Sully: Miracle on the Hudson

A well-constructed drama that diversifies the relatively straightforward story with a few cleverly timed changes in perspective. Eastwood directs conservatively and keeps pathos in check, which pays dividends several times in the process when we return from the "present" to the deck of flight 1549. The only problem is the character of Sully, who is so one-dimensionally humble, good and self-doubting, that in order for the film to function as a drama at all, it must demonize the NTSB investigators. Everyone around the miraculous flight does their job 100%, the film is literally an ode to ordinary working Americans who trust their asses more than computers or institutions. But I feel that making the NTSB into a group of biased, manipulative and unwilling suits is very controversial, even in the case of a "fictional dramatic reconstruction". Especially when among them are many former pilots and it is demonstrably usually very difficult for them to bear the failures of their colleagues. This way, it seems that the accident was surrounded by professionals, except for the investigators. Why this excursion? Sully is actually a very sparse and a single-stranded film. Entertaining but simple. But I wish it well - I could not tear myself away from it. (15/01/2017)

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)

The best new film since... Well, since Bridge of Spies. And it probably isn't a coincidence that Tom Hanks is also in it, because Sully is so very great in the first place, though not only because of him. I especially liked the ubiquitous tension and believable dramatic atmosphere. Whether the viewer knows in advance what happened on the Hudson or not (although after a few minutes everything is clear even to him), Eastwood's precise direction leaves him almost permanently shivering and waiting breathlessly for what will come in the next scene. We see the landing several times, but each time in a different way, and we never get the feeling that something is repeating itself, because the plot resembles a building kit made of many pieces that gradually fit together. Everything is carefully balanced - tension, pathos and humor - the main character is not a superman, but just an ordinary man who has done the incredibly right thing, but suddenly faces such pressure that he starts to doubt himself. What is admirable and commendable is that the film does not slip into any depressing drama full of regrets and question marks, but keeps its head above water and keeps winking at us: Don't worry, it will turn out well. It would be a shame to miss such an excellent film, as modest as its main character. (21/09/2016)

No excuses, no messing around, only sensitively dosed pathos and no clichés. Through a cleverly constructed structure the movie doesn't beat about the bush, in other words it directly portrays the conflict of a man who while flying the aircraft without engines failure accomplished seemingly impossible and who is subsequently, under the pressure of others, begin to doubt whether by chance what he did, on the contrary, was not the worst possible solution and unnecessary bravery. Hanks proves again that he has no competition overseas when it comes to the box of "ordinary good guys next door". It hit the bull's-eye and is gripping at all times, during the freezingly calm and controlled crisis landing itself, in the moments of the beginning of panic and after it, during the intense questioning in front of the commission and during the self-searching wandering through frozen New York. Although it might seem like a Zemeckis' Flight at first glance, it is much closer to Greengrass’ United 93. (09/09/2016)

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)