I have seen a lot of movies. I've seen bad ones, good ones, middle ones. But never have i felt so.. upset at a movie as I have for Flight. Disappointed and angry don't begin to cover it - this movie is the worst movie I have ever seen.
TL;DR Do not see this movie. Don't see it because you want to watch a film laughably bad - this one isn't good enough for that.
If that isn't enough for you to not watch, i will deconstruct and explain its failings. If your part of the apparent majority of people who liked this film, this isn't for you. for each to their own and feel free to try and convince people to see the movie. I do however request you create your own thread - this is not a debate thread.
!spoilers!
======>
1. The narrative - Religious subtext.
I'll admit i don't appreciate religious tones in my movies. I'm not of any particular faith and id rather just not watch films with such tones in them. But i get they are there sometimes and hell in some cases it can even add to a movie instead of just being some annoying sub-plot I'm trying to ignore.
Flight wants there to be a religious subtext. But somehow it manages to just.. go nowhere. You will notice a theme in my points - there is a constant lack of payoff. The religious sub-plot is one of the most noticeable cases. At some point during the film, Whip(Denzel) is told by his lawyer "You and I both know this was an act of god ". He later goes on to say he will try and convince the tribunal that they should add "act of god" into the accidents possible causes.
And he succeeds.
At this point in the movie I was convinced that there was some kind of meta-narrative going on. Perhaps he was dreaming, perhaps he was in heaven. There would be some moral about accepting responsibility tied to this twist.
There is none. The entire plot can be summed up as a drunk pilot saves 100 lives and goes to jail. That is it. there is NO depth.
=====>
2. The Narrative - The characters.
Where to begin?
First is the girl who nearly dies from an overdose. She forms a relationship with Whip and then leaves. She doesn't come back. The movie does hint they got back together, but thats it. there is no big final scene between the two, she has no affect on his eventual choice to admit he was an alcoholic.
Then there is the flight attendant who died. She was in the film in the first scene shown as being in some sort of sexual relationship with Whip. It is not made clear how serious. She saves 1 (this is important, she saves 1 life) on the plane by strapping a kid down into his seat. She then dies.
For whatever reason in the near-end scene of the tribunal for some freaking stupid reason this is when Whip decides to admit he is an alcoholic and that he was drunk on the flight. Even though he will get sent to jail. Even though the lie he would have to tell was about a dead girl, who as audience member we BARELY saw, formed NO connection too and who saved 1 life over whips 100.
The last character I want to go a little deeper on is Whips son. He is in two scenes in the entire movie, both under 2 minutes. Why am i talking about him then? Because for some reason three quarters through the movie it decides it want to be about identity and who we are as people. And what better tool to use that then his own son asking whip "WHO ARE YOU?". The final scene, meant to be some big moral truth about the movie involves his son asking that same question.
In the context of the movie it makes so little sense. The movie was never ever up until those two scenes about identity. It was about alcoholism, religion, whether saving lives is morally superior to begin drunk while flying a plane. NOT identity. Its such a curve ball that it throws off everything the movie was stumbling to say.
=====>
3. The Narrative - The Rest of it.
Its poorly written. There are entire conversations that leave you wondering, what were they saying, why were they fighting? Does the lawyer like or hate Whip?.
It has poor pacing. The movie dragged on but i kept hopeful that some twist would make it more interesting. There is no twist. There is no big moral.
Few characters make alot of sense, and fewer lines still. There is a moment where a man comes to help Whip sober up by giving him cocaine. He walks into the room, the lawyer reaches out to help him with his bag and he screams at him "hands off the merchandise!". Moments like these are just.. a waste of time. They tell us nothing about these characters and even less in context. Neither the drugs or value of them is brought up again, and those two characters never meet again. Indeed the drug seller only has two scenes.
====>
4. It lies
Here is how the movie describes itself.
"In this action-packed mystery thriller, Academy Award winner, Denzel Washington stars as Whip Whitaker, a seasoned airline pilot, who miraculously crash lands his plane after a mid-air catastrophe, saving nearly every soul on board. After the crash, Whip is hailed as a hero, but as more is learned, more questions than answers arise as to who or what was really at fault and what really happened on that plane?"
Lets break this down.
"action-packed". There is one action scene - the flight itself. it lasts for 10 minutes. It is mildly engaging. This is a 2 hour and 15 minute film. Having an action scene does not make a movie action packed.
"mystery thriller" As i said, there is no big payoff - there is hardly any payoff at all. There is no mystery. The movie starts by suggesting that there was a mechanical failure and that suggestion is never ever even hinted to be otherwise. It was mechanical failure.
No-one dies after the crash, and there is never ever any threat ever of other characters dying in a thriller-esque scene.
