When the movie Sully opens in theaters today, Tom Hanks will stand in as the eponymous hero whose 2009 splash-landing in the river—aka the “Miracle on the Hudson”—turned US Airways Capt. Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger into an instant celebrity. Directed by Clint Eastwood, it has all the elements of a gripping story: a terrifying near-disaster, in which everyone mercifully survives. 
 
 But the filmmakers faced one big problem: Where’s the suspense? The facts are well-known: The flight itself lasted all of four minutes—from take off at New York’s LaGuardia Airport, to that unlucky collision with a flock of geese that took out both engines , after which passengers endured a heart-stopping ride as Sully and his co-pilot Jeff Skiles made the call to ditch the Airbus A320 in an icy Hudson River rather than return to the airport. The evacuation and water rescue took only 24 minutes, as ferries and other vessels in the area quickly came to the rescue. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigation and public hearing that followed were anticlimactic—the crew, including the three flight attendants on board, had done the right thing, according to the board's final report. 
 
 That’s, well, kind of boring. Director Eastwood has admitted that he needed a villain. “Where’s the antagonist?” he reportedly asked when approached about the project. Sully’s best-selling book, Highest Duty , was more inspirational than a tell-all, and offered no candidates for the role of black hat. So the filmmakers solved their no-drama problem, in true Hollywood fashion , by making one up. 
 
 Actually, they made up an entire band of baddies: a glowering tribunal of investigators who torment Sully and Skiles for days immediately after the accident, not just questioning their decisions, but contradicting their accounts. While they’re identified in the film as NTSB officials, that’s where the resemblance to reality ends. These celluloid NTSB sleuths are fictional characters—an odd twist, given that almost all the other people depicted on screen, like passenger Jim Stefanik, and air traffic controller Patrick Harten, who took Sully’s mayday call, are real people identified by their actual names. 
 
 Dramatic, yes. Factual? As one source connected to the NTSB put it: 'The basic premise of the film is simply inaccurate.' Share via Pinterest SHARE THIS QUOTE 
 
 When the film’s pilots are shown in their first interview with the feds, the plot quickly strays from the well-known narrative. The so-called “lead investigator Charles Porter,” played by Mike O’Malley as a snarling Torquemada, immediately pounces on Sully and Skiles about alcohol and drug use, and follows that with claims that “engineers” and simulations of the flight revealed that they could have gotten the plane safely back to LaGuardia. Better yet: One engine still had power. Sully and Skiles are shocked, traumatized; Sully fears losing not just his reputation, but his whole livelihood: "I've got 40 years in the air, but in the end, I'm going to be judged on 208 seconds." And so it goes, for much of the movie’s 96-minute run. 
 
 Dramatic, yes. Factual? As one source connected to the NTSB put it: “The basic premise of the film is simply inaccurate.” 
 
 In fact, the NTSB was never consulted or even contacted by anyone connected with the film, a spokesperson confirms. There’s no one named Charles Porter at the agency and his two film colleagues, "Ben Edwards" and "Elizabeth Davis," played by veteran actors Jamey Sheridan and Anna Gunn, are also phony. Meanwhile, drug and alcohol tests of the crew were done right after the accident, and turned up nothing; by the same token, it’s also perfectly reasonable—and in fact standard procedure—for the interviewers to ask about that as well as any personal or financial problems the crew may have been experiencing. The simulations of the flight, done in cooperation with the plane’s manufacturer, were months away; and when they were in fact done, the results tilted in the pilots’s favor. 
 
 I reached out to the lead investigator in the case, Robert Benzon, who is now retired after a 27-year career with the agency; this was his last major air crash investigation. Did it bother him that the real NTSB people weren’t portrayed as themselves? “To be honest, I am kind of glad I’m not mentioned by name,” he tells Condé Nast Traveler. “Especially if the idea is to portray us as some kind of vindictive, out-to-get-‘em star chamber inquisition.” 
 
 When we spoke, Benzon had yet to see the film, but what he’s gleaned from the trailer and other reports have him concerned. “The NTSB treated Captain Sullenberger and his fellow crewmembers very benignly, as we always did in the many other major investigations with crew interviews,” he says. In fact, by the time the NTSB conducted interviews, “they were international heroes,” he adds. “As a result, we were even more deferential." 
 
 Other details are ironically off: An exterior shot of where the NTSB hearing is being held shows the Federal Aviation Administration headquarters—the two agencies are quite distinct and separate, and they are often at odds over how quickly to move on safety reforms. And in the movie’s depiction of the first “interrogations,” (that’s the movie studio’s description—the NTSB calls them “interviews”), the pilots are always shown together; agency procedure is to interview all crewmembers and witnesses separately, according to Benzon. In scenes of the hearing itself, the pilots confront the cockpit voice recording of the flight for the very first time. In fact, pilots are always given a chance to listen to it privately, usually well before the hearing, and the audio is never played in any type of public forum. (Printed excerpts of the dialogue were displayed at the actual hearing to accompany a video recreating the flight.) 
 
