Read Mixed User Reviews for Sully

5

foxgroveNov 10, 2016

A disappointing but predictably pedestrian telling of the plane that, due to an unforeseen bird strike on the aircraft, went down in New York's Hudson River. This is a big incident being told in a small time frame for the most part.A disappointing but predictably pedestrian telling of the plane that, due to an unforeseen bird strike on the aircraft, went down in New York's Hudson River. This is a big incident being told in a small time frame for the most part. Therefore, once the birds have done there damage and the plane crash lands there is nowhere much else for the film to go. Sure, we have endless 'what if' reconstructions and the inevitable investigation into the cause of the plane's downing, but this is all filler even if the recreations of the crash are well realised. The investigation by officials into Sully's actions are a bit on the ploddy side, only sparking any interest very occasionally. The scenes with Laura Linney are just impossible. The actress plays the part of the rather selfishly concerned wife in a dreary and tiresome manner. Her scenes add nothing to the drama, but add much to the film's descent into the average. Thankfully, the film is mercifully short.… Expand

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

6

mani8kgmSep 19, 2016

If it had been a lesser known actor, the movie would've sunk without a trace. Tom Hanks carried the film, and only just about. Total waste of my time.

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

6

netflicSep 12, 2016

The movie depicts a true story of "The Miracle on Hudson", when in 2009 a plane hit a flock of wild geese and lost both engines, and it's captain managed to land it into Hudson River and save all passengers and crew. It is named after CaptainThe movie depicts a true story of "The Miracle on Hudson", when in 2009 a plane hit a flock of wild geese and lost both engines, and it's captain managed to land it into Hudson River and save all passengers and crew. It is named after Captain Sullenberger, or "Sully" for short. The movie is based on a book 'Highest Duty' that Sully co-wrote.

I am a big fan of Clint Eastwood as a director, and my expectations were high, especially considering Tom Hanks starring in this movie, and high ratings from both critics and audience.

Hanks's performance was as good as I was hoping for. I enjoyed cinematography for the most part, even though sometimes computer-generated graphics were too obvious.

Directing for me was not very impressive, however. People in some episodes did not look authentic or believable. Additionally, Eastwood over-dramatized National Transportation commission's incident investigation, making them look like bad guys trying find fault in Captain Sully's actions. A quick look at Wikipedia proved that it was not the case. I understand the importance of artistic license, and that the movie is not a documentary, but the event was too recent, and Hollywood should not re-invent history to destroy real peoples' reputation.

Overall the movie is not bad and is worth watching but it is definitely not one of Eastwood's best.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

5

vreynauldSep 12, 2016

It pains me to give such a middling score to a movie which Tom Hanks so masterfully carries but that's the problem: Tom Hanks has to carry the whole movie. The film spends a ridiculous amount of time on the investigation of Sully and thatIt pains me to give such a middling score to a movie which Tom Hanks so masterfully carries but that's the problem: Tom Hanks has to carry the whole movie. The film spends a ridiculous amount of time on the investigation of Sully and that entire part of the film feels like it was ripped straight out of the script from Denzel Washington's similar film, "Flight". Other than Hanks' performance, the effects do help keep the movie from being a complete bore. All in all, it's a fictionalized biopic with drama of a situation we already know the resolution to and manufactured "drama" for the sake of creating artificial suspense.

"Sully" is a solid Blu-ray rent or buy but not worth paying the inflated theater costs to see.… Expand

4 of 7 users found this helpful43

All this user's reviews

6

InsomniackerSep 10, 2016

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. By weighing down the movie's first half with what felt like a ginned-up, artificial inquest, it turned what should have been an exciting story into a bit of a slog. The second half added a bit of adrenaline to the proceedings but for me, it was too little too late.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

AxeTSep 10, 2016

Very well crafted and acted, smart non-linear structure unfortunately suffers from the key inherent problem of it being a sensational true story we all know the ending to, but even more problematic for a Hollywood movie: nobody dies. TheVery well crafted and acted, smart non-linear structure unfortunately suffers from the key inherent problem of it being a sensational true story we all know the ending to, but even more problematic for a Hollywood movie: nobody dies. The story is sorely missing what all drama and comedy, anything must have: conflict. It attempts to manufacture this by way of the insurance/NTSB investigation, but somehow though no doubt true this comes off as phony and highly contrived for effect and filler.
The flashbacks of Sully's earlier flying days are not delved into and wind up pointless. With that kind of thing you can't go just partially into it.
It's a good old fashioned heroic tale yeah, but compared to the superb "Captain Phillips" (10 rating) also with Tom Hanks playing real captain in harrowing true story and the fictional "Flight" (9) which is very, very close story wise in its post flight investigation plot (and in fact its screenwriter was inspired by the miracle on the Hudson to conceive his similar story), this movie does not have nearly the gripping emotional pull of either of those films.

