Cannes Film Festival 2013

Zemeckis's 'Flight' features Denzel Washington at his best in a powerful character study

The two-time Oscar winner gives a complex performance in the NYFF closer

<p>Denzel Washington in "Flight"</p>

Denzel Washington in "Flight"

Credit: Paramount Pictures

Are you a fan of In Contention?

Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.

NEW YORK -- The modest similarities between Robert Zemeckis's last live action film, 2000's "Cast Away," and his latest, "Flight," are interesting. Both begin with a plane crash that changes a man's life, a man who goes on a journey of finding himself and restarting his life anew. Both are films about rebirth. One chooses a tale of a company guy stranded on a desert island to convey the theme. The other chooses that of a pilot caught up in a malfeasance nightmare.

Each commits to film one of the most harrowing plane crashes ever seen*, but while Tom Hanks's time-obsessed protagonist in "Cast Away" learns to take his time through life, Denzel Washington's addiction-afflicted hero in "Flight" learns to admit his problem to the one person he's still fooling: himself.

And that's what the film is about. It may have elements of action filmmaking and courtroom drama, but it is, ultimately, a character study about the sickness of addiction. It captures the embarrassment, the denial, the rage and, crucially, the chronic fallibility that comes with it. The screenplay, from writer John Gatins, pulses with an authenticity that suggests personal experience, but married to a narrative that all but asks whether impairment might have sparked the inspiration to save a hundred lives in a bold way, it becomes something more complex.

Related

Want More...

Academy Awards?
  • Oscar-statues-outside-the-82nd-academy-awards-at-the-kodak-theater-in-hollywood-ca
    Check out everything there is including photos, reviews, videos.

At the story's center, Washington delivers an equally complex performance. His Whip Whitaker is charismatic, embattled, defiant, broken and, ultimately, humbled. And the actor fires on all cylinders, running through a range that marks his most accomplished performance in some time, one certainly rating higher than the two that brought him Oscars in the past.

The film gets going in a hurry, Whitaker's ear-to-ear grin, the bouncing song choices, a near-numbing crash sequence and the beginnings of the malfeasance drama. But once the plot-driven stuff moves aside it starts to settle in somewhere in the second act and, for some, the gear shift might not work. It just depends on if you're invested in the character enough to follow that next path, and personally speaking, I was.

But one has to discuss the crash sequence separately. It is a stunning display, all elements of the production -- design, photography, sound, editing, visual effects -- combining to deliver a memorable cinematic moment. And it's not just candy. It delivers on theme, too. For a film that so often concerns itself with the concept of an "act of God," it's no mistake that the wing of the plane clips a steeple in half upon impact (nor is it, I think, that the line "God help me" is delivered at a surprising moment in the film's final moments).

Also worth mentioning in the supporting cast is Kelly Reilly as a recovering junkie who understands Whitaker's ailment all too well, Bruce Greenwood as his union representative and biggest ally, Don Cheadle as his no-nonsense attorney and John Goodman as his flamboyant friend and dealer. It's a top-notch assortment of performances making for a solid ensemble.

However, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention the powerful way James Badge Dale blows in and out of the movie in one of its most poignant and, for me, memorable scenes as a cancer patient bearing wisdom. The actor reportedly dropped 20 pounds to play the part after Zemeckis called him "too healthy" for the role and you can see why he wanted to take it on. Others might not be as touched by the moment as I was but it was a big takeaway for me and a real grace note.

Awards-wise, it's a little tough to say at the moment. Washington faces a difficult Best Actor race but he'll get the campaign of his life, surely: this is Paramount's baby this year. The screenplay deserves some real consideration, but it could fall short of films with more overt gravitas and/or fare not perceived in such commercial territory. I really couldn't say until more get a look and I can ask around, but I certainly think it's a great counter-intuitive choice in a year packed with the usual bait and I hope it finds its audience.

With that -- well, with tonight's gala premiere of the film, I should say -- the 50th annual New York Film Festival comes to a close. It was a success by all accounts and a real treat for a first-timer. I'll put a bow on soon enough, but for now, chalk the closing night presentation up as a winner.

"Flight" opens everywhere November 2.

*It's worth noting Joe Carnahan's contribution to cinematic plane crashes this year, as his vision of one in "The Grey" was just as harrowing if not more so than the pair Zemeckis has given us.

Kristopher-tapley-sm
Kristopher Tapley
Editor-at-Large
Kristopher Tapley has covered the film awards landscape for over a decade. He founded In Contention in 2005. His work has also appeared in The New York Times, The Times of London and Variety. He begs you not to take any of this too seriously.
Trending Now on HitFix Boards
Topic Started By Latest Post Replies
DarylRichardson
3 months ago
1
gregel
7 months ago
9
Discuss Oscars on HitFix Message Boards »

Comments

  • Option 1

    Comment instantly as a guest Guest
  • Option 2

    Connect
  • Option 3

    Login or create a HitFix account Login Signup
  • Default-avatar

    JJ1

    Great read. I was hoping 'Flight' would be as good as you make it sound.