 These are minor quibbles, Eastwood might say. And don’t all docu-dramas take some creative license? A disclaimer at the end of the film does acknowledge a condensed timeframe for dramatic effect. Still, Benzon is concerned that showing the NTSB as a bunch of callous and self-serving bureaucrats could damage the public’s respect for the process—and could even be detrimental to aviation safety. “Pilots who see the movie might think we come in with preconceived notions, and they’ll be reluctant to cooperate” in future investigations, he says. 
 
 Asked about the NTSB criticism, Warner Brothers declined to answer questions, as did Sully himself and his co-pilot Skiles, who is back in the cockpit and now a captain for American Airlines. Sully has talked and written about the stresses he experienced post-accident and the self-doubts he experienced, and his worries over the results of the NTSB probe are undoubtedly genuine. But anyone who wants to see the real story of the investigation can read the full transcript of the hearing online . Another spoiler alert: It’s pretty dull. 
 
 As for the movie itself: I saw it, in an IMAX theater (bring some Dramamine if you see that version). It actually felt like I watching two films. The half that depicts the flight itself and the rescue, as well as Sully’s nightmares reliving the event, is riveting, with strong performances and impressive special effects. The rest? Even if you know nothing about the NTSB or aviation safety, it feels too long and somehow unsatisfying. Like your typical coach flight, maybe? ||||| ‘Sully’: Brace for emotional impact of Tom Hanks’ cockpit triumph 
 
 It remains one of the indelible images of the 21st century. 
 
 On a frigid January morning in 2009, dozens of passengers found themselves perched on the wings of US Airways Flight 1549 — in the Hudson River. 
 
 Well. ON the Hudson River. 
 
 Just a few minutes after takeoff, the plane was struck by a flock of Canadian geese, rendering both engines powerless and necessitating a return to LaGuardia Airport — but when it was determined there wasn’t enough time to reach LaGuardia or any other nearby runway, the plane made an emergency crash landing on the water, and miraculously, all 155 passengers and crew survived. 
 
 At the helm of Flight 1549 was one Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger, who within 24 hours became one of the most famous American pilots this side of Charles Lindbergh. 
 
 It seems almost a foregone conclusion Clint Eastwood would direct and Tom Hanks would star in the movie version of the story. (Can you think of a better starting battery? I can’t.) 
 
 As accomplished as they are, it would be an understatement to say Eastwood and Hanks meet expectations. This isn’t just a solid piece of work; it’s resonant. 
 
 The 86-year-old Eastwood gives us an electrifying thriller, a wonderful in-depth character study and a fascinating airline safety procedural, while Hanks delivers another in a long line of memorable, nomination-worthy performances. 
 
 (Sidebar: How is it Tom Hanks hasn’t been nominated for an Oscar since 2001 with “Castaway”? Could it be the Academy has fallen into a pattern of taking his comfortable, outwardly effortless genius for granted?) 
 
 “Sully” begins with the immediate aftermath of the water landing, with Hanks’ Sully and his co-pilot, Jeff Skiles (Aaron Eckhart in one of his most measured and authentic performances), seemingly barely dried off being soaked in the icy waters of the Hudson when they have to face down a skeptical group of inquisitors from the National Transportation Safety Board, including Mike O’Malley as Charles Porter and Anna Gunn from “Breaking Bad” as Dr. Elizabeth Davis. 
 
 From the get-go, it’s clear some on the panel believe Sully might have panicked and actually had enough engine power and enough altitude and time to get back to an airport. They ask Sully questions about how much sleep he had before the flight, when he had his last drink — and if he was experiencing any problems at home. 
 
 They’re looking for chinks in the armor of a man who was already being hailed as a hero in the media and who seemed a bit uncomfortable under the lights, but didn’t say no to David Letterman or Katie Couric or plenty of other interview opportunities. 
 
 Eastwood directs with his usual economical style. (Even his longest-running films rarely seem to waste our time with overlong scenes of exposition, or unnecessary supporting characters.) We learn a little about Sully’s love of piloting and his resourcefulness in times of crisis via a couple of flashback scenes, and we’re introduced to a handful of flight attendants and rather thinly sketched passengers, including two adult sons and their beloved old pops, a young woman with a baby and a grown woman and her elderly mother. 
 
 Mostly, though, “Sully” is about Sully. Hanks is so good he could play this character in a one-man show with nothing but a chair and a telephone onstage and it would be riveting. 
 
 On the surface, Sully is a calm, cool, no-nonsense, self-effacing veteran of some 42 years as a pilot. But in the aftermath of the landing, he has visions of the plane smashing into Manhattan buildings, he has dreams of news reporters questioning his judgment, and he confesses his doubts and fears in intimate telephone conversations with his wife Lorraine (Laura Linney, who spends nearly every second of her screen time on the phone with Sully). 
 
 Eventually, at just the right time, “Sully” takes us through those harrowing, incredible 208 seconds when Flight 1549 is struck by those birds, and the engines burst into flames before dying out, and Sully and Skiles react in the cockpit, and the flight attendants repeatedly command, “Heads down, stay down, heads down, stay down!” and a commercial aircraft rapidly sinks in the skies above New York City (of all places) and eventually splashes down on the Hudson. 
 
