DS Forums

 
 

Sully


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 23-12-2016, 18:20
David_Flett1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,454
I very much doubt that Sully will get a UK release until around February as it's still in the charts.
Releases date should be around 27th of March 2017, flexibility can allow early release for seasonal events but Easter doesn't fall until April 17th next year.
David_Flett1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 23-12-2016, 19:29
dosanjh1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,789
I liked the film. It's good because it's short and there's no padding - a tightly presented story.
dosanjh1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-12-2016, 14:10
cnbcwatcher
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: At college, in L.A.'s office
Posts: 54,213
I've booked to go see it on Friday night. I'm looking forward to it
cnbcwatcher is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 27-12-2016, 15:55
dave2702
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Offenburg, Germany
Posts: 1,344
Releases date should be around 27th of March 2017, flexibility can allow early release for seasonal events but Easter doesn't fall until April 17th next year.
Conveniently March 26th will be Mothering Sunday, so a handy present for mothers who like Tom Hanks
dave2702 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-12-2016, 02:12
PJ68
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,807
must say i thought this was incredibly boring, they had to spice it up with nightmares of planes crashing and a very dubious will he or won't he get blamed for landing on the hudson.

and showing the crash at the end of the film, the climax, what it had been leading up to, was ever so slightly ruined by ALREADY SHOWING THE CRASH HALFWAY THROUGH THE FILM.

completely ridiculous film making.

if you want to see a great film about a plane crash in which the crash is teased throughout the story watch peter weir's fearless.
PJ68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-12-2016, 05:12
koantemplation
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wolf359
Posts: 96,648
must say i thought this was incredibly boring, they had to spice it up with nightmares of planes crashing and a very dubious will he or won't he get blamed for landing on the hudson.
I was put off as soon as they showed the first 'crash' was just a nightmare.

Like you say, you know a film is in trouble when they have to use dreams.
koantemplation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-12-2016, 12:17
Ted Cunterblast
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 5,763
must say i thought this was incredibly boring, they had to spice it up with nightmares of planes crashing and a very dubious will he or won't he get blamed for landing on the hudson.

and showing the crash at the end of the film, the climax, what it had been leading up to, was ever so slightly ruined by ALREADY SHOWING THE CRASH HALFWAY THROUGH THE FILM.

completely ridiculous film making.

if you want to see a great film about a plane crash in which the crash is teased throughout the story watch peter weir's fearless.
I didn't have an issue with the structure of the film in that respect at all. Intercutting between different aspects of the story and showing flash forward/flashbacks is a very common technique in film.

In this case I thought the contrast between the inquest scenes and the various aspects of the event, including the lead up to the incident as well as the aftermath. In that respect I thought it was paced fairly well.

Granted the nightmares may have seemed a little clichéd and melodramatic, but I don't think it detracted from the overall enjoyment of the story.

As for Fearless, which I also love and watched recently, I think you could argue the structure was not too dissimilar. Both films showed aspects of the crash near the beginning of the film, and then showed various other details of the event during the film interspersed with the main story.

You appear to have been expecting some sort of Airport-style disaster movie, with events unfolding in strictly linear fashion.
Ted Cunterblast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-12-2016, 07:04
PJ68
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,807
no its that the plane crashing flashbacks were the same. it took all the drama out of the second
PJ68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-12-2016, 19:17
cnbcwatcher
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: At college, in L.A.'s office
Posts: 54,213
Heading off to see this soon
cnbcwatcher is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 11:49
Ted Cunterblast
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 5,763
no its that the plane crashing flashbacks were the same. it took all the drama out of the second
Completely disagree - what you saw throughout the film was not the same sequence, but various different aspects of the takeoff, the flight, the bird strike, the reaction of the passengers and the actions of the pilots in the cockpit.

I believe you may have seen a brief sequence early on of the plane landing on the Hudson, but the end sequence showed the full, detailed landing and the escape and rescue of the passengers.

Plus any sequences where you may have been shown the same sequence twice was shown from a different aspect or angle.

I would also make the point that this was a real life event so we already know what happened, same with the Titanic...so what exactly can be spoiled by showing the event or aspects of the event twice?
Ted Cunterblast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 19:56
cnbcwatcher
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: At college, in L.A.'s office
Posts: 54,213
Went to see it last night. Absolutely brilliant, I enjoyed every minute of it. I liked the fact that it was not told in a linear fashion. It made it a bit more interesting. The crash scenes were very dramatic and I almost felt like I was there! I don't know how I would have reacted if I was on that flight. I probably would have panicked or written my last will and testament. I listened to some of the real crew interviews on my phone on the way home to see how accurate they were and most of the details were strangely accurate in the film. I pre-ordered the DVD from Amazon. Definitely a movie I'd watch again as I find the story of the Miracle on the Hudson fascinating.
cnbcwatcher is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 01:57
d'@ve
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Darn Sarf
Posts: 28,723
I must admit I saw it online
Can't blame you really, it's long overdue for the film companies to get their act together and do simultaneous DVD/BD releases Worldwide and unless and until they do, many people will find ways to acquire the first disc or download release, who would otherwise have bought the disc/DL, or had it bought as a gift.

It's their own darned fault and I have no sympathy with them at all. Especially with a movie of such a well known and fascinating event as this - I watched it all unfold live while at home and it was amazing. I don't go to the cinema but can't wait to see the film (and may or may not be able to restrain myself from using other means).
d'@ve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2017, 16:36
c4ll3mw
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 684
I've got a terrible fear of flying and watching this set me off lol.

When the cabin crew started shouting 'brace' I got a terrible feeling of panic (wuss I know).

But I did enjoy the film.
c4ll3mw is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36.