A fan of aviation disaster movies going all the way back to the seminal experience of seeing "Airport 1975" at the movies, I was fully onboard for this and was riveted for the first half. The second half dragged and I was very glad when it ended at a normal running time and not the well over two hours as is the stupid trend for any kind of big or substantive pictures these days.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

RobBob99Sep 10, 2016

While the plane sequences in the film are jaw dropping, I can't say anything else in Sully is. It's a well made movie with good performances but there wasn't anything exceptional about it. I feel like it's a cliche at this point to say thatWhile the plane sequences in the film are jaw dropping, I can't say anything else in Sully is. It's a well made movie with good performances but there wasn't anything exceptional about it. I feel like it's a cliche at this point to say that Tom Hanks is really good in a movie but that's the case with Sully. He absolutely carries the movie from start to finish in a slightly rushed and an uninspired by the numbers biopic.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

BilkaDimmaSep 8, 2021

It's a movie based around strong dialogues. If you have one and a half hour available you will not regret watching it but don't wait for the film that is going to change your life. It has some boring parts ,but overall the experience isIt's a movie based around strong dialogues. If you have one and a half hour available you will not regret watching it but don't wait for the film that is going to change your life. It has some boring parts ,but overall the experience is rather intresting. Tom hanks really showed up ,almost carrying the film. Solid 6.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

imthenoobDec 8, 2016

A few years back they made the movie Flight and it was inspired by the real life Miracle on the Hudson but wasn't based off the same event. Watch that instead, It's a far superior film. Sully focuses more on the boring aftermath of the eventsA few years back they made the movie Flight and it was inspired by the real life Miracle on the Hudson but wasn't based off the same event. Watch that instead, It's a far superior film. Sully focuses more on the boring aftermath of the events on the Hudson and it just fails to capture anything emotionally on screen. There is not a single stand out thing about it. Even Hanks' solid performance as Sully doesn't save this film from being a total and absolute bore.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

SpangleFeb 22, 2017

Whenever I watch a standard biopic, a thought crosses my mind: Do directors and writers ever feel bad about turning somebody's life into something unextraordinary? In a film such as this, a real life tale of heroism, Clint Eastwood justWhenever I watch a standard biopic, a thought crosses my mind: Do directors and writers ever feel bad about turning somebody's life into something unextraordinary? In a film such as this, a real life tale of heroism, Clint Eastwood just shoves Sully's life into being a rehash of every inspirational biopic ever made. In the process, the extraordinary becomes typical and loses its power. He tries to change the formula a bit and turns the film into an occasionally flashback look at the Miracle on the Hudson and the impact it had on Chesley Sullenberger (Tom Hanks) and all those on-board, but the film just never really sticks the landing. Its real power is found on the plane, but Eastwood seems reluctant to go to the plane at all and instead tells uninteresting side stories.

One of the main culprits in the crash of Sully is the inclusion of the NTSB investigation. Cliched, annoying, and unfair to the NTSB who did not interrogate Sully or make him out to be a villain, these portions of the film are included to add stakes and tension to non-flight scenes. However, they just feel like inclusions from every cliched feel good biopic of the past century. The scenes do not add tension, rather they merely annoy and distract from the true story: the landing of the plane on the Hudson. They do not add greater understanding to the story and merely exist to add the false tension that the film could find on the plane, but refuses to do so for a long stretch. Worse yet, the NTSB investigation is greatly predictable. As it is not true, it is clear it will always come back positive for Sully after he is persecuted for much of the film. Eastwood tries to strike an anti-bureaucracy tone here as they try to tear down this great American hero. Unfortunately, he misses the mark. Throughout the film, we see nothing but evidence he could have made it back and an over-eager Sully taking a nosedive into the Hudson. The way the film paints it, it seems like he wanted to land in the Hudson regardless of the options available to him. By the end, he is cleared and we all celebrate that he has been vindicated, but this does not excuse the scattershot approach to the treatment of Sully's decision or the actions of the NTSB.

The film also tacks on Sully's wife Lorraine (Laura Linney). Watching a talented actress get stuck in a somebody's wife role is always tough, just as it is watching Linney struggle for air in a film that strips her of any role in the film. Randomly popping up to further add pathos and power with Sully's family, the scenes are flat, dull, and useless. Linney tries her best, but the scenes feel scripted and nonsensical. Perhaps they are real, but they never feel authentic and are akin to the flight simulations run throughout the film. The scenes simply miss the mark and do not add emotional depth to the film, especially since it did not need any more stakes or suspense. The scenes are all shown in the aftermath of the accident, so we know Sully survived. Thus, Eastwood is forced into showing delayed reaction on the part of Lorraine or her first seeing it on the news, but even then it lacks the suspense of her not knowing about Sully's safety, since he was the one who told her to see the television. In other words, the scenes are useless.

