So much average

Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

The Incident is a must-see for every film buff. The story and the setting are very simple. The black and white photography looks really good and emphasises the gritty nature of night-time New York streets and the film itself. The performances are fantastic. You will see many familiar faces making their debut here. The main reason this film will never age is the fact that if you would put the exact same scenario in present times, things would not have played out much differently. The two thugs terrorising passangers on a subway train with everyone afraid to stand up and quickly put an end to the ordeal. Everyone for themselves. If it does not happen to me, I will be fine, I do not want to be involved and get myself into trouble. Sure some people speak up but their efforts are fast suppressed by the aggressors - too fast. It is a kind of social experiment in a way. How long does it take for people to reach their boiling point. The only reason that I have rated this 9/10 instead of 10/10 is that the set-up is quite long. It takes about 50 minutes before the subway train nightmare begins. But at least we get to know the thorough background of the characters. After that, The Incident kicks into top gear and the thrill ride with great suspense, acting and dialogue begins. Highly recommended.

A critical take on the Genovese syndrome, which concerns bystanders in situations in which they could be more active, "The Incident" raises deep questions in this good combination of thriller with social denounce, rare pairing in today's movies. Larry Peerce's film (a remake of an obscure TV film) tells about the hold up of a train car by two muggers (Martin Sheen and Tony Musante) who keep picking on innocent passengers as if playing silly games. But no, they're gashly and dangerous as we're told and know them beforehand in the first minutes when they rob and kill a guy. It's late at night, New York back in its days of high criminality, everybody's tired and all they want is to just go home. We're introduced to the passengers before they go on board, the majority of them are people having heated arguments, husbands giving a hard time to their wives or girlfriends, or stressed over their usual problems. Then the idiots come up and trouble begins. Loud and demanding attention, the pair keeps bothering each passenger, offending them and being completely ridiculous and mean to everyone. No one acts upon them. The two dominate them in such a way that it's paralyzing, even when the threats (more the sense of eminent threat) are destined to a single person no one does a thing, complain or if they do is just too few. Who are the passengers? An old couple (Jack Gilford and Thelma Ritter), an African American couple (Ruby Dee and Brock Peters), a young couple (Donna Mills and Victor Arnold), the nothing in common Purvis couple (Jan Sterling and Mike Kellin) the Wilks couple (Ed McMahon and Diana Van der Vlis) and their sleepy daughter, two privates (a boyish Beau Bridges and Robert Bannard), a homosexual (Robert Fields) and the wrong man he tried to make a move (Gary Merrill), and the sleepy drunk who doesn't follow any action whatsoever. 14 people terrorized by two. Strange but it happens.The rising tension built by this thriller is highly effective, so unsettling and it stays with you days after the experience. Enraging, revolting, gritty. But this is just 50%. The other half comes with its perceptive look, almost a psychological study, on society and its ways. The writer breaks myths, stir up more and more controversies about people's reactions towards menacing acts of stupidity. Remember Bernard Goetz in 1984? Well, this movie could be a legitimate proof that his actions were positive, since he felt close to danger, he had to defend his ground. Sure, the real case is much more complicated but one can understand. I've been through a strange situation similar as his but luckily I had the chance to get out. What's destroyed here? Angry mobs doesn't exist when needed. Like said, it's 14 against 2, one of them armed with a knife (shown later in the last minutes, so people didn't know nothing about them except their strange behavior), the concept of union among strangers is destroyed when apathy takes over. Why stand up against? They're not bothering me, most would think or say. The not so rough manhood, only giving us rude guys when alone with their wives or girlfriends and completely powerless over two guys. What angered me the most besides the pair of knuckleheads was 1) the young guy with his girlfriend. Why? The level of insistence in his misoginy with her in his first scene was appalling, disgusting, eternally forceful yet when one of the guys comes over her and teases her he does nothing. And 2) the soldier. Not the injured one played by Bridges but his perfect friend. Two arms, two legs, highly trained....well why bother doing it, it happens all the time as he sort of say to his buddy. I admired the performances (specially the bad guys) and its relevance in presenting the different social perspectives and their issues, quite alright but there's thousands of problems. It lacks in realism, too strange at times. No one reacts even when picked on? No instinct, no reaction at all? If someone personally bothers you, you say something, anything. The passiveness of some characters wasn't real to me (it can happen but not in the way the movie presents it). Audiences would benefit more with a remake. The 21st century vision would be far more explosive than this one in the 1960's. There's a facade some of us wear as being tolerant when in fact many aren't. If happened now the story would be very different. Trust the words of someone with a little experience on this. 8/10

