It is an odd feeling, walking into a theater to see a movie based on events you remember.
I had a similar sensation when I went to see Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, a great film that I hope to see again and blog about in the near future. Perks of getting older, I suppose. I look forward to seeing what else turns into a multi-million-dollar film, from event to production to distribution, in my lifetime.
But back to the matter at hand. Sully was about the "Miracle on the Hudson" that happened in January of 2009. The story is, basically, a routine flight was ended suddenly when birds flew into both engines of the plane. Without enough time to make a safe landing on a runway, the pilot, "Sully," decided to land on the Hudson River. This was incredibly dangerous, and there were many arguments about whether this was wise or not. This was the tension that was explored most in this film.
The main argument "for" Sully's decision was the fact that he was a responsible and experienced pilot. One way this was built in the story was by providing flashbacks to his earlier piloting years. Herein lies my main irritation with the film; the uncomfortable use of the tradition of threes. In many stories, films or otherwise, a repeated theme or idea will occur in a count of three. There are the Three Musketeers, three cheers of "Hip, Hip, Hooray!" and the three days given the young lady to guess Rumpelstiltskin's name. In the classic French version of Cinderella she attends three balls, Ebeneezer Scrooge is visited thrice in the night, and the Fellowship of the Ring breaks into three separate "teams," if you will. Jesus was in the grave for three days, Joseph interprets three dreams in Egypt, and there are three bears in the woods who love porridge.
Back to the flashbacks. There were two. While it could have been argued that the third flight that proved his experience/responsibility was that flight that landed on the river, the fact that that flight was shown over and over again seemed to separate it from his history. They were given their own category of repetition. I spent the rest of the movie after the second remembering of past flights waiting for the third. That would have rounded it off and made the whole film feel complete. Granted, it was also based on the book, so maybe that was not possible, but that is my opinion.
The rest of the film was okay. It looked impressive, for sure. There were a few other areas where the story could have been stronger, but the final hearing scene was phenomenal. I could feel the tension and the excitement and the pauses were just long enough. The acting and directing were superb.
As per the norm, there were a couple of editing/production slips, but that rarely detracts from the experience of the average viewer. I have become more sensitive to the little things, the slight change in the direction or color of the light, or the repeated action in the background. These are in every film, though. This one was quite clean.
Overall, I believe the film told a fascinating story. It may not have been 100% accurate, but what is, really? Even the news does not represent exactly what happened. I hope the story is remembered for years to come, and if the film helps, excellent.
 |
| Tom Hanks - A screenshot from the film - Captain Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger |
