A great film with only one or two flaws

Rating: 7/10 (10 February 2013)

I wanted to give this film a ten, but unfortunately I think there were a couple of things that weren't done right, and which were important enough to have a bearing on the final ranking.
Before I get to those things though, let me start by saying that I think this is a brilliantly acted film that challenges the audience in some important ways.
I think that the casting of Denzel Washington was probably one of the best decisions that could have been made for this role - the fact that Denzel is one of those rare widely beloved actors means that it was easy for the audience to fall for his character without a lot of character development needed. I think that most other actors in that role would have alienated the audience, not because of their performance, but purely because of who they weren't - a popular celebrity.
By using Denzel the audience is quickly forced into the same internal conflict that people would experience in real life were the events in this film to unfold as portrayed - initially we would love the captain and consider him a hero, but then doubt would set in as the story began to unfold, and finally there would be the question of what to actually think about this man and his character in light of ALL his actions.
The audience is quickly pulled into this same journey, with little in the way of back-story required to endear Denzel's character to us, purely because we all know and love Denzel as an actor. Very clever casting.
I also like the story concept for this film - a plane crash that quickly turns into a character study of alcoholism and ethics, and the way in which it challenges the audience to actually consider the question: 'does the end justify the means?' I'm sure many an audience member was tempted, like I was at different points in the movie, to try and rationalize away the captain's unethical behavior purely because we could see a good outcome in doing so. Ironically, this sort of rationalizing is precisely the type of thing that addicts do when they don't want to confront the truth that they are addicted.
Here's what I think they got wrong though...
1. The final moments of the scene with the co-pilot and his wife in the hospital came across as being completely contrived - especially the weird 'praise Jesus' affirmations that his wife kept calling out. I'm really not sure who wrote that scene, but it doesn't truly reflect the mannerisms and speech of any Christian person I've ever met. I see what they were trying to do, but I think that the dialog was sloppy, and contrived and completely out of character with the rest of the acting in this scene, not to mention the rest of the film. Basically it pulls you right out of the movie for those couple of moments - there were far better ways those final few minutes could have been written to achieve what they wanted it to. In fact, I suspect that even the actors didn't get what was going on because suddenly the co-pilot and his wife slip into a mode of simply repeating dialog rather than actually emotionally investing themselves into what they are saying (just think about the difference in that co-pilot character at the start of the film, in the cockpit, and then again at the start of the hospital room scene, to what transpires in the last minute or so when they start talking about religion.)
2. John Goodman's character was wrong for this film.
Most of his scenes completely change, and are at total odds with the tone of the rest of the film. It literally goes from being a serious drama about an alcoholic to a Coen Brothers style black comedy whenever John Goodman's character makes an appearance.
3. The scene in the hotel with John Goodman and the cocaine rescue was completely wrong for this film.
We literally go from a serious scene exploring the temptations of addiction and the serious ramifications of giving in to that addiction, to a scene where a character right out of the Big Lebowski wanders in (catchphrase and all - "I'm on the list"), and then three guys proceed to play out a scene with a comedic tone. The only thing that could have made that scene worse was if they had included canned laughter when the union rep and the lawyer are quibbling over who was going to pay the drug dealer's bill.
And then within minutes of this comedic interchange we are literally into the serious dramatic crescendo of the film - the aviation investigation hearing.
I guess they were trying to portray the irresponsible and enabling nature of certain people that addicts surround themselves with (i.e. their dealers), however this didn't really get conveyed at all in the film - i.e. there was no moment of epiphany where Denzel's character suddenly realizes that this lovable drug dealer is actually a loser who is actively destroying and dragging his life down the toilet, and then confronts Goodman's character. No, instead we have a drug dealer who has his own theme song and catchphrase, and whose vile behavior is turned into schtick comedy scenes.
Ironically these scenes almost completely undo the film by trivializing drug use, drug dealing and substance addiction.
So, all in all, a great film with one or two flaws that were bad enough to cost it a ten.