El vuelo (Flight)

Denzel Washington is William "Whip" Whitaker, an alcoholic pilot who, after a night of heavy drinking, remains drunk well into the morning he is to fly a plane into Georgia. When his flight goes into a sudden tail- spin, Whip manages to save all but six lives through his crash-landing. Whip is a hero until his toxicology report comes up positive for everything under the sun, leaving the airline, Whip's union, his friends, and Whip in a tailspin of their own.

I have often thought that Denzel Washington is one of the finest actors to ever grace the silver screen, and he proves that assertion with a film that is assured to receive him a sixth Academy Award nomination. Here is a man broken beyond measure, stumbling through his lost life until unprecedented new stress is placed upon him. Not even the intervention of those he holds close can stop his self-destructive nature - or can it?

Robert Zemeckis has been on a sturdy path with animated films recently, so it was with a bit of apprehension that I saw his most recent live- action offering since "Cast Away". But have no fear. The direction here is clean, crisp, and efficient as ever, producing a simple, but powerful script by John Gatins, chock-full of par-none supporting roles by the likes of John Goodman, Don Cheadle, and Bruce Greenwood.

Undoubtedly the best part of the film - besides the wonderful cast - was the soundtrack. Joe Cocker, Bill Withers, and more are used expertly to mold into every emotion, sometimes emotional roller coaster, Whip experiences. Each song (some used more than once) slips seamlessly into the background and keeps the audience following more than the script.

"Flight" is a powerful, dark, character study about a man who has fallen to his darkest depths, and finds out how to fall farther. It sees Denzel Washington in top form and Robert Zemeckis' triumphant return to the live screen.

I am an aircraft mechanic, so admittedly I have trouble watching a movie which will undoubtedly abuse reality in terms of physics and aircraft design. I recall seeing previews for this and being stunned at the laughable scenario of an inverted passenger plane. That experience dropped my expectation to essentially zero.

When I watched this film I was surprised in two ways. Firstly, the scenario was more plausible than I had given it credit. Inverted flight is a problem for most planes because of aerodynamics. And while some aircraft are aerodynamically capable of inverted flight (even some passenger planes) it is additionally a problem because hydraulic and engine oil systems are often gravity fed. This means that if a plane is able to fly this way, most of them won't fly for long before systems begin to fail. The film did a reasonable job of portraying this as the plane was just barely able to sustain level flight with a full pitch down elevator position and displayed low engine oil press warnings which led to engine fire. I suspect the roll maneuver would require more altitude than the film suggests...but otherwise it's not far from what could happen in reality if this was actually attempted. Most engine fire T-handles are designed to instantly shut fuel and bleed air valves for an engine...which doesn't seem to happen here, but that was my biggest realism gripe.

My second surprise is that this movie has very little to do with aviation. Aviation seems to be the setting for the story, but the subject itself is substance abuse. The story could have just as easily been set around a bus driver or a ship captain. Given the fact that aviation was merely a setting for the story I have to give credit to the film makers for paying at least some attention to realism.

I thought the story was fascinating. It's the sort of film that requires something of the viewer. You can't watch this without making moral judgements and that process requires each viewer to evaluate how they feel about certain subjects. The story creates just enough moral dilemma to get people thinking and any story that can succeed in that gets a pass from me.

All the way until the ending I was eating this up. "Flight" is a tense, character-driven drama about a heroic pilot who averts an epic disaster only to be caught in the crosshairs of a long, ugly investigation of his life. It presents a highly complex story, weaving themes of heroism vs. arrogance, good intentions vs. bad results, and bad intentions vs. good results. For 80% of the film, "Flight" is on par with the greatest character studies since "12 Angry Men". However, be prepared for a less than fitting ending, or at best an ending that was rushed so quickly that it leaves you wondering "did we miss an entire scene where the ghosts of Christmas past, present & future showed up?"

That's the only negative I have, although it's a big one. For the rest of my review I'll focus on the positives. The biggest positive is, of course, Denzel Washington as pilot "Whip Whittaker". He certainly doesn't disappoint. The role is a challenging one: a man whose personal life is a disaster even though his professional life is spotless. His professional arrogance leads him to deny the failure of his personal life, and this is the conflict that makes the film riveting.

Although this film is squarely about him, there were some peripheral characters who really added to the pot. British actress Kelly Reilley pulls of a convincing southern accent (though southern sticklers may spot it as more "Alabama" than "Georgia" haha) and more importantly gives us insight into the mind of a damaged person who is genuinely trying to better herself, unlike our hero who denies his faults. Another great character, though minimal, is John Goodman who shows up as a bizarre, surrealistic "fixer" and adds tremendous color and humor to the show. The attorney for Whip Whittaker is excellently played by Don Cheadle who balances slick legal professionalism with utter frustration at his client's self-sabotaging acts.

Even the action scenes were incredibly done, using a full sized commercial jet cut into sections and hoisted up on a weird contraption that made it flip around for the cameras. This is a first class production from start to finish.

It only falls shy of monumental because of its Zemeckisy ending, a trademark of many 80s directors like Spielberg and Ron Howard where everything has to be neatly tied up in a bundle with a moral ending, even if it seems out of left field considering the characters' personality. But that's just my opinion and the reason why I docked "Flight" a few points. You may find it perfect. Regardless I think everyone can agree that most of the film is phenomenal.

Based on the trailers for "Flight," I was expecting a investigative procedural film. Denzel Washington plays a pilot who manages to crash land a plane with a minimal loss of lives, a feat everyone agrees no other pilot could probably accomplish. But evidence that he was intoxicated while flying the plane emerges and instead of a hero who saved lives, he becomes a possible felon who caused the crash in the first place.

But the film isn't interested in the investigation. Instead, this is a film about an alcoholic and the rock-bottom journey he goes on that leads him to face his addictive demons. I've never been a huge Washington fan, but he does pretty tremendous work here. This also feels like surprisingly grown-up material for director Robert Zemeckis, who's most known for treacly stuff like "Forrest Gump." My major complaint about the film is that it's far too long. An entire subplot that gives Washington a nominal love interest in the form of a fellow addict could have been cut from the film entirely -- and a good half hour with it -- without any significant impact.

I don't know that I would heartily recommend this film for any reason other than the excellent performance of Washington.

Grade: B+

Trailers might lead you to believe this is a film about flying. Or about an amazing flying feat. But it is all about the lead character, Captain "Whip" Whitaker (Denzel Washington), a man who is a pilot and an alcoholic. The flying and a terrible crash provide background for the story of this man, who has struggled with his illness for years.

In many ways the story is not that original. We have seen numerous stories about alcoholics and heard real-life testimonies of the behaviors that accompany alcoholism, and this film tracks with all of them.

It is worth seeing for the brilliant portrayal of Captain Whitaker and the performances of the other actors in the film. Some parts are difficult to watch because the acting is so engaging.

I also think the film raises some interesting questions that some viewers may not be willing to acknowledge. If one is an alcoholic, is the entire worth of that man nothing more than what his sickness drags him down to? Are we what we do? Can we rise above our neuroses or our worst behaviors? Often we see public figures condemned in media for indiscretions or harmful acts; is that, then, the measure of the man or woman?

The film, even if judged solely for its dramatic content, is worth seeing.