Sully

The movie is enjoyable to watch and gives a good impression of what must go on inside the mind of a pilot after such a spectacular accident. The depiction of the actual ditching (landing in the water) and the conversation between the pilots and controllers is quite accurate, and with CGI, quite believable.

However, the depiction of the investigative process, including the behavior of the investigators, is not realistic at all. I have worked as a professional pilot and air accident investigator for most of my life, and the investigation as depicted in this film is pure fiction.

In several interviews with the director, Clint Eastwood, he admitted that the movie needed a villain or antagonist, so he chose to depict the investigators and the investigative process as much more hostile than it really is.

It's not easy to present recent history in film. The rescue of 155 souls in an airplane who were diverted to the Hudson River is still in our memories (I remember them standing on the wings). Tom Hanks does a cool, underplayed version of Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger, who will live in the annals of heroism for as long as we talk about heroes. I was wondering how one takes a two minute event and turns it into a bracing film. But they do. By including the events in the investigation of the landing, they are able to keep our attention. Sullenberger's actions came under tight scrutiny because the airline "lost a plane." As it turns out, the lead investigator for the NTSB wasn't played quite accurately. Of course, we are in need of a villain, and the geese that flew into the engines wouldn't make good witnesses. I'm used to filmmakers playing a bit fast and loose with events, but let's face it, everyday things don't draw much attention. Hanks is good. The pacing is good. The recreation of the landing is quite apt. A good film.

What makes Sully exceptional is that Clint Eastwood lets the story tell itself.

Specifically real with the water landing itself. Nothing is really taken out of content in the way Hollywood thinks and usually takes it.

The event was dramatic enough without anything needed to be added to enhance that.

Tom Hanks is a fine actor. Not the greatest performance, but it was cool that Hanks and Eastwood did a movie together.

Sully gives us an in depth look at the miracle of the Hudson. Though the title does state that the we focus on Capt. Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger who did an amazing water landing on the Hudson in January of 2009, and got his 15 mins because of it, Eastwood shows us that even one man can see things in many different ways, as Eastwood goes through all those angles.

I love Aaron Eckhart as Jeff Skiles, the co pilot who supported greatly the pilots decision. He was a great supporting actor for Tom Hanks.

In the end this movie is about heroes, not just Sully but everyone involved in the US Airways Flight 1549 water landing. From the well trained flight attendances to the rescue police on the water fairy. Its about the 155 passengers and the their accounts of what happen. It's about how sometimes we forget how to treat a hero, but true heroes will always shine though, and Eastwood tells the story as real as possible knowing that he has an incredible story here.

It's a cold morning on Jan 15, 2009. Captain Chesley Sullenberger (Tom Hanks) and his first officer Jeff Skiles (Aaron Eckhart) survive bird strikes and the lost of both engines to safely land the US Airways Flight 1549 in the middle of the Hudson River. All 155 aboard are rescued. Despite being almost universally herald as a hero, the NTSB investigation starts raising questions and Sully is haunted by the incident.

Hanks is Sully. He embodies the easy natural goodness the role entails. The recreation of the incident is compelling. Eastwood should be more careful about doing the incident twice. The second time needs to be sufficiently different from the first. Then there is the clunky NTSB villainy. The flawed computer simulations need to be expanded. Otherwise, it's hard to buy the dangers to Sully. I wonder if a straight docu-style recreation would be more compelling.

One of the most remarkable incidents of the 2000s was when U.S. Airways Flight 1549 landed in the Hudson River on January 15, 2009. All of the 155 passengers on the plane survived. This dramatization of the incident, starring Tom Hanks, tells the story of Captain Chesley Sullenberger, who pulled off the Miracle on the Hudson, as it's called. Hanks gives a solid performance as Sully, who is conflicted as to whether or not he endangered the lives of all of the people on board. Aside from the incident itself, most of the movie is dedicated to the debate over whether or not the plane could potentially have returned to LaGuardia. The FAA is made out to be a villain of sorts. Some may argue that this is not as interesting as the incident itself, or that it isn't good movie material. It still works as a film, as it is more about Sully himself than anything else. Director Clint Eastwood does a great job at telling the story, by cutting the incident into several scenes and having the rest be about how it affected Sully's life, and that of his family. After the incident, Sully himself had to deal with PTSD, as well as the stress of instantly becoming a celebrity. His wife and daughters also had to deal with a constant bombardment of attention from the press. This is the focal point of the movie. It's about the people, not the incident. In that regard, it is a very good movie, but if you're expecting it to be about the incident itself, go watch any of the documentaries made about it.