The 15h17 to Paris

Cinema Wednesdays - Marina De Toro

After American Sniper and Sully, Clint Eastwood takes another look at modern American heroes little known to the general public in The 15h17 to Paris. This time, however, it's directed differently, with not actors playing characters, but the protagonists of an event playing themselves. This feature-length film is a re-enactment of the foiled attack on a Paris-bound train on August 21, 2015.

The three Americans—Spencer Stone, Alek Skarlatos, and Anthony Sadler—play themselves in the story of how they prevented a premeditated massacre by a jihadist terrorist aboard the Thalys 9364 bound for Paris. Eastwood doesn’t just depict this thwarted tragedy; he also looks back at the childhood and friendship of the three young men that led to their presence on that train. These three friends were originally just taking a trip around Europe, but found themselves in a situation that required courage and quick thinking.

This production is not only different in terms of its cast, but also in its filming style, and the screenplay sometimes raises questions about the director’s intentions. Indeed, even though the film is meant to reflect reality, certain scenes are sometimes exaggerated and seem to convey a message that, in my opinion, is irrelevant: they were destined to experience this tragedy.

Destiny as a common thread

The film revolves around the lives of three young boys; we see them as children at a very Catholic school in California that teaches them discipline and respect for religion. Of course, the three boys aren’t like the other students—they swear, struggle in class, and just want to «play war» together. Later, Spencer and Alek enlist in the army, while Anthony focuses on his studies.

Admittedly, the various events in their lives are undeniable, but it is the way they are portrayed that poses a problem. Indeed, the film gives us the impression that these three young men unconsciously prepared themselves for this attack from a very young age. Several scenes allude to fate—whether through the mothers who sense that their sons are destined for something extraordinary, or the premonition of one of the boys who feels that his life is leading him toward something grand. The facts and statements themselves need not be questioned, but treating them as if they were predestined does not seem appropriate. Furthermore, Alek maintains in an interview that they were «in the wrong place at the wrong time,» which only reinforces the sense of confusion regarding the film’s plot.

A major reconstruction effort

Despite some criticism of the screenplay, Clint Eastwood emphasized the realism of his direction by creating a meticulously detailed reconstruction of the events. Not only did he recruit many of the people who were on the train at the time of the tragedy, but he also enlisted the rescue teams that had responded that day. This was a bold decision on the director’s part, as he recreates a terrible event that the actors themselves choose to relive and portray. The realism is very much present, especially since no artificial elements were added; there is almost no music, and the scene on the train is very gripping, as there are no screams or hysteria, unlike in some blockbusters, but nothing but silence and fear.

Ultimately, Clint Eastwood’s decision to bring real-life heroes to the screen is a commendable initiative. However, we mustn’t forget that this film aims to stay true to the facts, and the involvement of the three young men—playing themselves—breaks down the barrier between fiction and reality, making the film feel more like a reenactment. That’s why our expectations shouldn’t be the same as for American Sniper, the latter being more of a film based on a true story, whereas The 15h17 to Paris looks like real events brought to life on screen.

Write to the author : detoro.marina@bluewin.ch

Photo credit: © Warner Bros