Sully : 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

An abrupt ending on a weird joke. The same scene repeated three times in full over the course of the movie, forced drama that quickly subsides. Sully didn't do the things I expected and I am amazed its being rated this well after viewing it. Word of mouth should drop this quickly, if Eastwood and Hanks weren't attached this script would have been thrown in the Hudson.

It seems like a lifetime movie with good acting. Honestly it was just a weird movie. I can't say I hated it, just left without understanding what I just watched. Very forced. I'm so confused. When movies like this make so much money I question everything! Everything!!!! 36 million...How?!?!?!?! I really expected a 8-10 million opening with the theater I went to being so empty at prime time.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

I guess the story is a fantasy for late in life dudes. Hot wife, awesome mustache, being a hero because of your years of experience, delivering a sick burn to a court of young know it alls in front of a crowd of people. Being proved that you were right all along.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

That may be the best explanation I hear. Seriously forgettable movie too. I'm trying to remember scenes but it's all just coming out as cliches.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

Yeah, I think there's actually a lot of merit to that point. It's a good fantasy for older men.

"I said no camels, that's five camels, can't you count?"

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

So... it's "weird" that a movie doesn't cater to the point of view of a 17-23 year old?

Hollywood can't make every movie about the fantasies of children who want to have super powers and save the galaxy, men who want to be action heroes and save the world, or women who want to... well all the crazy stuff women want. Those are all over the map, really. :D

This is actual reality. But you guys dismiss it as fantasy for old guys. Funny.

I know, it's hard to see outside your own personal box. No, I am not an old dude either.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

I'm legitimately asking what you enjoyed about it. Did you enjoy the same dialogue three times? Did you enjoy the flashbacks that came and went without a word? Did you enjoy the crisp fade to black ending on a joke? Like I said I didn't hate it, it was an average movie, but in no way an 8.0 and in no way should it make 36 million. I was frustrated to pay for two tickets cause it was a 40 minute movie stretched to an hour and a half.

The material was basic. The filmography was simple and the cgi was good but I liked it the first time and didn't need to keep rewatching the same scene. My main point being that I challenge anyone to remember specifics about this movie in 4 months.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

It ended with the joke because that was the first time Sully was able to relax, and the first time he was able to smile, since the emergency landing. It was the perfect ending.

Each time the water landing scene was repeated, something was different. The first time they showed the water landing, a good deal of the cockpit dialog in the middle was skipped and the perspective of the passengers was shown. Each time they revisited it, the director teased by showing just snippets of the actual point of impact, until by the end of the movie they'd shown it a few times. It was good because each time I kept wanting them to show more, and by the end of the film they had.

Even the flashback while they were playing the cockpit voice recorder showed a new perspective - imagine a frantic air traffic controller trying to help by shouting runway numbers in your ear while you're trying to figure out how to land a plane with no engines.

It may be cliched, but this is actually the first "feel good" movie I've seen in years, and that's pretty much all it was intended to be, and all it needs to be. It works because it's an amazing story, and it takes a certain kind of person to be good enough at his profession that he can improvise in an emergency like that.

There isn't much to remember other than that Tom Hanks did a fantastic job portraying the kind of guy Sully probably is, and must have been on that day.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

I get that but the end also has a choppy fadeaway that looks out of PowerPoint. You bring up all the fair points that make it a decent movie. I just feel like the box office and IMDb are overinflated right now even for a feel good movie

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

This.

Plus the incident was so amazing I was glad to see it repeated, albeit in different details along the way.

A gripping true story deserves a re-watch.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

I liked those repeated scenes of the landing and what led to it too.

But while the movie in some way was Monday morning quarterbacking at the same time the whole movie also seemed like a comment on that. A reminder of how easy it is to play with "should have done this" and "should have done that", but that hindsight is never being there, and usually misses more than a few things which actually were crucial for people who acted and were there.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

I have not seen the movie yet, but I've read this entire thread, and my immediate impression is that those saying it is "just ok", or "overrated", etc., have not watched many, if any, airplane crash documentaries, because the way everyone is describing the movie, sounds very similar to an airplane crash documentary, and I have watched tons of those.

I love those documentaries, and this is what it sounds like, with a little Hollywood spice thrown in for the big screen. Ironically, I wasn't planning on going to see it, for the opposite reason, i.e., I thought it would be yet another over-done Hollywood action-drama fest with suped up graphics and dim-bulb dialogue, and I have no interest in that cookie cutter junk anymore.

But after reading this thread, it sounds closer to the documentaries that I do like watching, so I think I will go see it this weekend.

If I'm right about that, there are mountains of people who like watching those kind of shows, so I'm not surprised at all that it's doing this well, and of course star power will always help. The real test will be the 2nd weekend, of course. Overrated movies flop on the 2nd weekend.

So, you've got a movie that is a real life story, plus, it's been given the blessing of Sully himself, it caters to a mature audience which represents at least 2/3rds of the population, it balances drama and action, catering to both genders, statistically speaking is a once in a lifetime event, apparently has a documentary feel to it which tons of people love, and last but not least, has a 100% happy ending where everyone goes home....only happy tears.

