Well-Made Movie, But A Complete Lack Of Conflict Keeps It From Greatness

Rating: 5/10 (27 February 2017)

There is no doubt that "Sully" is a well-made film. I don't think Clint Eastwood (director) could do anything less at this point in his career. The tone is proper, the acting is fine, and the story is an inspiring one. It's just missing that one thing any film needs in order to have any dramatic purpose: conflict.
"Sully" tells the story of Chesley Sullenberger (Tom Hanks), the pilot of a passenger jet who, along with co-pilot Jeff Skiles (Aaron Eckhart), experiences dual-engine failure shortly after takeoff. With seemingly no other resort, Sully guides the plan down into the icy Hudson River, and all 155 passengers and crew are rescued safely.
Here's the problem with "Sully", flat-out: It doesn't have any conflict. Eastwood is a master at telling two sides of a story, but in this case only one side exists. No matter how evil Eastwood makes the NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board) look for questioning Sully, or the couple scenes where Sully beings to doubt himself, the audience is never given plausible evidence to believe that Sully is anything but a hero. It makes for a good feel-good story, sure, but not necessarily up on the big screen where some drama needs to be present.
All that being said, there is nothing technically wrong with the film. The airplane scenes are thrilling, the acting is solid all the way through, and Eastwood's tone (set by the real-life visuals and simple music) is right. If you perhaps know nothing about Sully's story, you might be completely drawn in.
To me, this is the type of film that might actually work better 5-10 years down the road, being watched by audiences that don't have any knowledge of the events. Since they won't know the details like current audiences do, future watchers might be able to get more invested.
As it stands, however, "Sully" is a film that is very well-made but just doesn't have the greatest dramatic story to tell. One would think it would be, but instead it just lacks that central conflict that any great movie needs. As such, I can't really give it the highest of marks (even if it is little fault of the film's own). At this point in his career, Eastwood can do any project he wants...and he's earned that. But some will be better/more interesting than others, and I felt "Sully" feel somewhere in the middle of that spectrum.