need to dumb it all down for the audience.Yes, the whole situation was greatly dramatized over reality (and the amount of media coverage portrayed in the film is unreal! How many reporters and news choppers did that town have??), and there were lots of inaccuracies with real railroad operations, but the feel of it was very believable and I think a relatively flattering portrayal of railroad workers (albeit not their upper management).

All in all, it was great fun to watch all those trains on the big screen, and as an action movie, this one scores high on my list. The situation was greatly over-dramatized, and the whole "based on true events" disclaimer at the start would better have read "very loosely based on a slightly similar real event", but it was still a great movie. I also thought the lead run-away AC4400CW being numbered "777" was a neat tribute to the real CSX SD40-2 "8888" of the real-life "crazy-eights" incident.

My recommendation: Go see it. Definitely worth the price of admission, and (in my mind), the DVD when it comes out.

THayman-

CN does refer to trains by the lead loco number (at least in my area) more often than not.  I felt that was accurate to my experiences.

So I went to see this movie today. 

They did get some of the "railroad worker environment" feeling right as others have pointed out.  They also sprinkled enough railroad terms in the dialogue to make it sound good, even if the actions were completely off the wall.

For realism?  Not even close.  Just turn off your brain and enjoy the smashey-smashey.

ugh.. hit reply instead of edit. 

 Sorry...

Saw it today with my bride...and since I am an action movie junkie as well as a railfan...I loved it, inaccuraciies and all!

Saw it on opening night...LOVED it. I'd probably say it was one of the best train movies I've ever seen. No dull moments, many edge-of-your-seat suspense and LOTS of train action scenes. I'm sure some can pick out all of the inaccuracies, but honestly I couldn't pick out much. Denzel Washington and Chris Pine did a fantastic job as the train crew, a very realistic portrayal. All and all, I thought it was great, and I'm ready to see it again when it comes to some of our local theatres nearby!

CNW 6000

THayman-

CN does refer to trains by the lead loco number (at least in my area) more often than not.  I felt that was accurate to my experiences.

Interesting. I suppose it might be done in some places, but I haven't heard CN use this practice anywhere else on the system. Perhaps if it's one locomotive working a switch job (like the SD40-2 Denzel and Chris were on), but when it's actually a prepared train with a designated route, it has its own ID number distinct from the loco number.

Although I suppose in the case of the film, that train wasn't actually set out on the main yet, it was still being prepared in the yard. So maybe it's not unreasonable.

THayman

 

 

 

Interesting. I suppose it might be done in some places, but I haven't heard CN use this practice anywhere else on the system. Perhaps if it's one locomotive working a switch job (like the SD40-2 Denzel and Chris were on), but when it's actually a prepared train with a designated route, it has its own ID number distinct from the loco number.

Although I suppose in the case of the film, that train wasn't actually set out on the main yet, it was still being prepared in the yard. So maybe it's not unreasonable.

We use both.  But for any type of switching moves, I always use engine number pretty much exclusively.  One reason:  it is entirely possible to get 2 trains with the same symbol working in the same area, but there better not be more than one engine with the same number and reporting marks. 

But yeah, they just used the number to make it simpler for the vast majority.

The East RTC will usually call out something like:
"East RTC to CN 2687 South, Q198" or whatever train s/he wants.  I have heard just the Train ID number and just the lead loco number.  Most crews and both Shops and Neenah Yard tend to use the lead loco number and direction of travel (north/south) for the majority of conversations.'

Any idea on when this comes out on video?

CNW 6000

Any idea on when this comes out on video?

Theater to DVD times are getting shorter and shorter, some smaller flicks are having the DVD released the same day it hits the theaters, as thats often where the real money is made, in DVD sales and rentals. I would expect this to be released in about 3 months but dont be surprised if it gets released before Xmas, and Yes, this one is going into the permanent collection.

The radio rules in the GCOR state that the job number or engine number is acceptable during yard operations.

But while on a road job or outside the yard , only the engine number is permissable. At least that's how I've done it working for the UP and the BNSF. Example: WAMX 4107 West entering Track Warrant Territory at Dewey.

So if they are doing something like that in "Unstoppable," then they are correct.

This is how I've always heard it over the scanners with both the UP and IC&E