And some people are wondering why it's doing so well........

Not to mention the fact that more and more people are sick to death of the half baked recycled crud that Hollywood pumps out, and are absolutely desperate for something decent.

Btw, though, people don't usually finish an airplane crash documentary by saying, "Wow, that was incredibly exciting, had me hooked every second, fabulous direction, great acting, and the ending, WOW!" No, they're not like blockbuster movies, but they're not supposed to be.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

That's a valid point and I don't think you're far off from the documentary feel of it. Like I said I don't think anyone is saying they hated it. I didn't hate it, it was just very blasé, kind of like a airplane documentary.

At the end of the day, I was interested in the subject matter just not the presentation. It's the perfect movie for dvd viewing cause the crash is dialogue driven though and I wouldn't waste money on iMax

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

I enjoyed the performances...Hanks, Eckhart, etc....I enjoyed the scenes of the plane in flight (all of them), and the landings...I enjoyed the fact that this was based on a true story and that this pilot had the knowledge and skills to land the plane on the Hudson river and save everyone on board after both engines failed. That pretty much never happens. It was inspiring (disclaimer: I have a fear of flying).

I've always thought Eastwood was a technically skilled director, however, I usually find his films boring. I think the short run time and the fact that I expected a somewhat "boring" story, helped me enjoy this one. Also this was the first Eastwood film I've seen in a movie theater. Maybe that helped too.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

"The filmography was simple"

Yeah, or maybe someone else is simple.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

And the weird I'm referring to is the pacing. It was all over the place

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

Bravo!

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

I couldn't have said it better myself. Well done.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!


It's a good fantasy for older men.


There are many others. But they dont have Tom Hanks in them.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

Hard to disagree with this your assessment, but I do remember a few scenes that were good and Hanks pulls through too in some scenes. I think the wife is written poorly. The biggest thing for me as a negative is it's a 30 minute story told in 90 minutes. It's still a good ninety.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

That’s EVERY Clint Eastwood movie. Seriously, the guy didn’t start his career until he was in his 40s. By the 1980s, all his movies were about being old. The fact that they are such fantasy -- for example, they beg an old guy to come out of retirement because he is the only one who can save the day -- is what makes them so fun (mostly). This movie would have been a lot more fun if it had starred Eastwood because he’s so fun playing the old guy role. With Hanks it was “good” but ultimately kind of boring.

Your film gods: Lee Van Cleef and Laura Gemser
http://tinyurl.com/pa4ud44

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

So you must have never seen Rawhide. Eastwood didn't start is career in his 50's. He was doing TV during the 50s. Like a lot of actors. Got into the movies in the 1965 and started directing in the 70's. Get you fact straight.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

Jellybean, anyone can look at Eastwood’s IMDb page and see exactly when he started acting. We don’t need autists like you to verify the details that are irrelevant to to what someone is saying.

In case you still don’t understand: I was speaking broadly and hyperbolically to express the idea that Eastwood began his “old guy” / “I’m retired” movies quit early.

Your film gods: Lee Van Cleef and Laura Gemser
http://tinyurl.com/pa4ud44

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

No. American Beauty was a Fantasy movie for older men. This just a drama about some guy who landed in the Hudson. Also his Wife is not that hot. The woman who plays the wife is only about 10 years younger than Tom Hanks. That not unbelievable.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

this is quite a good analysis. i'll see it when i'm in my 60's

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

Just because you expected something to fail, doesn't mean it was going to. I hate that logic. Because you didn't like it, nobody else should.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

I feel like my opinion is pretty objective with this film.

They played the same cockpit scene three times. That's just insulting. The cut scenes were random, they through in a bar scene with Rappaport. I challenge anyone to tell me one original thing they did in the movie. It ended on a joke and fade to black?!?! That's so cheesy. The movie is average at best. Should be rated about a 6.0

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

Zman- I agree with pretty much everything you have said on this entire thread.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

Well, they make some original points I was not aware of, like the fact airline pilots do not get trained to land on water or that they are supposed to go through their quick reference guide book in case both engines fail, rather than know what to do. Makes me think twice about flying again.

As for repeating scenes, they were all from different points of view and as such were interesting. A lot of the film is psychological and an attempt to get into Sully's head I felt, thus the randomness, flashbacks and non-linear timeline help feel what Sully was feeling during and after the entire ordeal. They do not let the viewer watch it non-involved, with a cool head.

The joke is again trying to show that the life moves on, the story and the horror is largely behind them. It's like a first baby step after the entire thing has settled.

I liked the film, it was refreshing to see the non-overuse of special effects, the drama in realistic circumstances if you like.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

I've said this before on other threads - most Hollywood films today are so bad and generic, "average" films like this look like works of art. I think the film is above-average, but maybe that's because there are so few movie releases that I think are any good.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

sheep

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

The joke is on you, the film didn't end on an abrubt joke, the film continued after the still photo credits with a reunion of the real Sully, crew and passengers in the museum where the retrieved airline is kept. It was a really great scene to see them all back together.