The only scenes that work are the ones in the plane. Unfortunately, Eastwood even strips these of tension by showing them out of order. The film could have been 24 minutes and 208 seconds long without missing any of the good parts. The only successful parts of this film come as a result of the natural pathos, tension, and thrills aboard this plane that is coming down on the Hudson. Fluff added via the control tower and the guy who thinks the plane crashed, the rescue teams, and otherwise, are unnecessary additions of hero worship or suspense. The plane hitting the birds, them landing the plane, the flight crew preparing the passengers, the passengers telling one another they love each other, the landing, and then the rescue. That is it. That should be the whole film. End credits. Fin. In these scenes, Tom Hanks is in full control and Aaron Eckhart is equally terrific. Eastwood's direction is reserved, relying upon the scene to provide the tension with no artificial additions to try and make it even more suspenseful. The scenes just play out to perfection, but are sadly chopped up and strewn throughout the film. It seems as if Eastwood knew they were the only scenes that worked, so he tried to make it last longer as he built a film from scraps around these top-notch sequences. Unfortunately, the film suffers under this bloat and the excess scenes feel so much worse in comparison to the scenes that do work. In essence, Sully is a film with a great core - the acting and the flight sequences - but it refuses to use them, in favor of peripheral element that suck the life out of the entire picture.

A mixed bag, Sully would be a great short film. As a feature length film, it is not.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

MattBrady99Dec 25, 2016

"I've had 40 years in the air but in the end, I'm going to be judged by 208 seconds.”

The story of "Sully" may not be an exiting one on paper, but it's take on heroism and false judgment is quite compelling. Tom Hanks & Aaron Eckhart both"I've had 40 years in the air but in the end, I'm going to be judged by 208 seconds.”

The story of "Sully" may not be an exiting one on paper, but it's take on heroism and false judgment is quite compelling. Tom Hanks & Aaron Eckhart both deliver a powerful performance that was so down to earth. I don't think the movie would've worked without those two. They literally carry this movie and the best scenes come from them.

Clint Eastwood manages to take a basic story and make into something effectively thrilling. Even if I don't agree with everything decision (film making wise) Eastwood made in this movie, but his heart and mind was in the right place.

The movie has it's flaws. Like the 9/11 imagery and dream sequences wasn't really needed. It felt force and kinda thrown in at the least minute, because of how short the movie is. And that's really it for issues.

I think it's worth checking out for Tom Hanks and Aaron Eckhart outstanding performances, which might be their best.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Rebecca31Dec 6, 2016

Right I'm going to get the bad stuff out of the way first. The pacing for this movie is all over the place, there is no smooth transition from scene to scene from dream to flashback to dream and so on. As a result the movie suffers from aRight I'm going to get the bad stuff out of the way first. The pacing for this movie is all over the place, there is no smooth transition from scene to scene from dream to flashback to dream and so on. As a result the movie suffers from a lack of build-up and loses some dramatic effect. As for the references to a plane crashing into buildings in New York that was simply unnecessary. Seriously Clint Eastwood if you wanted to make a 9/11 movie then you should have made one. Aside from all that Tom Hanks and Aaron Eckhart were perfect together, and there are some truly intense moments that really capture "the miracle on the Hudson." Yet from all the hype I feel like this movie should have been better, still worth a watch so I'm recommending it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

mohamadjahaniDec 11, 2016

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I did not expect Clint Eastwood to make such a film ,simple poor and very boring but in fact acting of tom hanks was wonderful such ever . however thanks man .… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Benkoko11Feb 23, 2017

Sully benefits from great acting and direction that brings depth and humanity to a wonderful moment of heroism, however stretching a 200 second event into a 90 minute film was a tall order.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

amheretojudgeFeb 9, 2018

brace for impact..

Sully Often biographies takes their time, mostly more than 2 hours or so but this one seems to be to the point and not far fetched, hats off to the editor. Sully brews a soft hearted characters through rough series ofbrace for impact..

Sully

Often biographies takes their time, mostly more than 2 hours or so but this one seems to be to the point and not far fetched, hats off to the editor. Sully brews a soft hearted characters through rough series of events which probably is the only reason why you root for the protagonist from the first frame of the movie; that and of course blend in by excellent execution and Tom Hanks. Clint Eastwood as always justifies each and every character and gives them enough space and range (even the passengers) holding the bits and pieces of the movie with the emotion that comes off it. Tom Hanks is as always magnificent in it and is supported strongly by Aaron through out the course of it. Sully's strength is its runtime which is short and to the point but the problem is that the material isn't sufficient for even that amount of time cornering the feature to rely only upon the performance by the actors and the final act of the interrogation which is the highlight of it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews