Missed opportunity. The back and forth in timelines through flashbacks plus hallucinations of how things could have gone wrong make this a bit of a mess. I am surprised to say the least, because Clint Eastwood is an old school director whose movies - as dumb as this may sound - usually start at the beginning and close with the end. This one does not and it's confusing. I realize it's hard to create drama, when you know the outcome, but I've seen dozens of "true events" movies where this was handled better by far less accomplished directors than Eastwood. That being said the acting was good, which happens when you cast Tom Hanks in the main role. Aaron Eckhart performance was solid as well. No complains there. The main problem I have with the movie is that it's focus is the investigation of Captain Sullenberger in the aftermath of his heroic landing on the Hudson river. An investigation I was not even aware was going on. It seems like constructed drama where there was none. Through the whole investigation I was sitting there thinking: He landed a plane on a freaking river! That should be the focus. THAT'S where the drama is. Using the NTSB investigation as the focal point of the movie did not do the real Sully justice. In the end of the investigation we learn that he made a split second decision, that saved the lives of 155 passengers and that all alternatives would have led to a deadly crash. Wow, what a great reveal. It seems like the movie is trying to validate Captain Sullenberger as a hero when there was no doubt for anyone that he was. So why make the film? Yes, the spectacular water landing lends itself to be made into a movie. The investigation does not. I give this 6/10. Without Hanks this would have dropped below 5. On a side note: Anna Gunn complains about the hate from fans, yet she keeps playing these roles. I find that amusing.
I really enjoyed this movie. Some might find it slow but to be honest, how much can you squeeze out of 208 seconds of flight? How many times can you replay it to make 1.5 hours of movie? I personally thought making the investigation the focus was a good way to extend it as well as show what everyone was going through. Pilot, passenger, traffic control, police, coast guard, boats, office workers, family etc etc. The other thing I wanted to say, being a former veteran is that I get that some people find the structure confusing but think about the pilots and even the passengers. They're gonna be suffering from PTSD. And even when they're not- think about going through a traumatic event- breaking your leg, a car accident. And think about those first couple of days and weeks re-living that scene in your head. I think that's what the director was going for. The experience from Sully's point of view replaying it over and over. What could he have done differently? The self-doubt, the questioning by the NTSB, the stress from his family, etc etc.
About my only gripe was that the sudden transition from NTSB looking to take his wings forever in a split second to recognizing his effort. To shift suddenly from them trying to pin everything on pilot error to you really were the main factor why everyone survived was just too fast. It made for a good climax in a way but seemed really unrealistic.
Review by dgwVIP 10BlockedParent2016-09-19T06:21:55Z
Two major components to this review: structure and impact. I will use inline spoiler tags, but note that I do not consider facts about the true events to be spoilers. It's a biopic—we know what happened. But if you don't, be warned that I will "spoil the ending", as it were, and stop reading now.
Now, then.
This is an important story. We all know what happened to the plane, and we all know what usually happens to aircraft whose pilots attempt to do what Sully pulled off. The story of the cra— I mean, forced water landing, itself is amazing. The whole process is so incredible, and this movie captures everything from the initial bird strike through the last boats carrying passengers to shore. I thought the story of the landing itself was done very, very well. This movie is worth watching on the strength of that portrayal alone.
I did have some major objections to the structure, though. They're probably not unlike @LuckyNumber78's complaints…though I'm not coming at this from the perspective of a screenwriter, just as a viewer.
Specifically, the most insulting sequence in the entire film to me was the beginning, which seems like it's throwing us right into the narrative, but turns out to be a just a dream (if it wasn't given away already by the aircraft trying to fly through Manhattan, grazing skyscrapers on its way to a fiery crash). That put me in a pretty skeptical mood for the rest of the film, and for good reason—lots of sequences turn out to be Sully's daydreams/hallucinations/imagination. They were not managed well, in my opinion. That's not to say I object to their use; just that they weren't done well in this film.
The whole temporal flow of the film is pretty unhinged, actually. Though it technically follows a single event from start to finish (the NTSB investigation), even that continuity is disrupted in places. The film retreads certain events, and includes a few others, for no discernible dramatic purpose. And even when it does buckle down and get on with settling the NTSB investigation once and for all, the climax reeks of half-assed attempts to make it "Hollywood suspenseful" that just fall flat. (I mean most of the final NTSB hearing, if you're wondering, where evidence like the report on the left engine shows up at the last minute.)
To be quite honest, I waffled between a 5 and a 6 on this one, not because I didn't find the film compelling, but because it doesn't work structurally. I get that there's an element of metaphor in how the film is laid out, and I appreciate it, but for a film like this it's really not in the story's best interest to keep the audience guessing at what's real. I finally decided on a 6, but only because the true story deserves more than a 5.