"who or what was really at fault and what really happened on that plane?" There is never any doubt for the audience what went on. Unless you read too much into the "did he die and go to heaven" type deal. What you see is EXACTLY what happened.
You know what other piece of media lied about what it was? Aliens:Colonial marines.
=====>
5. The alcoholism
Ill admit I'm not an alcoholic, so i cannot empathize with the main character. I am even willing to admit that Whip may be an accurate portrayal of an alcoholic. But i take huge issue with the notion that him saving a hundred lives on a plane doesnt warrant him a little leniency when it comes to him going to jail. But hey that's just me speaking morally.
Its a much more absurd notion that he decided int he middle of a hearing of all times to admit to being an alcoholic. What is most absurd about it is that prior to that scene the movie seemed to hint the exact opposite - that he could not escape his alcoholism. The night before the hearing he literally drinks himself to near-death. There was no hint, NONE whatsoever that he was about to take responsibility, and it made no sense for his character, AT ALL, that during the hearing was when he would come out.
The excuse we are given post-fact? "It was like I had just run out of lies". As I said, poorly written.
=====>
6. The conclusion.
What makes a movie bad? as in truly vile? Does it present questionable morals? Is it boring and poorly written? Does it last too long, have unnecessary scenes, have characters that make no sense?
A bad narrative can be forgiven if the spectacle is good enough - see Avatar.
A poorly written one can be forgiven - if its so bad its good.
A movie that lies about itself can be forgiven - if the lie is only to draw the audience in for some greater idea.
What makes Flight truly vile, truly despicable, at least in my eyes, is its combination of failings. In its failed potential. The movie isn't filmed bad, and the acting isn't particularly sub par. But thats what makes this movie so horrible.
It isn't completely shit.
It has sparks, moments that aren't terrible. Its written just well enough that you cant laugh at it. Its filmed just well enough that it doesn't hurt the eyes. The characters are just believable enough that they are boring and have nothing unique about them.
Its not a film you can tell your friends "man i watched the worst movie of all time" - at least not in the way you mean it.
Flights flaw is that it is nothing. It has nothing to say, and no way to say it. It is a time sink of 2 hours that's only real use is for film students to watch and learn exactly what NOT to do with a film.
Its the worst movie of all time not because of the way its made, but because it is completely devoid of any semblance of value.
Keep those 2 hours. Being on the toilet is a more interesting experience - with a bigger payoff.
TL;DR Do not see this movie. Don't see it because you want to watch a film laughably bad - this one isn't good enough for that.
If that isn't enough for you to not watch, i will deconstruct and explain its failings. If your part of the apparent majority of people who liked this film, this isn't for you. for each to their own and feel free to try and convince people to see the movie. I do however request you create your own thread - this is not a debate thread.
!spoilers!
======>
1. The narrative - Religious subtext.
I'll admit i don't appreciate religious tones in my movies. I'm not of any particular faith and id rather just not watch films with such tones in them. But i get they are there sometimes and hell in some cases it can even add to a movie instead of just being some annoying sub-plot I'm trying to ignore.
Flight wants there to be a religious subtext. But somehow it manages to just.. go nowhere. You will notice a theme in my points - there is a constant lack of payoff. The religious sub-plot is one of the most noticeable cases. At some point during the film, Whip(Denzel) is told by his lawyer "You and I both know this was an act of god ". He later goes on to say he will try and convince the tribunal that they should add "act of god" into the accidents possible causes.
And he succeeds.
At this point in the movie I was convinced that there was some kind of meta-narrative going on. Perhaps he was dreaming, perhaps he was in heaven. There would be some moral about accepting responsibility tied to this twist.
There is none. The entire plot can be summed up as a drunk pilot saves 100 lives and goes to jail. That is it. there is NO depth.
=====>
2. The Narrative - The characters.
Where to begin?
First is the girl who nearly dies from an overdose. She forms a relationship with Whip and then leaves. She doesn't come back. The movie does hint they got back together, but thats it. there is no big final scene between the two, she has no affect on his eventual choice to admit he was an alcoholic.
Then there is the flight attendant who died. She was in the film in the first scene shown as being in some sort of sexual relationship with Whip. It is not made clear how serious. She saves 1 (this is important, she saves 1 life) on the plane by strapping a kid down into his seat. She then dies.
For whatever reason in the near-end scene of the tribunal for some freaking stupid reason this is when Whip decides to admit he is an alcoholic and that he was drunk on the flight. Even though he will get sent to jail. Even though the lie he would have to tell was about a dead girl, who as audience member we BARELY saw, formed NO connection too and who saved 1 life over whips 100.
The last character I want to go a little deeper on is Whips son. He is in two scenes in the entire movie, both under 2 minutes. Why am i talking about him then? Because for some reason three quarters through the movie it decides it want to be about identity and who we are as people. And what better tool to use that then his own son asking whip "WHO ARE YOU?". The final scene, meant to be some big moral truth about the movie involves his son asking that same question.
In the context of the movie it makes so little sense. The movie was never ever up until those two scenes about identity. It was about alcoholism, religion, whether saving lives is morally superior to begin drunk while flying a plane. NOT identity. Its such a curve ball that it throws off everything the movie was stumbling to say.
=====>
3. The Narrative - The Rest of it.
Its poorly written. There are entire conversations that leave you wondering, what were they saying, why were they fighting? Does the lawyer like or hate Whip?.
It has poor pacing. The movie dragged on but i kept hopeful that some twist would make it more interesting. There is no twist. There is no big moral.
Few characters make alot of sense, and fewer lines still. There is a moment where a man comes to help Whip sober up by giving him cocaine. He walks into the room, the lawyer reaches out to help him with his bag and he screams at him "hands off the merchandise!". Moments like these are just.. a waste of time. They tell us nothing about these characters and even less in context. Neither the drugs or value of them is brought up again, and those two characters never meet again. Indeed the drug seller only has two scenes.
====>
4. It lies
Here is how the movie describes itself.
"In this action-packed mystery thriller, Academy Award winner, Denzel Washington stars as Whip Whitaker, a seasoned airline pilot, who miraculously crash lands his plane after a mid-air catastrophe, saving nearly every soul on board. After the crash, Whip is hailed as a hero, but as more is learned, more questions than answers arise as to who or what was really at fault and what really happened on that plane?"
Lets break this down.
"action-packed". There is one action scene - the flight itself. it lasts for 10 minutes. It is mildly engaging. This is a 2 hour and 15 minute film. Having an action scene does not make a movie action packed.
"mystery thriller" As i said, there is no big payoff - there is hardly any payoff at all. There is no mystery. The movie starts by suggesting that there was a mechanical failure and that suggestion is never ever even hinted to be otherwise. It was mechanical failure.
No-one dies after the crash, and there is never ever any threat ever of other characters dying in a thriller-esque scene.
"who or what was really at fault and what really happened on that plane?" There is never any doubt for the audience what went on. Unless you read too much into the "did he die and go to heaven" type deal. What you see is EXACTLY what happened.
You know what other piece of media lied about what it was? Aliens:Colonial marines.
=====>
5. The alcoholism
Ill admit I'm not an alcoholic, so i cannot empathize with the main character. I am even willing to admit that Whip may be an accurate portrayal of an alcoholic. But i take huge issue with the notion that him saving a hundred lives on a plane doesnt warrant him a little leniency when it comes to him going to jail. But hey that's just me speaking morally.
Its a much more absurd notion that he decided int he middle of a hearing of all times to admit to being an alcoholic. What is most absurd about it is that prior to that scene the movie seemed to hint the exact opposite - that he could not escape his alcoholism. The night before the hearing he literally drinks himself to near-death. There was no hint, NONE whatsoever that he was about to take responsibility, and it made no sense for his character, AT ALL, that during the hearing was when he would come out.
The excuse we are given post-fact? "It was like I had just run out of lies". As I said, poorly written.
=====>
6. The conclusion.
What makes a movie bad? as in truly vile? Does it present questionable morals? Is it boring and poorly written? Does it last too long, have unnecessary scenes, have characters that make no sense?
A bad narrative can be forgiven if the spectacle is good enough - see Avatar.
A poorly written one can be forgiven - if its so bad its good.
A movie that lies about itself can be forgiven - if the lie is only to draw the audience in for some greater idea.
What makes Flight truly vile, truly despicable, at least in my eyes, is its combination of failings. In its failed potential. The movie isn't filmed bad, and the acting isn't particularly sub par. But thats what makes this movie so horrible.
It isn't completely shit.
It has sparks, moments that aren't terrible. Its written just well enough that you cant laugh at it. Its filmed just well enough that it doesn't hurt the eyes. The characters are just believable enough that they are boring and have nothing unique about them.
Its not a film you can tell your friends "man i watched the worst movie of all time" - at least not in the way you mean it.
Flights flaw is that it is nothing. It has nothing to say, and no way to say it. It is a time sink of 2 hours that's only real use is for film students to watch and learn exactly what NOT to do with a film.
Its the worst movie of all time not because of the way its made, but because it is completely devoid of any semblance of value.
Keep those 2 hours. Being on the toilet is a more interesting experience - with a bigger payoff.
