Sully

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 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.

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.

A very low-key and introverted film. The structure of the film is very clever, the most moving flight process is scattered in the middle of the film, constantly re-enacted fragments to enhance the heat. But from another point of view, the story of the film is very simple, it can be said that the plot has no depth, especially reflected in the final hearing, a sentence to achieve a big turnaround. After watching it, there was even a feeling that it was a documentary rather than a commercial movie.

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.