 The editing and the special effects and the performances are so pitch-perfect, this is as close as you’d ever want to come to being on that flight on that January day. 
 
 “Sully” is an absolute triumph. 
 
 ★★★★ 
 
 Warner Bros. Pictures presents a film directed by Clint Eastwood and written by Todd Komarnicki, based on the book “Highest Duty” by Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger. Running time: 95 minutes. Rated PG-13 (for some peril and brief strong language). Opens Friday at local theaters. ||||| Skip in Skip x Embed x Share CLOSE Tom Hanks stars as Chesley Sullenberger, the pilot who safely landed his plane in the Hudson River, saving the lives of 155 crew and passengers. 
 
 Aaron Eckhart (foreground) and Tom Hanks in 'Sully.' (Photo: Warner Bros. Entertainment) 
 
 Never underestimate the box-office appeal of Tom Hanks saving the day. 
 
 Clint Eastwood's heroic biopic Sully, with Hanks as the real-life airline pilot who pulled off the "Miracle on the Hudson," flew past the competition to finish No. 1 with $35.5 million in its opening weekend, according to studio estimates from comScore. Also starring Aaron Eckhart and Laura Linney, the drama connected with critics (who collectively gave it an 83% "fresh" rating at review aggregate site Rotten Tomatoes) and especially audiences (a grade of A on CinemaScore). 
 
 Sully's weekend haul marks the fifth-best September opening of all time and Eastwood's top debut as a director. 
 
 "This is what the fall is all about — Oscar contenders, stories with some depth and gravitas — and Hanks and Eastwood delivered that," says comScore senior media analyst Paul Dergarabedian. 
 
 According to comScore audience survey results, 82% of Sully moviegoers were older than 25, and 39% said Hanks was their primary reason for seeing it — a testament to the goodwill on and off screen for the actor. "If Tom Hanks ran for president, he’d win," Dergarabedian says. "He has developed such a reputation, consistently doing great work and instilling in the audience a really warm feeling." 
 
 Domestic thriller When the Bough Breaks, starring Regina Hall and Morris Chestnut, made its debut at No. 2 with $15 million. It was pummeled by critics (0% positive reviews on Rotten Tomatoes) but scored decently with moviegoers (B at CinemaScore). 
 
 As counterprogramming to the "highbrow" Sully, the mystery Bough is "an example of a guilty pleasure not chasing Oscar," says Dergarabedian, adding that like The Perfect Guy, which topped the box office a year ago, it's another successful early fall mashup of romance, horror and suspense with a predominantly African-American cast. "These films never get critical acclaim, but they don’t need it. They’re looking for dollars and they get them." 
 
 After two weeks at No. 1, horror film Don't Breathe fell to third place with $8.2 million. Supervillain blockbuster Suicide Squad made $5.7 million — good enough for fourth and bringing it to $307.4 million to date domestically — and The Wild Life rounded out the top five. The new animated film snagged $3.4 million, despite scathing reviews (15% approval on Rotten Tomatoes). 
 
 Another newcomer, the Kate Beckinsale horror movie The Disappointments Room, completely bombed with $1.4 million — the fright fest wasn't helped by a goose egg on Rotten Tomatoes or a dreaded D at CinemaScore. "This is a movie that really couldn’t get a leg up on any front," Dergarabedian says. "It’s definitely a disappointment, no question." 
 
 Final figures are expected Monday. 
 
 Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/2cQDoRw
– Sure, there was plenty of "hero sex," but the aftermath of the Miracle on the Hudson wasn't all sunshine and rainbows. It's that story Clint Eastwood has chosen to tell in Sully, starring Tom Hanks as pilot Chesley Sullenberger. Here's what critics are saying: Richard Roeper at the Chicago Sun-Times calls it "an absolute triumph." It's "an electrifying thriller, a wonderful in-depth character study and a fascinating airline safety procedural." Hanks, meanwhile, "is so good he could play this character in a one-man show with nothing but a chair and a telephone onstage and it would be riveting." "That it unnerves you as much as it does may seem surprising, given that going in, we know how this story ends." But Eastwood is "very good at his job, a talent that gives the movie its tension along with an autobiographical sheen," writes Manohla Dargis at the New York Times. In particular, he offers "a master class in direction" during the accident scene, while Hanks makes a perfect Sully. Stephen Whitty at NJ.com says the accident scene is "the best part of the film," but he's not so enthralled with the rest of it. Basically, he concludes "there's not enough story" to warrant a feature-length film. Flashbacks to Sully's youth "add nothing but time," while the National Transportation Board Safety Board investigation delivers no drama or suspense, he adds. Ann Hornaday doesn't agree. Sully is "a four-square, upstanding, rock-solid example of filmmaking at its most direct and honestly affecting," and is "thoroughly engrossing and exciting to watch," she writes at the Washington Post. "To paraphrase the title character, it's just a movie doing its job. And amen to that."