    October 14, 2012 at 10:56AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    daveylo

    A three way race among Day-Lewis, Washington and Hawkes? But we haven't seen Jackman yet. And I know some love Phoenix.

    October 14, 2012 at 11:55AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Images_talkback_profile

      Laura Stewart Just based on what I've read it looks like a three way tie between DDL, Phoenix, and Washington with Hawkes and possibly Hopkins looking in from the sidelines. I still think it will be Phoenix's year if he decides to show up to a press conference or two and campaign. Harvey has yet to prove himself a magician of that caliber.

      October 14, 2012 at 11:46PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      daveylo I know I'm prejudiced. I didn't like The Master. I think Phoenix will be nominated but he won't win. The film isn't loved enough.

      October 15, 2012 at 1:04AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    HoustonRufus

    Enjoyed your recap, Kris. Happy to hear Washington is in top form.

    October 14, 2012 at 12:37PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Guesto

    "but married to a narrative that all but asks whether impairment might have sparked the inspiration to save a hundred lives in a bold way"

    Let me preface my cooment by saying that I am a Zemeckis fan. However, the statement above is, in a nutshell, what made me feel deeply uneasy about this project from the very first time I saw the trailer.

    I am sure the movie is more complex than it seems. But I still find it borderline irresponsible to even suggest an idea that drinking alcohol could ever, under any circumstances, be beneficial or result in saving lives.

    No matter how you look at it, this implication is embedded into the fabric of the narrative. And the fact that the effect of the character's actions is flawless only makes things worse. And if only a subset of people who see the trailer see the actual movie than they may walk away with a pretty dangerous impression.

    October 14, 2012 at 1:03PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      neverthehero You must have a story behind "even suggest an idea that drinking alcohol could ever, under any circumstances, be beneficial or result in saving lives.". In no way is this an absolute truth, which is another way of saying, it would be easy to disprove. Kind of silly to have a narrow view, when all that quote that you used is saying, maybe the alcohol released any kind of mental barriers for him to make snap judgement instead of being scared out of his mind.

      October 14, 2012 at 1:44PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Guesto I rest my case. The last question sentence you wrote is the very reason I have a problem with this movie. It's not that I have a narrow view, it's just that you kind of open-mindedness has no grounding in reality or empirical evidence. Only in movies can your question even be posed in the first place. For fear is just one factor and others, such as response time are just as, if not more so, important.

      It is also pretty interesting to see someone complain against absolutism only to turn around and say the other's *entire* argument can be disproved outright. I'd like to see you try because, at best, you can, only question on one or two factors.

      I want to make another thing clear. I am not arrogant enough to argue absolute truth. I'm just saying that certain things should not be suggested. It's a slippery slope that leads nowhere. Even if your implication was partially correct, than what exactly is the takeaway? Do you see what I'm saying?

      Also, staying within the context of the movie (based on what I got from the trailer), this is a character who didn't drink specifically to prepare for what was about to happen. Think about what this means also.

      October 14, 2012 at 3:12PM EST
    • Krispic3_talkback_profile

      Kristopher Tapley "Only in movies can your question even be posed in the first place."

      If it's only a movie (which it is), why get this bent out of shape over it? Regardless, it's a fair exploration, and not necessarily entirely willful. Some would read it as an extrapolation but I think it's in the text enough to be considered and the point made is that lines are blurred whether you want them clearly defined or not. (THAT's the takeaway.)

      "I'm just saying that certain things should not be suggested."

      Dangerous territory.

      Anyway, you should see the film before having such a well-rounded view of what it is. It's not a celebration of addiction and the wonderful possibilities that stem from it, Guesto. This sliver is simply one of the various textures that, I think, make it a denser piece than mere polemic.

      October 14, 2012 at 3:26PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Zack

    Denzel Washington, Robert De Niro and Matthew McConaughey all decide they give a shit again in the same year? Someone up there likes us. (I know Washington wasn't in anything like the other two's slumps, but this still sounds way heavier than anything he's done in a while.)

    October 14, 2012 at 6:02PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      tim You really think McConaughey is in the same league as DeNiro and Denzel? Really?

      October 14, 2012 at 6:23PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Zack No, I'm just glad he's doing decent movies again. Sorry, didn't mean to make you mad.

      October 14, 2012 at 6:28PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      /3rt Washington's paycheck movies weren't bottom of the barrel quality B-/C+ usually but never the Razzie worthy garbage the industry puts out all the time. He isn't as classy and adult with it as Clooney but they serve their purpose without that guilty pleasure vibe afterwards.

      I feel bad for De Niro—he's range was never going to extension further out from the tough guy parts he played in his prime.

      Matt being a sleazy goofball is apart of his natural appeal. He's tried to class it up for years but his Magic Mike character is a lot closer to the spirit of the guy inside.

      October 14, 2012 at 7:27PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      HoustonRufus Ha! I love this comment. It's turning into an interesting, fun year, full of some actual surprises. And we still have so much more to see.

      October 15, 2012 at 11:11PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    ePastorJ

    I do think Washington looks great and the film seems enjoyable. However, I don't really buy Washington as much of a nomination condtender. It seems like one that will be left off easily, and fall by the wayside. Perhaps a bit too commercial in feel, or just not really inspire the #1 rankings in votes.

