PANIC ON THE 5.22

US, 1974, 78 minutes, Colour.
Lynda Day George, Laurence Luckinbill, Ina Ballin, Bernie Casey.
Directed by Harvey Hart.

Panic on the 5.22 is an above average suspenseful telemovie. It is reminiscent of Larry Pearce's 1967 The Incident.

The film shows various wealthy people in their business life and finally assembles them on the 5.22. It also shows three underprivileged toughs of New York who eventually decide to hold up the group and rob them during the journey. The film takes us through a week before the trip and intercuts the various characters. The film begins and ends with an over moralising comment about the exploitation of the underprivileged by the wealthy. The film makes its point dramatically without this over seriously presented comment.

The film is effective, especially, in showing the three young men as ignorant, not planning their robbery well and unable to cope. Robert Walden is particularly good as the leader and Reni Santoni as the dumbest of the three. A range of television telemovie stars is effective as the group on the train, especially Andrew Duggan as a right wing former general. The film is brief, makes its points and has an air of realism in the interaction as the passengers try to cope with the hold up. Direction is by Harvey Hart, director of
several good film and telemovies.

1. The impact of this kind of suspense thriller? Its realism, inviting audiences to experience the situation?

2. Location photography, the club car of the train, the wealthy backgrounds of the passengers, the inner city background of the thugs? The importance of pace and editing?

3. The familiarity of this kind of film? How well did this film break through the conventions? Characterisation, issues, action?

4. The plausibility of the plot: the range of backgrounds of the passengers ? and their wealth, deals, affluent lifestyle? The three young men seen in their backgrounds? The temptation to hold up the train? Their inability to carry through the robbery? The reactions of the passengers?

5. The presentation of the three young men: Frank and his erratic behaviour, his going to confession and the ironic comments to the priest about too many prayers for lewd thoughts and wishing him well on his Bingo)? His ambitions? Eddie and his taking the goods onto the train? The ideas man? The hopes for a better life? Eddie and his holding up the Jewish man in the street, wanting his diamonds, ineffective? His slow wittedness? The background of his having killed someone? The three together and their plans, dressing up, memories of their childhood and their names scratched on the railway carriage, Frank holding up the shop on the way to the train, sitting in the car, their masks, their names (Butch Cassidy etc.), their trying to handle the situation, potential violence, Emil taking off his mask, Frank and his getting more manic, Eddie and the appeal by the businessman? The threat of violence hostility? Criticisms of the wealthy? The ultimate violence and Emil's death? Eddie's disillusionment?

6. The build up of the passengers: the countess and the background of Latin America, wealth and deals? The general and his being dismissed from his job? His jingoistic attitudes? His criticism of the others as not being men? His recklessness? His assistant and his fears? The businessman and his associates? His having only credit cards and the group not believing him? Removing his trousers? His being persuasive to Eddie about giving him a job? The doctor and his background, his spurning of the others? The promiscuous wife and her affairs? Getting Emil to take off his mask? Her jealous husband? The reconciliation? The elderly businessman (and his sketching the thugs)? The baseball player and his moves during the trip? The black bartender and his charging for the drinks? His comment? The conductor and his arrogance towards Eddie?

7. The drama and interaction? The various moves by the passengers? The counter moves? An atmosphere of credible tension?

8. The ending, freedom, death, Eddie's job and his becoming part of the establishment? The justification of the film's criticism of the wealthy?