Ordinary people in extraordinary circumstances can become heroes. That is the premise of Clint Eastwood’s 15:17 to Paris.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Eastwood’s film is definitely ordinary. There’s an abundance of ordinariness in 15:17 to Paris.
Based on real events and starring the actual people involved, the film highlights how Alek Skarlatos, Anthony Sadler and Spencer Stone, three ordinary American men from Sacramento, California find themselves on a train travelling to Paris when Ayoud, a terrorist, pulls out an AK47 with the intention of slaughtering the passengers on the train.
We start with glimpses of Ayoud boarding the train then switch to the three friends who thwarted the attack, as primary age children and their struggle to be accepted by their classmates. Every once in a while we cut back to the train until we are locked into the tedious story of Alek, Anthony and Spencer’s continuing struggle to join the military and their subsequent trip to Europe that places them in harm’s way. We get it. They are dogged in their determination to succeed.
We get stuck in a home movie of their travels through Europe that is like watching wet concrete set.
There is no tension or suspense at all.
The dialogue is stilted and obvious. When the group is in Venice, they observe, “Isn’t that pretty?” Yes, we can see it’s fabulous.
They then visit a gelato café in St Mark’s Square. Oh look, gelato. It looks delicious. Let’s buy some gelato. We cut to a shot of the display of gelato flavours. I’ll have chocolate. It’s yummy. And on it goes.
Remember that 15:17 to Paris is a feature film directed by Clint Eastwood, who has made films such as Gran Torino, Play Misty for Me and Unforgiven. One expects to see more than a bog standard travelogue.
I was tempted to walk out of the film except I wanted to see how the terrorist incident would be resolved. It took all of five minutes in a 94-minute film.
A curious part of 15:17 to Paris was the sidelining of the fourth hero, an Englishmen, who was excluded from the story until the final sequence. It seems Eastwood was only interested in promoting the heroic behaviours of the Americans.
The heroic nature of their actions overcoming the terrorist was a case of pure dumb luck. Only Spencer charged the terrorist. The terrorist’s gun jammed; otherwise Spencer would have been dead. The other two only jumped out when Spencer had subdued the terrorist.
If you think I should have provided spoiler alerts, just consider that I have saved you several hours of your time in which you can do something worthwhile, like watching the home movies of your own overseas trips.