You obviously don't know what good editing is all about because Eastwood and his crew did a fantastic job with this film in the way they presented the crash from different points of view. The fact that you can't understand why this film is good means you have no idea what real filmmaking is all about. You might want to stick to crappy cartoony superhero movies.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

Oh man I love the assumption I like super hero movies for anything more than eating popcorn for two and half hours.

You acting like the nuances are anything more than stretching out a movie with a thin plot is laughable. Especially when the movie did little to make you care about anyone but Sully.

The passengers were overlooked as a plot point. Terribly so. The cuts between scenes looked like they were done in PowerPoint with a fade. You can't really be that much in love with Clint Eastwood, mostly so cause it was such a departure of quality from his previous works. It could have been directed like that by anyone.

I've seen thousands of movies. This is an average film at best and never should have made that much money or had that big of a budget. The only thing that kept it from being a snooze fest is they had the dignity to cut it at an 1:36.

Like I said though, you mistake my confusion in its success or high rating for not appreciating the feel good sentiment in the film. I have never said I hated the film or its message, it's just average at best and 36 million is not typical box office for average with not a ton of hype.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

Please remove yourself from this website

"Think of it. 90% of the population united against a common enemy. We'll be unstoppable!"

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

You first. Meanie face

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!


An abrupt ending on a weird joke. The same scene repeated three times in full over the course of the movie, forced drama that quickly subsides. Sully didn't do the things I expected and I am amazed its being rated this well after viewing it. Word of mouth should drop this quickly, if Eastwood and Hanks weren't attached this script would have been thrown in the Hudson.

It seems like a lifetime movie with good acting. Honestly it was just a weird movie. I can't say I hated it, just left without understanding what I just watched. Very forced. I'm so confused. When movies like this make so much money I question everything! Everything!!!! 36 million...How?!?!?!?! I really expected a 8-10 million opening with the theater I went to being so empty at prime time.


I can feel the heat off the butt-hurt you're experiencing. It's like you never watch any movie that isn't put out by DC or Marvel. You're the reason why movies are rebooted so often. You want to see the same thing over and over and never experience anything other than text book script writing.






A good review of "Inside Out": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXC_205E3Og

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

I think it was cut the way it was because we were experiencing what Sully was...PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder). He kept on having flashbacks and nightmares of what had happened. That's why it was the way it was.



Get away from her, you BITCH!!!

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

Only two complaints? I thought the ending was fine. It is over. It's done. If it went on any longer it would've dragged. I thought the flashbacks were kind of weird at first but I like the different perspectives shown. Overall, really good movie with terrific performances by Tom Hanks and Aaron Eckhart. Good direction by Eastwood.


"Batter up, bitch boy." -Steve Klaszky

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

It was an OK movie. One of those movies you only need to see one time.

Either "WE" f*<kin or "I'M" f*<kin- Bill Cosby

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!


I guess the story is a fantasy for late in life dudes. Hot wife, awesome mustache, being a hero because of your years of experience, delivering a sick burn to a court of young know it alls in front of a crowd of people. Being proved that you were right all along.


Maybe this is it. My mom NEVER talks about movies....but she mentioned to me that her and her boyfriend are going to go see this. He's 88 and she's 78.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

I thought the film was great. Seems to me like some people are too used to stupid movies.

Actors are useless without the power of a good writer's imagination

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

Tom Hanks sells movies.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

I'd like to see you do better cawk stain.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

I have, check out my youtube.

I'm kidding, thanks for the input though. Just cause Clint makes something decent, doesn't mean I can't take confusion at the downgrade in quality from his previous works and an anomaly at the box office. When's the last time a film with the name of the true life character as the title dropped 35 mil plus.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

Ray? Ali?

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

Respectively made 20 million and 10 million on opening weekend. Sully almost doubled that...

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

Movies always get high ratings right after they come out. I thought it was a very good movie that deserved an 8.0. Sure, no super heroes exploded a bad guy after flying through CGI worlds of impossibility and there was no "message" about the importance of diversity, no fantastic car driving through heavy traffic, no flashing handguns giving a bad guy his deserved comeuppance and Sandra Bullock did not show how horrible people can be and give a poor person the chance he deserved. It was a real life story and had very round characters. It completely held my attention. There are movies with higher ratings that are more shockingly undeserving than this. The Force Awakens comes to mind immediately.

But of course this is just IMHO. I was not shocked to see an 8.0. New movies usually bust out higher than that. I expected the movie to be bad because I could not see how they could get a whole movie out of an event that happened so quickly, but it worked for me in a happy surprise.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

As for the replaying of scenes, I think that was because this was a third person subjective point of view. It got me inside of Sully's mind. He was replaying the scene over and over in his own head. But I understand your criticism because it might also be viewed as a way to make the movie long enough. All I can say is that it worked well for me. Eastwood is a good director and I think he had a purpose for what he did, but it clearly did not work for you, which I can respect.

Re: 36 Million?! How?! 8.0 rating? How?!

I think you sum up the other side pretty well. Like I said at the end of the day it wasn't a terrible movie and if I went into the IMDb rating system id be posting on every movie. I just feel like was it released any other date without a period of slow weekends it would have made nothing.
Top