The 15:17 to Paris

I hate to say this, because Clint is an icon and a fantastic film director, but I fear it's curtains up for him. To think this movie would work is delusional. His right wing, elderly driven nationalism starts to leak into his movies in a cringeworthy fashion. The acting in this movie is The Room-bad; it was so unbelievably bad that I enjoyed every minute of it. I had a hard time rating this movie because I also really love how horrible it is.

Station announcement: "The 15:17 will be running approximately 1 hour late, due to vital actor training, unecessary, totally irrelevant scenes from school days and a time wasting travelogue of Venice, Rome and Amsterdam. However, this will not impact on your arrival time, as the journey itself is only 10 minutes. If passengers want to wait for 3 people to beat someone up on a train, we will supply complimentary coffee and sandwiches. We understand, however, if you would prefer to claim a refund

The real actors were the let downs in this one. Hamming it up too much

A crazy event doesn't always make a great movie. This was the case here, Clint Eastwood seems to know this and tries to get us to care for the three Americans by showing us random montages of there lives while intercutting the afore mentioned incident. The montages weren't quite enough and the incident itself is shot in "real time" and only takes up like 5 minutes of the film. The acting is mediocre but doesn't really detract from the film. Worth a watch but pretty average.

One of Eastwood's most unusual films utilising real-life people to re-enact a thwarted tragedy; should have the stench of ghoulish tastelessness about it, but actually works well, especially once the lead characters hit adulthood. Aimless style of the lead-up feels Linklater-ish, and while there have been better, more visceral depictions of terrorism, the scenes on the train are still quite gripping. An odd film; probably more fun to contemplate its making, rather than rate a total success.

When the part with the kids is the best part of the film you know you done goofed. In all honesty, what was Eastwood smoking during the production of this film, let alone the conception it. Some parts felt like The Room pt. II and some parts like robots rehearsing their lines. The film should 've been a documentary from the get go, with perhaps some actual good reenactments with some actual actors, while the three guys would narrate the story. It's not that hard, Clint.

Who in the fudge gave Clint his Gus Van Sant DVD collection? That guy is the real culprit here.

I hope this isn't Clint Eastwood's last film as director. Though a nice idea to have the actual heroes play themselves in this movie, it really hurt the overall quality as none of them can act. Also, the dialogue was really rough. The scenes on the train were fairly intense and some of the scenery in Europe was very pleasant, but that's about all it had going for it. It felt more like a cable TV movie.

Blink and you'll miss the part that isn't padding.

Is Clint okay?

Clint Eastwood does it again, a great movie that truly explains what happened. From beginning to end, this movie was absolutley great. There are a lot of negative reviews, but if you like Clint Eastwood, this one is certainly not a dissapointment.

Watch: Skip it | The true story is great and these guys are truly heroes, but there just doesn't seem to be enough story to fill out a movie. The pacing is painful, the dialogue had me cringing, the acting is sub-par, and the pivotal moment is gone too quickly with no real tension.

I'm not sure what Eastwood was going for here, but whatever it was didn't work. I've read reviews that the scene involving the attack is tense, but I didn't feel it. The non actors were horrible throughout, but that scene in particular needed professional help. There are talented actors who can't pull off a fight scene - with these guys it looked comical (like backyard "professional" wrestling). When it comes to the real actors Eastwood went with comedic actors - strange indeed.

A weird and ham-fisted movie. Basically 2-3 boring guys on holiday. Awful script and lousy direction. Spencer Stone does an ok job.

At his age, Eastwood is allowed to be indulgent and I'll still willingly see his movies. While this movie does feature a noble gimmick, the casting of non-actors as themselves undermines whatever allowances I've given him. It's a really bad movie, the acting is horrible, and it's filled with fluff and filler. Call the subjects heros if you want, certainly they did a good deed, but to capture it on film, you need to hire actors.

Discovering the protagonists are played by their real selves explains the poor acting, but still doesn't go any way to making sense of the terrible script, tedious story and TV-movie cheap feel of the whole thing. The attack is the only interesting part of their tale, and that's only ten minutes of the film. I could stomach this as background fare while doing a crossword, but I don't envy anyone who committed themselves to it. The fact Clint Eastwood directed is astonishing.

Now that was some bad acting

While they do their best to flesh out this film, there just isn't enough there to make this all that interesting. The flashback scenes are not very engaging but much better acted, while the actual act of bravery is fascinating but way too short-lived. Their performances are fine, but unfortunately, it stands out like a sore thumb around the other actors. This would have also benefited from having more backstory about the attacker or scenes from his perspective to build the tension.

Slight. The use of the story's real-life protagonists rather than actors has obvious upsides but also the downside that the film avoids ascribing their characters any complexity. They are just "heroes". Redundant flashforwards transparently strain to keep the viewer waiting for the short action sequence of the climax; and the ending is tinged with Eastwood's infamous jingoism.

Clint Eastwood, kahraman filmi çekmek istemiş. Fakat sadete gelmek için o kadar uzatmış ki. Tren sahnelerinin etkileyici olduğu film, sıkıcı. Kahramanların, çocukluk yıllarından ergenlik yıllarına kadar hayat hikayesinden banane diyoruz. Kahramanlar olunmaz kahramanlar doğulur.

The small part that actually covers the terrorist attack is alright, but the majority of the film is about a lot of other stuff and it's borderline parody at times. It feels like someone gave Eastwood one of the worst scripts ever as some kind of challenge.

D-

politik olarak çok daha kötü bir şey beklediğimden midir nedir, rezalet gelmedi. bayağı zayıf anları var tabii ki

10 minutes of this is interesting. Most of that was in the trailer. A whole lot of unneeded padding.

It’s hard to articulate what’s wrong with this movie beyond calling it... awkward. It’s an awkward, odd little movie, like a military/terrorism themed mumblecore film or something. There were points I felt almost embarrassed watching it. That said, I was kinda like “Yeah kick that dude’s ass!” at the end, so eh.

37.50

This is pure trash. Alt-right, christian propaganda...

A simple, true, beautiful movie of what actually happened starring the people who did it. The reception it's getting from movie lovers and connoisseurs everywhere is very telling of the state of the art/business.

60

As basic as it gets.

I don't often say something like this, and I say it with all due sensitivity to the film's subject and real-life heroes: this shouldn't have been THIS movie. There's a hell of a story to tell here. But it's undercut by really bad performances, and time-hopping that is, at best, detrimentally noticeable. I can, in the same instant, both appreciate this film's creative aim, and criticize its execution; the payoff didn't justify what you have to go through to get there. This story deserves better.

Viewed February 11, 2018.

I naively thought that this would be Flags of Our Fathers 3.0, but it's more like... Billy Lynn?? I don't really even know, but I think I really like it.

I always liked Eastwood's directorial stuff, but this felt like a quasi-reenactment documentary more than anything. I know what he was going for, the mundane followed by a few seconds of no-notice crisis decision making and action. Soldiers are trained for war, yet often still choke. The religious stuff was off-putting, but it was balanced when they asked the guy who was apparently bleeding to death if he wanted to pray, and he responded "No". Remarkable heroism and poise in any case.