IT IS INDEED a very humiliating experience to sort of accidentally run across such a film as this! We mean that just when one thinks he knows of all of the truly great movies, both big and small, here comes a relatively unheralded masterpiece; such as this one, today's subject, THE INCIDENT (Moned Associated/20th Century-Fox, 1967).WHILE BOASTING Of A GREAT roll call of acting talent, the film really has no "star" as such. Instead, we are presented with an array of outstanding characterizations of people who are unrelated to each other; other than being New Yorkers who find themselves out late and sharing a precarious trip home via public transportation (aka the Elevated Line).ONE BY ONE we are introduced to couples (Ed Mcmahon & Diana Van der Vis, Jack Gilford & Thelma Ritter, Brock Peters & Ruby Dee, Mike Kellin & Jan Sterling) as well as some individuals (such as Gary Merrill, Beau Bridges, Robert Bannard, Tony Musante, etc). We add to the mix some young couple; who almost continuously swap spits during the first part of the story; being that they are the first to enter the train car, which has only a derelict wino sleeping it off.ENTER THE TWO street punks (Martin Sheen & Other Player), who proceed to terrorize everyone; starting with one couple and moving onto all the others. Their insult and abuse knows no bounds; be it sexually (to the young lovers), physical brutality, or all out mockery, Racial Insults to RubyDee and Brock Peters and mocking,threatening intimidation (as to the young homosexual man).NO Where IS there any attempt to stand up to the thugs. There is no initiative in joining together and put up a united front. All seem to desire to just be left alone and all seem to have cultivated a 'go on and bother someone else' attitude.EVENTUALLY THE CHARACTER of the one soldier (Beau Bridges)is pushed just a little too far and he manages to club tho one thug into unconsciousness with the use of the plaster cast on his right arm. The Martin Sheen thug is dumbfounded and tries to escape. Shortly thereafter, the train stops, the conductor, the police arrive* and take away the bad guys. Slowly and seemingly in turn, all others leave the train.GOING ON THEIR separate ways, in a way of telling us that they have learned nothing. If any of them would find themselves in the same or similar situation; the very same outcome would play out.OUR CONGRATULATIONS TO Mr.Nicholas E. Baehr (Writer) and Larry Pierce (Director) for bringing us an outstanding work of art and definitely a one of a kind movie; which is as great as it is obscure. They've given us what is essentially a slice of reality, which, unfortunately, still finds itself being repeated daily in Big City U.S.A.NOTE: * (Having been a member of the Chicago Ploice Deppartment for nearly 35 years, the reviewer (yours truly) feels the need to comment on one aspect of the finale.) When the Cops enter the train car, they immediately start to frisk the Brock Peters character, the Black Man. While this goes by very quickly, it could portray a fallacious message. No Cop who has any experience would move in such an impetuous a manner. When one enters a scene such as this, caution is one virtue that is expended in all directions. This scene is obviously more an indicator of the attitude of the writer and/or the director; than it is to a realistic depiction of the real world.

The first time i saw this film is the same feeling as i had on the second time i watched it. Garbage that you can't turn away from. As you sit to watch the film, you get a sense of nervousness coming over the passengers in the train. You watch as 2 teens terrorize each passenger one by one. This didn't make sense to me, The 2 terrorizers go to each person causing different issues, and the passengers all watch and do nothing, they all feel the same way about the 2 thugs causing problems and speak out eventually, what gets me is that you'd think by the 3rd person saying for them to stop what they are doing, the other 2 would have spoke up as well and ganged up on the terrorizers. But no? they sit there and pretend nothings happening... I'm sorry but its not human nature to sit there and let things go on like they were. Especially when you know the next person probubly is going to be you. On the flip side of things, i can't stop watching this movie no matter how frustrated i get with the passengers on the train. It really pulls you in and grabs your every attention hoping that someone will put the 2 thugs in their place. And i am so happy to say they eventually do. Even at the end again things seem not to make sense, the police show up and take the 2 terrorists that just got beat up out of the train, but no police officer questions anyone they just leave? Then the passengers all leave one by one saying nothing..? This movie is really a movie that would not happen in real life, there are problems like that that may happen, but the way the passengers and police were acting is definitely not. Maybe on an Elementary school bus but i cannot imagine adults letting such tragedy happen. So it's safe to say its a good movie to make your emotions get the best of you in anger for whats going on, because you feel you would never act that way with 2 psycho youths doing whatever they want. If you like to challenge your emotions , its a good movie to watch.