    I gripe about this a lot, but it still remains a consistent trend: every category tends to have at least one first-time nominee, but the sidebar predictions only have first-timers in Best Actress, which makes no sense. I'm thinking Cooper or Jackman will get in over Washington (Hopkins seems secure, but ya never know). Then, in supporting actor, I think Henry will be the Hawkes of this season, riding the indie wave of support. And in supporting actress, which is the toughest, I can either see the precedent being shattered OR Johansson possibly getting in somehow. I doubt she would, but now I wonder....If not her, what other first-timer in supporting actress?

    October 14, 2012 at 11:00PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      JLPatt Samantha Barks.

      October 14, 2012 at 11:02PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      ePastorJ I was being rhetorical, haha, but yeah, she came to mind. Although, I feel like Hathaway will just overshadow her chances, unlike Leo/Adams, Farmiga/Kendrick, et al, But definitely an option.

      Forgot to say that if so, it'd be over Smith or Field (probably the former), and Henry over DeNiro most likely.

      October 14, 2012 at 11:08PM EST
    • Krispic3_talkback_profile

      Kristopher Tapley "I gripe about this a lot, but it still remains a consistent trend: every category tends to have at least one first-time nominee, but the sidebar predictions only have first-timers in Best Actress, which makes no sense."

      Yes and it remains an annoying gripe, if only because "making sense" is impossible in October when so much of the season is yet to be revealed and no one sits down and says, "Hang on a minute, I haven't voted for a first-timer." It's unfortunate prognostication obsession.

      October 14, 2012 at 11:29PM EST
    • Krispic3_talkback_profile

      Kristopher Tapley And see Flight before having a commentary or thought about the performance and its chances. It's not what you see in the trailer.

      October 14, 2012 at 11:30PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      ePastorJ But I'm not judging the performance or criticizing it either. All I'm doing is actually being a bit risky and having more fun trying to predict further ahead. Sure, I could be wrong, but at least I went there, and for me, that's always been the fun of predictions to begin with, not playing it safe. My gut instinct tells me that I don't see Washington going past the Globes; however, I do think he looks incredible, and am excited to see his performance and the film as a whole. I see why you're getting defensive here, but it rang true last year, when Rooney Mara and Jonah Hill made sure their respective categories had newcomer nods. It's just factoring in some logic and patterns into more shapely predix. To each his own, naturally.

      October 14, 2012 at 11:45PM EST
    • Krispic3_talkback_profile

      Kristopher Tapley Well, sure, I guess one could stand on the sidelines and toss out guesses. I've been there. I get it. The rest about factoring in patterns, etc., you're preaching to the choir on that.

      Anyway, Denzel is an easy nominee...if he wants it. My only hesitation is whether or not he's willing to put in the effort it takes to get a performance like this nominated.

      October 15, 2012 at 12:38AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Joe7827 John Hawkes does come to mind when I think of Dwight Henry. One major difference, though: "Winter's Bone" wasn't disqualified from SAG, and that was a major boost.

      By the way... Zemeckiss?

      October 15, 2012 at 1:17PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      EPASTORJ @Kris: That's a good point, re: his motivation to campaign. Interested to see how compelled he is or isn't to work for it.

      For now, I'm inclined towards:

      01) John Hawkes
      02) Joaquin Phoenix
      03) Daniel Day-Lewis
      04) Anthony Hopkins
      05) Bradley Cooper
      ----
      06) Denzel Washington
      07) Hugh Jackman
      08) Jean-Louis Trintignant
      09) Suraj Sharma
      10) Ben Affleck

      @Joe: Fair point for sure, but imo, it wasn't just Hawkes getting the SAG nomination; it was the motivation BEHIND the nomination. I feel like a similar motivation will be there for Henry. Consider this: most likely, all of those who nominate Wallis are potentially bound to mark Henry down as well. No guarantee, but I think there's some hope there.

      @Mark (below): James Badge Dale is great. He didn't have as much to do in "Shame", but I'm glad to know he makes an impression here. Same goes for Kelly Reilly, whom I've always liked, particularly in "Eden Lake", which is one of the best thriller films of late.

      October 15, 2012 at 2:20PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Mark Johnson

    I love James Badge Dale. Very underrated talent.

    October 15, 2012 at 11:50AM EST Reply to Comment

Get Instant Alerts on In Contention

2012-2013 OSCAR PREDICTIONS

oscarside.jpg

Best Picture

Best Director

Best Actor

Best Actress

Best Supporting Actor

Best Supporting Actress

Best Adapted Screenplay

Best Original Screenplay

Best Cinematography

Best Costume Design

Best Film Editing

Best Makeup And Hairstyling

Best Original Score

Best Original Song

Best Production Design

Best Sound Editing

Best Sound Mixing

Best Visual Effects

Best Animated Feature Film

Best Documentary Feature

Best Foreign Language Film

Latest Posts
More Posts
Recent Activity on Facebook
Most Popular on Facebook