Many films have that exact moment when you know that it will be amazing. Sometimes it is a striking image or an amazing action set piece. For any cinephile, it is a great feeling, especially if it comes in the opening scenes of a film. Other times, there is that exact moment when you know a film is going to be bad.
In The 15:17 to Paris, the latter is true. The film loses you the moment someone utters a word. That is this film’s fatal flaw. A poorly written script with terrible dialogue, horrible pacing, and directing lead to a very disappointing experience. The story of these three heroes is incredible and worthy of retelling, but this film lets these men down.
An Incredible Story, Terrible Storytelling
On August 21, 2015, three Americans…Air Force Staff Sergeant Spencer Stone, Anthony Slader, and National Guardsman Alek Skarlatos…found themselves in the right place at the right time. The three men, together with three Frenchmen and a British citizen, subdued an armed terrorist on a train to Paris. Hailed as heroes, The 15:17 to Paris attempts to show how these men from Sacramento propelled towards a “greater purpose.”
Let me be clear: These three men are heroes and deserve every accolade they have received. That is why The 15:17 to Paris is so disappointing. The film’s script, written by Dorothy Blyskal and based on the book by Jeffrey E. Stone, contains terrible dialogue, unconnected scenes that come out of nowhere, and horrible pacing. It’s a disservice to these men.
Let’s look at the introduction to our heroes at the beginning. It epitomizes the film’s problems. First, Sadler narrates as the three men ride in a car. The narration is poorly written and is the start of the bad dialogue that occurs throughout the film. It is on the nose and unrealistically expository. Secondly, he never narrates again.
This is another fatal flaw…scenes are barely connected and feel almost random. Faith is a huge part of Stone’s life, but the film never does anything with it. The narrative seems to connect his faith with his future as a hero, but the connection feels tenuous at best. There seems to be a rift developing between long time childhood friends Stone and Skarlatos as both consider joining the U.S. military, but it literally disappears later in the film.
Characters appear to be important, but then they simply leave the story. Jaleel White appears as a teacher who connects with our three main characters, but never shows up again. Stone and Sadler meet a fellow American woman on their European trip that appears to be important as well, but promptly disappears. It is jarring and leads to confusion and boredom. Paired with the terrible dialogue, the film becomes a slog to get through.
The decision to cast all three men to play themselves is something of a mistake. You can see why Eastwood and the other producers made the choice…all three, especially Stone, are incredibly likeable despite the poor script. It also seems to be an attempt to give the film authenticity. But their inexperience shows. In terms of screen presence, Stone is probably the strongest as his outgoing and affable manner does manage to translate onscreen at times. Skarlatos appears to be the most uncomfortable onscreen, and so he is given the least time.
The inexperience is the most obvious as we see the three friends interact. As we see the three friends backpack through Europe, their friendly interactions are inauthentic and ultimately boring. These scenes might be some of the most boring cinematic moments I have ever experienced.
I do not blame Stone, Sadler, and Skarlatos. They have been put in an impossible position portraying themselves, where a discerning audience will watch to see if they can pull it off. If anyone holds any blame, it may be Director Eastwood. Known for a more casual approach to directing actors, the legendary director may have done the same for these inexperienced men…and unfortunately it shows. A more hands on approach may have been wiser.
The established actors do the best with the thin material. Judy Geer stands out the most as Stone’s mother. She has some pretty clunky lines, but she gives them some life. But like many of the characters, she suddenly disappears for long stretches. Jenna Fischer appears briefly as Skarlatos’ mother, but is ultimately wasted as her character seems to just be another version of Geer’s God-faring mother.
Thalys Train Attack
When The 15:17 to Paris finally gets to the attack on that train, it is compelling. Eastwood does a good job building tension, cutting to the incident with quick cuts throughout the film. As the heroes aboard the train defend themselves, the sequence is filmed well. It is raw and authentic with only the sounds of the attack filling our ears.
However, the sequence and attack are over quickly, leading to the audience questioning why so much time was dedicated to a bland build up. Much like Eastwood’s previous biopic Sully, the film often feels padded. Was there ever enough story to dedicate to a feature length film?
Secondly, we see that other people are involved in taking down the terrorist. Yes, the three Americans are the principle participants, but the others aren’t even named. Maybe we could have followed these others as well? That could have possibly led to more of a narrative.
A Disservice
The 15:17 to Paris fails the men it attempts to revere. From an unwise decision to cast the actual heroes to play themselves to a terrible script, the film instead shifts focus to how bad it is. The film lacks authenticity because no moments feel genuine…in fact, the movie is almost amateurish.
A different format may have been a wiser approach. A documentary featuring interviews with these heroes, where we hear them describe their lives in their own words would be much better. Instead, we are left with a bad film with only a single highlight.
These men deserve better.
SCORE: 3 OUT OF 10