Eye in the Sky (2016)

'Eye in the Sky's' main attraction was not for me the fascinating subject. It was not because of my love for the genre. It was because of the immensely talented cast, Helen Mirren, Alan Rickman, Barkhad Abdi and Aaron Paul have been great and more in other things, with my main reason for seeing 'Eye in the Sky' being Rickman in his final screen role before his ultimely death two years ago from pancreatic cancer (a loss still very deeply felt).While not a flawless film as such, and it has proven to be a film that has polarised viewers, 'Eye in the Sky' is truly impressive. There are many fine things and its best elements are superb. What some have found heavy handed, dull, dubious morally and one-sided, was to me a film that was gripping, tense and one that approached its subject matter intelligently and strived not to be too conventional or too simple. Can totally understand the polarisation though, it's a controversial subject in the first place and it was always going to be very hard for any film how to approach it, 'Eye in the Sky' does this well. Maybe the sentimentality towards the end is a touch too much and maybe the message was hammered home a little too thickly. Otherwise, there was nothing to fault 'Eye in the Sky'. Where it most excels is with the casting, with Helen Mirren being cast against type and doing so with authoritative steel. Aaron Paul is as great as he was in 'Breaking Bad' and Barkhad Abdi shows his versatility in a role different to the one he had in 'Captain Phillips'. Alan Rickman however gives the best performance, he is commanding and splendidly droll and there was an element of poignancy too knowing that it was his last performance.The film has nail-biting tension and suspense, unfolds deliberately but never dully (was actually on the edge of my seat the whole time) and was never hard to follow while not ever getting simplistic. It made a real effort to be balanced and handles a difficult subject with tact and intelligence, with it not overdoing or trivialising the full impact of the situation and bravely not falling into clichéd genre tropes or providing easy or over-convenient answers. The main point and moral is generally made effectively. The script is thoughtful and well written and some of the film is also very heartfelt and brings a lump to the throat.It is a very well made film visually, having the right amount of grit and stylishness and capturing the claustrophobic confinement of the setting with authenticity. The direction is always at ease with the material and doesn't lose control or let go. Although, truly impressive. 8/10 Bethany Cox

Great movie that doesn't have to rely on tons of CGI to sustain interest. Instead, there is just a handful of characters, and they discuss about consequences. It's a discussion that won't happen in reality, of course, but the characters represent the different viewpoints in the drone killing process, and they do it very well. As another comment said: you have never seen a Skype call this gripping. This is great cinematography.Had it just been a discussion about the moral ambiguity of drone strikes, the movie would not have convinced. Where the movie shines, IMO, is its portrayal of uncertainty. Reality cannot be manipulated, and can certainly not be taken for granted. The outcome is not decided in the discussion, but afterwards, and we have to face it. That can make you reluctant to act to the point of cowardice, or all gung-ho, but it doesn't make a difference in the end.So, is there a happy ending? It doesn't matter. Live with the pain.

This movie will have you on the edge of your seat from beginning to end. Helen Mirren is superb and Alan Rickman likewise.

The Trolley Problem is a sociological experiment where an individual is asked how they would respond to an unfolding tragedy. In this, the individual is positioned in a place where they can see a tram or trolley travelling towards a person working on the line. The person will be killed, unless you pull a lever which will send the trolley onto another track. Simple choice, yeah? Now imagine that there are people on both tracks, and either your action or inaction will result in deaths. Action may result in fewer deaths than inaction, but ultimately it comes down to how you think you will deal with the guilt of being directly responsible for x deaths versus being indirectly responsible for y deaths.Eye in the sky cleverly uses this idea in a way which is much more plausible: A drone strike on a terrorist cell hiding in a densely populated area. Helen Mirren is in charge of an international anti-terrorism operation in possession of intelligence indicating the location of some high level targets. Drone pilots Aaron Paul and Phoebe Fox are to fire the missile which will neutralise these targets. As the senior pilot, Paul is the one who must pull the trigger; however the potential for collateral damage is too high for his liking. At the same time, politicians overseeing the operation lack the will to give an order they feel will come back on them if it is unsuccessful. What follows is a first ever look into how the drone strikes we read about in the news every other day may weigh on the consciences of those who pilot them, and the political fallout from their actions. While the tension mounts, and the probability of success versus failure is calculated, Mirren struggles to straddle the two worlds in which she must convince the military brass and politicians that the action is necessary; and at the same time convince the team she has authority over that it is vital. The end result is a film where nobody escapes the emotional engagement of such an event and all must resolve their actions in their own ways. This was Alan Rickman's last onscreen performance as Mirren's boss, acting as the conduit between the operations centre and the politicians as they sit at antique furnishings drinking tea and try to avoid making any decision which they may be held accountable for. Paul condenses the emotional range he showed in Breaking Bad to provide a compelling illustration of the conflict in the mind of the man with his finger on the trigger. Mirren's dogged determination and self assuredness is the balance between the two conflicts, trying not to let either one derail the operation. And all the while, the people walking the streets of Nairobi unaware that their fates are being decided by people in far off lands. Eye in the Sky is both original and captivating. This is a fantastic way to bring modern warfare, fought not on battlefields but from offices in various parts of the world connected by communications technologies, to the big screen with tension and emotion.