Flight (2012)

If you've seen the trailer for Flight then you might be under the impression that this film is a thrilling all-speed-ahead drama, and while this is, in part, true, the film is more a searing character-study which explores important moral issues than anything else. Given its director, the acclaimed Robert Zemeckis (the brilliant mind behind Forrest Gump, Back to the Future and Cast Away to name a few) this might not come as a surprise, because based on his repertoire of films he seems to relish a thoroughly thought-out character. Yet one defining difference behind this character Whip Whittaker (Denzel Washington) is that he is unlikeable, filled with hubris and infuriating to watch in his self-destruction.

To some this would be a justifiable reason to dislike the film, because without a character we can like or even empathise with how can we enjoy or begin to understand the film or its character? Despite the heroism and bravery of Whittaker in the first act of this film in which he manages to save 96 of the 102 passengers aboard his crumbling aircraft his actions and behaviour afterwards are despicable and colour the audience’s perception of him. His aggressiveness to those that try and save him from his inexcusable downward-spiral makes for irritating viewing. You might question why I call it “inexcusable”. You might think that this “downward-spiral” is the consequence of the traumatic events of the plane crash. It is not. His alcoholism and substance abuse, which is portrayed by Washington with astonishing reality, is a long-standing and widely known characteristic amongst his work colleagues, which is a shocking thought really. It makes you question not only your own safety, but also how such a character could exist that would put innocent lives at risk.

This is where the question of morality comes in, because the audience is forced to make a decision about this character. The audience is forced to decide whether this man is a hero for pulling off the impossible and saving many lives, or whether he is a morally-bankrupt individual who must be sent to jail for his actions. If the character was a more likeable one throughout the film then the answer to that question would be easy for most viewers. The answer would be that his actions deserve praise rather than condemnation. You might not think so now that I am laying it out plain for you, but if you are honest then you will recognise that sometimes we do root for the bad guy. Zemeckis prevents this instant reaction though by making our hero a sinner and forcing us to question our own views. It’s an interesting thought to consider, isn't it?

But enough with the question of morality and this films place within that question… I’ll get down to the stuff you’re really interested in.

Here Whittaker sees for the first time the repercussions of the plane crash.

I’ll start with our lead, the incomparable acting-god that is Denzel Washington who gives a searing performance as a conflicted and troubled pilot struggling with addiction and the scrutiny of his superiors and those close to him. Washington makes excellent work of this character and I can tell you this with my utmost assurance because I genuinely disliked his character, which is a tough feat considering how much I admire the actor. Washington portrays the self-destruction of this character with remarkable reality and in one scene, where Whittaker is intoxicated to the point of incoherency, Washington manages to portray not only this incoherency but also the characters vulnerability and fears. His nuanced performance and the subtlety that he lends to this performance is another example of Washington’s effortless talent. One point I feel the need to make however, is my annoyance at Washington’s increasingly familiar roles as of late. It seems to me that he is reprising the same roles and the examples I offer you are very recent additions to his resume: The Taking of Pelham 123 and Unstoppable. I don’t know whether Washington is just growing comfortable in this role of hero-with-a-problem but if he continues then he may just run the risk of becoming boring and type-cast. I know that may seem like sacrilege to some but it is a point which needs to be made. I want to see this fantastic actor take on more varied roles and I want to see this because I appreciate his scope and talent.

One aspect of this film which should rightly-so be showered with praise is its special effects and visual-quality. Zemeckis has been praised countless times for his ability to handle special effects with reality and ease and that talent can be seen here to a fantastic quality. The scene which catapults this character-driven film is visceral and terrifying and as we watch Washington turn the doomed-aircraft upside down in the air to avoid crashing into a busy suburban town we as an audience are struck-dumb by the terrifying reality of the scene. It is an action-packed sequence and one which unsurprisingly causes our brief yet intense hero-worship of this character who managed to save countless lives and remain calm in the midst of chaos.

All-in-all it is an impressive film with fantastic performances from all those involved however I am left unsure as to whether I actually liked the film. Like I said, can you like a film when you have no reason to like its main character?

Best moment: Undoubtedly the moment that Captain Whittaker does the impossible and performs a miracle when he manages to safely land the doomed-from-the-get-go airplane.

To cut a long story short…
Would I recommend this? I’m not sure really, this film feels like a bit of a hit-and-miss. I suppose if you’re a fan of Washington then yes, you should give it a go. A film ramblers star rating?

That's it for now folks...

If you enjoyed this post or are interested in more films of the same genre then just click here and have a browse...