It is easy to appreciate the high praise for one of Denzel's finest performances, the wonderful cast, and the quality of the narrative and storyline over the course of most of the film. This script had great potential to produce an often compelling story, with fine characters and direction. (I'm ignoring the fact that in everyday reality, a pilot like Denzel's character would be impossible, since professional pilots are subjected to regular drug and alcohol tests.) But, alas, virtually all the reviews and reviewers are blind to the film's fatal flaw.
What so terribly wrong here?? In nearly all action films and psychological dramas, the writers and director are offered several different--often competing--conclusions, the final "hook." I watched a film that deserved an 6/7 for its entire length, until the final 15 minutes, the scene where Denzel's character breaks down in a sudden fit of moral consternation in the official inquiry. At this point, the film suddenly is transformed from a serious drama into a sloppy, moralizing MELODRAMA. What a great loss. But Hollywood will out, destroying an intrinsically dark tale by providing a redemptive "happy ending" that is utterly incredible. Of course, 90% the audiences will love this, but it doesn't change the facts.
Think: When Denzel's character's interrogator asks the big question in the hearing, the real alcoholic he's been in every scene becomes a utterly different person. He can easily avoid blaming the innocent stewardess, AND save himself, with one answer: "I don't know." And then repeating it, over and over. Exactly what a binge drinker would have done--except for Hollywood and HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars at stake at the box office!! Concluding the film with the broken pilot preaching the gospel of AA while gratefully serving his prison term is like stepping into an entirely different fantasy, one without credible linkage. Speaking as a professional writer, no one who has read great novels and fiction critically can come to any other conclusion. But this qualifier regarding familiarity with supreme fictions will exempt the vast majority of readers who usually appear on this site.
What so terribly wrong here?? In nearly all action films and psychological dramas, the writers and director are offered several different--often competing--conclusions, the final "hook." I watched a film that deserved an 6/7 for its entire length, until the final 15 minutes, the scene where Denzel's character breaks down in a sudden fit of moral consternation in the official inquiry. At this point, the film suddenly is transformed from a serious drama into a sloppy, moralizing MELODRAMA. What a great loss. But Hollywood will out, destroying an intrinsically dark tale by providing a redemptive "happy ending" that is utterly incredible. Of course, 90% the audiences will love this, but it doesn't change the facts.
Think: When Denzel's character's interrogator asks the big question in the hearing, the real alcoholic he's been in every scene becomes a utterly different person. He can easily avoid blaming the innocent stewardess, AND save himself, with one answer: "I don't know." And then repeating it, over and over. Exactly what a binge drinker would have done--except for Hollywood and HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars at stake at the box office!! Concluding the film with the broken pilot preaching the gospel of AA while gratefully serving his prison term is like stepping into an entirely different fantasy, one without credible linkage. Speaking as a professional writer, no one who has read great novels and fiction critically can come to any other conclusion. But this qualifier regarding familiarity with supreme fictions will exempt the vast majority of readers who usually appear on this site.