Sully: Miracle on the Hudson

Clint Eastwood as we like him the most: simple, economical, straightforward and this time almost without pathos. His reconstruction of a famous event is neither as overwhelmingly authentic as United 93 nor as classically cinematic as The Flight, it treads on the edge, somewhere in between, and it does a great job. Basically without a dead spot, every shot is a forward thrust. The accident scene is amazing, both in terms of atmosphere and visual effects. Another film where the great form isn't a crutch for a lack of screenwriting substance, but serves exactly where it's expected, something that very rarely happens in a film of this kind. If it weren't for Tom Hanks being a good guy in the 126th way (getting a little tired of it) and the final 30-60 seconds, it would be almost perfect. (11/09/2016)

Sully is an ingeniously constructed portrait of a disciplined professional who is haunted by doubts about whether he did the best job he could do. Eastwood composes the image of the central “miracle” and the portrait of the protagonist from several flashbacks, each of which accentuates a different level of the event and are then collectively mirrored in Sully’s final speech highlighting the merits of the crew. Though, thanks to Hanks, Sullenberger is a more charismatic personality than he seems to be from the way he describes himself in the book on which the film is based, he is still a rather ordinary working man of firm principles and unchanging rituals, not a hero who humorously comments on every difficulty and effortlessly overcomes every obstacle. Thanks to that, Eastwood is able to see the concept of heroism in a different light. Anyone can become a hero regardless of the brilliance of their character traits, if they “just” do what they do best. 80% (19/09/2016)

Isn’t Clint Eastwood overdoing it it a bit with the nationalism? OK, I can take a war movie about a famous American flag, I can even take the story of an American sniper, whose life is quite tough, but is it really necessary to shoot a detailed reconstruction of how a plane landed on the Hudson River eight years ago? I’m not surprised that without the opening and closing credits this movie takes hardly 90 minutes because there really isn’t much to add. And I have to say that I didn’t really like the digital effect scenes involving the plane. Maybe fifteen years ago, but today? Thank god Tom Hanks was cast in the lead role because he’s not going to get any worse. But for the rest, I don’t want to see that ever again. (30/01/2017)

Clint Eastwood and Tom Hanks, in their old age, give precise performances in every way. I wouldn't have hoped for a biopic drama to blow me away more than anything else in recent memory. I watched until two in the morning to see how it would all play out. Suspenseful, intelligent, engaging and perfectly acted. It's great. 90% (26/11/2016)

Very professional work by the whole crew. Captain Eastwood boldly erects a memorial to discipline, precise decision-making and perfect work of Chesley Sullenberger. I vaguely remember seeing something about the crash-landing in the Hudson on the Internet. Needless to say, it didn’t really affect me much, but the way Clint works with this topic is fantastic. Nightmares, doubts and an almost detective movie style finale when Sully takes control and again using his cool nerves to saves himself. Wonderful. And the movie flies past terribly fast. Tom Hanks is absolutely right, no unnecessary snivelling from his Sully, he is just down to earth, a real professional. A minimum of pathos, pure facts. Bravo! (26/09/2016)