Sully Movie Review - Robert Zemeckis' Flight in TV movie form

Clint Eastwood, once known as the man with no name, has been putting his directorial emphasis on telling many true stories as of late, which, as many people know, is a risky business, not just because of the backlash a film can get for getting many details wrong (which, yeah, this film's already received much of that as is), but because in order to get an audience invested, there has to be an emotional weight to it. Getting this aspect right has been a roller coaster for Clint; J. Edgar was an unfocused, scattered biopic that didn't have very much emotional weight due to the story not holding much emotional weight to begin with, but American Sniper, polar opposite to that, was an emotionally powerful look at PTSD. Sully lands somewhere in the middle of that, maintaining focus on one event rather than trying to tell a person's life story, but also suffering from some stiff, almost lifeless execution that makes for a pretty forgettable experience.

For those who don't know, the film centers around Captain Chesley Sullenberger, who, on January 15th, 2009, piloted US Airways Flight 1549 taking off from an airport in New York City. A mere three minutes after takeoff, the plane gets bombarded by a group of geese, which causes engine failure. After much analyzing, Sully, as he's called, decides the best option is to land the plane in the Hudson River. His efforts save everyone on board, and he's dubbed by the press as a hero. However, not too long after, investigators come after him and try to make it look like he could have taken a different course that would have resulted in less damage to the plane. The resolution to that, if you don't already know, I won't spoil.

All the pieces are in place for a pretty powerful drama. The set-up reminds me very much of Robert Zemeckis' 2009 film, Flight, except whereas that was more of a character study in which a man goes through the turmoil of an emotional experience and suffers the consequences of his drinking problems, Sully plays out like an investigative drama in which we constantly look over an event and the audience, along with the characters, attempts to determine if a better outcome could have come about. Honestly, the choice to adapt this story was a much smarter decision from Eastwood than just saying "I'm gonna  make a movie about J. Edgar Hoover!..... And that's all I got."

Where the film falls short, however, is in its execution. The film feels very much like a TV drama, being very straight-forward, dull, and lifeless. Everybody talks about the emotions of the situation rather than conveying emotions, and every performance is flat and forgettable. Tom Hanks is a talented actor who recently gave an emotionally hefty performance in Captain Phillips, but comes off very stiff here. Even during the flight failure, he seems rather calm, cool, and collected about the scenario. Even in Saving Private Ryan, a film where he plays a Captain in the military, he conveyed SOME emotion. I got nothing but stiff monologue from Sully! And yes, as you probably heard, the investigators are the most obvious villain stereotypes you could get in a film like this. I almost expected one of them to have an eye patch, or a least a cigar.

So, would I recommend the film? Well, if you're familiar with this incident and have been following this film for a while and want to see the event conveyed in film form, I can't say there's anything terrible about it that makes me say you should stay away from it. It tells the story it needs to tell, and plot-wise, it does have a pretty flowing narrative. However, if you're like me and you want to get invested in the representation of a historical event through an emotional experience, this will definitely be underwhelming for you.

My rating: