User Reviews

It's a nostalgic trip back to simpler storytelling. At a crisp 90 minutes, it's the perfect low-effort way to kill an afternoon.

Michelle Dockery is cast as an Air Marshal, who’s assigned to accompanying a mob witness to trial (Topher Grace). Their flight across the Alaskan wilderness soon turns dangerous when the pilot’s true identity is revealed (Mark Wahlberg). Almost all of this takes place on the small plane, so it’s up to director Mel Gibson to make the thrills take flight. First, there’s lots of stupidity in the script, which simply can’t be overcome. Dockery does OK as the one in charge and Grace brings his comic ability to make his character enjoyable. Wahlberg goes all out to create a creep, but his over-the-top performance is an embarrassment. Even though he’s supposed to be balding, the first scene without his cap clearly shows the shaved hairline. Obs, Gibson is versed in going too far, so he certainly gets some of the fault. If you give in to the cheesy aspects and want a mindless thriller, this isn’t horrible.

I guess I can add Mark Wahlberg to my list of "now terrible" actors. The shaved head for his character is almost as ridiculous as his terrible accident. I think bad movies, with big names, should have to pay us back for wasting our time. In my opinion, this is an insult.

You see the setup for this movie right out the gate and it all takes place on the plane. What I hated most about this movie was that mark Walberg has his haircut to mimic someone with a receding hairline, but it was not in the budget to cut his hair closer so it's almost comical to see the buzzcut. that in itself tells you how much they cared about realism...

Greetings from Lithuania. "Flight Risk" (2025) is a movie directed by Mel Gibson. As a directors film, this is by far his worst one yet. The problem is not even directing, but absolutely predictable and by the numbers plot. Dialogs are very weak. Acting by all 3 actors were pretty good. And the confined space in which this movie takes place isn't a problem - the problem is execution. Mel Gibson is clearly not Hitchcock. Overall, at it's running time very short 1 h 20 min this movie still draggs heavily. First 20 min ir so are interesting, but soon it all falls apart. "Flight Risk" is a poor film.

Wilson möchte eine Zeugenaussage tätigen. Dabei wird er von dem Air-Marshal Modolyn Harris begleitet. Ein Pilot gespielt von Mark Wahlberg begleitet die beiden und soll diese von Alaska nach New York fliegen. Mitten in der Luft müssen Wilson und Modolyn feststellen, dass der Pilot nicht echt ist und den Auftrag erhalten hat die beiden zu beseitigen. Schaffen sie es dort lebend heraus?Flight Risk ist Mel Gibsons sechster Film, in dem er Regie führt. Es ist der erste Film von ihm, den ich gesehen habe. Und die anderen Filme können nur besser sein. Positiv zu erwähnen ist Mark Wahlberg. Er hat Spaß an der Rolle und spielt den Psycho Auftragskiller super. Das Problem, der Charakter selber hat keine Tiefe und man erfährt über ihn gar nichts. Außerdem ist er nur selten im Film zu sehen. Gefühlt ist er nur 5–15 Minuten zu sehen. Der Film sieht auch gut gemacht aus, darüber kann man sich nicht beschweren. Es gibt auch Detailarbeit, die mir gefallen hat wie sie z. B. im Flugzeug kommunizieren. Das war es auch mit dem positiven. Flight Risk ist ein langweiliger Thriller, welcher keine Spannung hatund uninteressante Charaktere hat, wie ich schon lange nicht mehr gesehen habe. Während im Trailer Wilson noch als schüchtern und paranoid wirkt, ist er hier ein nerviger Plappermaul. Die Eigenschaft paranoid hat er nur am Anfang und während der Flugreise nicht wirklich. So kommt es vor das der Pilot gefesselt wird und er sich befreien möchte und die beiden die ganze Zeit nur geradeaus gucken und so tun, als wäre nichts los. Wenn sie nach gefühlten Stunden mal nach hinten gucken, machen sie dies nur grob, das der Pilot easy flüchten kann. Der Film rägt dazu ein am Handy zu spielen, was ich auch machen musste, anders konnte ich diesen Film nicht zu Ende schauen. Dies machen nur sehr selten. Während es Filme gibt, die schlecht sind, und zwar auch langweilen, aber wiederum so schlecht sind das man sich darüber aufregen kann und ein bisschen Spaß hat und sich nicht langweilt, langweilt man sich hier **** Ende ist Flight Risk nur ein langweiliger Thriller mit interessanter Prämisse, die es zwar schon öfters gibt und dieses Potenzial überhaupt nicht zu nutzen weiß.3/10

Mel Gibson directs a light thriller, very much in the vein of those movies you’d stumble upon while channel-surfing on a Friday night—and end up watching until the end. Flight Risk doesn’t pretend to be more than it is: simple entertainment, and it more or less **** story moves at a decent pace and doesn’t drag, and its short runtime is a plus. But don’t expect memorable scenes or complex characters. What drives the film is straightforward action, cheesy dialogue, and a few over-the-top twists that go down easier if you don’t overthink them. Wahlberg does fine as the reluctant pilot, though he fades into the background at times due to weak effects and forced moments.What works best is the film’s unmistakable '90s vibe—that feeling of "I’ve seen this before, but it’s kind of fun." What doesn’t work is how little it brings to the table. It’s a decent ride while it lasts, but once it lands… you’re already thinking of something else.

Every bit as terrible as people make it out to be. Paper-thin plot, awful leads, and an absolute waste of talent.

(Mauro Lanari) Rickety Kammerspiel with unity of time, place, and action in a Cessna 208 Grand Caravan where everyone brings out their worst believing in self-parody: Gibson directs his first B-movie, Wahlberg plays a psychopath with more gab than adrenaline, Topher Grace is supposed to entertain but bores, Michelle Dockery gets the role of the expiatory and redemptive second chance. Debutant Jared Rosenberg's script was included in the 2020 Black List of the best unproduced American screenplays. I can only imagine the others.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

What a load of chat gpt drivel. Also i dont think they put injectable morphine in a first aid kit. Oh and the radio guy says shiver me timbers when they see a shipwreck. Good lord.

It was not as bad as ratings show here in my opinion but also it was lacking in the story and how much it showed of it - I really feel it had good potential but since it all was filmed in airplane (almost all) and none of the other parts of the story were shown (almost), it felt like they lacked budget or something

Below average drama/thriller fails to locate a tone and stick to it. Instead we get an awkward poorly acted thriller with a weak storyline. The concept itself is as old as cinema so there are many better examples of this concept to enjoy. Its a real shame as the concept, casting, direction and production quality are all very good.

Flight Risk (2025) starts off promising, with a strong setup, solid camera work, and an intriguing atmosphere. The first few shots in the cabin pull you in, and the takeoff sequence gives some nice scenic visuals. But once the plane gets in the air, the movie loses its edge. The direction is competent but lacks any real flair, shifting into a standard back-and-forth between characters that makes everything feel predictable. The plot tries to build tension with espionage and intrigue, but it never fully develops. There are a lot of questionable decisions made by the characters, and the script doesn’t do much to make them feel believable. Mark Wahlberg delivers a solid performance, holding his character well, but the supporting cast doesn’t bring much to the table. The CGI is a weak point, especially considering how much the movie relies on it. With most of the story taking place inside the plane, you'd expect at least the exterior shots to be convincing, but they aren't. The action sequences feel choppy, and some moments defy logic in ways that take you out of the experience. The score is there, but nothing stands out. Overall, Flight Risk had potential but ends up being an average thriller that leans too much on familiar tropes without adding anything new.

Mark Wahlberg delivers a compelling villainous performance, but Flight Risk is no Speak No Evil. A weak script prevents this confined-setting thriller from truly shining. Perhaps Mel Gibson is still better suited for directing grand-scale epics.

Came in with low expectations and actually enjoyed it more than I thought I would. Mark Wahlberg steals the show, but the other actors were also fine. There are some silly moments and questionable effects, but also some decent action scenes and tension. Mark's deranged character keeps you guessing (also because of how stupid the other two were at times) and Topher Grace was some decent comic relief. Fun popcorn flick. Not to be taken too seriously.

"Flight Risk" (1/24/25, $40M w/w, D/Mel Gibson) Mel directs this taught psychological thriller featuring Topher Grace and Mark Wahlburg. It's a low-budget presentation though its budget is reportedly $26M which is likely mostly fees for Mel and his stars because it's certainly not in the set pieces. Anyway, "Winston" is taken in as a material witness by Marshal "Madolyn" on a tiny Cessna piloted by "Daryl", but it seems the arch-villain (NPC) has compromised Daryl and others making the Marshal's mission to get Winston to safety very perilous. The thrilling situations that evolve are mostly plausible though you will have a few "ah, c'mon" moments but it's a mostly satisfying ride, have a bucket of popcorn available.

The screenwriting is atrocious. Why bring a first draft to production and expect the movie to do well. There's zero wit or humor. Topher Grace was poorly cast. I don't have any idea why Gibson would agree to direct this. I have no idea why Whalberg agreed to the part. They must have been bored. I have no idea why it was even released in it's final form.

Took to long for marks action scenes commercials only showed the ending worst movie for walhberg

I had forgotten that Mel Gibson had directed this awful **** until the credits rolled. There is just not enough good plot or action to support this single location thriller at all.

Went to see because of the decent thrilling promised trailer and Mark Walberg, left with expectations in check. Positives there is pretty good tension throughout the movie and nice subtly unease that builds when needed. Characters, aside from the hijacker played by Mark, the two other leads had really good chemistry and likeability, I cared whether or not they made it out alive which is a major plus, also some decent humor from the flight instructor over the radio. Negatives, one of the worst opening scenes I've ever seen, it honestly felt like they filmed it last minute without direction, i was actually shocked that opener was the 'grab' to catch my attention. Mark's hijacker character was barely a character at all, for a 90 minute movie this lead was out of the action for probably 70 minutes and immediately felt like just starpower for starpower. A pretty goofy movie that shines with the lead female fed agent and the witness built relationship while in danger, worthy watch just have reasonable expectations.

Flight Risk in a nutshell can be best described as one big coin toss. From the CGI to the dialogue, it's 50/50 on whether the toss up sticks the landing or not.

This movie is a fun get away clear your head film. It's a thriller with a quick truntime. Deacting is good Topher Grace plays a decent dirty account,Walburg plays a good pyscho killer and the female lead holds her own. Draws backs areCGI is not good and the run time cuts down on a deeper story. But, decent escape film probably wait to se it at home

I don’t know why this film doesn’t have more love. I went with three friends and all four of us found this movie to be highly entertaining! Topher Grace does a great job of being funny and droll in his part as a witness being transported by Michelle Dockery. Mark Wahlberg is campy funny as well as their pilot. We laughed a lot and had a really great time watching this movie. Very fun and entertaining.

O sequestro do voo 375, mesmo com orçamento menor, consegue provocar mais tensão do que isso aqui, lotado de clichês. O bom é que temos um avião de pequeno porte, tornando mais claustrofóbicas as cenas, mas incomoda demais a inocência da protagonista, mesmo ela sendo treinada, conferindo um ar de quase mediocridade a tudo que estamos vendo. O lado bom é que a cena final do avião tentando pousar é bem divertida, não podendo dizer o mesmo da tentativa forçada de plot.

Huge plot holes make this almost unwatchable. What agent would get onboard a plane with their prisoner who is now a target from a mob boss without checking the ID of their pilot and questioning the airport crew. And that’s just the beginning of a movie that is full of stupid unbelievable decisions; one right after another. Thankfully it was barely 90 minutes long.

A classic it is not, but it is still entertaining. Wahlberg's character wasn't as zany as expected. It contained a lot of, "keep your eyes on the prisoner!" viewer frustration. Flaws and all: it's a fun thriller.

Desde os primeiros passos da divulgação de Ameaça no Ar, já era possível perceber sinais de que a Lionsgate não depositava grandes expectativas no filme. O marketing, limitado e quase cômico, destacava elementos absurdos, como o making of de Mark Wahlberg raspando a cabeça para interpretar um personagem calvo, algo que parecia mais uma piada interna do que uma tentativa séria de promover o longa. Esse tipo de abordagem refletia uma produção que parecia destinada ao fracasso, sendo tratada como um descarte pelo estúdio, que claramente sabia que não havia muito a ser salvo, apesar do orçamento reduzido.Dirigido por Mel Gibson, que retorna à cadeira de diretor após um hiato de nove anos desde o aclamado Até o Último Homem, o filme tenta ser uma espécie de ponto de reentrada para Gibson em Hollywood. Contudo, Ameaça no Ar acaba funcionando mais como um retrocesso em sua carreira. Ao lado do roteirista Jared Rosenberg, Gibson entrega um trabalho que falha tanto na execução narrativa quanto na utilização de recursos técnicos modernos, como a inteligência artificial, que aqui beira o catastrófico. As cenas geradas ou complementadas por I.A. são visivelmente artificiais, criando uma estética superficial e risível, que mais se aproxima de uma paródia de filmes de ação do que de algo sério e bem produzido.A trama se passa quase inteiramente dentro de um avião, uma escolha narrativa que poderia gerar tensão e claustrofobia, mas que acaba expondo as limitações técnicas e criativas da produção. Ao tentar estabelecer o senso de passagem de tempo, o roteiro comete o erro de subestimar o público, repetindo constantemente quanto tempo falta para os eventos-chave, como se a história precisasse desesperadamente de lembretes para criar urgência. O resultado é um filme sem ritmo, onde a tensão nunca é realmente construída, e o ambiente claustrofóbico se torna apenas monótono.A fragilidade dos cenários, que não transmitem nenhuma sensação de veracidade, e a falta de cuidado técnico, especialmente nos efeitos visuais e no uso de I.A., agravam ainda mais os problemas do longa. Em nenhum momento o espectador sente a urgência ou o perigo que a narrativa tenta emular. O que poderia ser uma experiência imersiva transforma-se em algo raso e artificial, com cenas que parecem retiradas de um simulador genérico e sem **** personagens também sofrem com um roteiro mal desenvolvido, que não oferece profundidade ou carisma para estabelecer qualquer conexão com o público. O trio principal — Mark Wahlberg, Topher Grace e Michelle Dockery — parece desconfortável em cena, resultado de uma direção pouco inspirada e de escolhas narrativas equivocadas. Wahlberg, que deveria ser o grande nome do filme, é reduzido a um papel quase coadjuvante, com momentos de completa ausência de relevância. Grace alterna entre períodos de total passividade e participações forçadas, enquanto Dockery tenta, sem sucesso, sustentar a narrativa com sua performance, prejudicada pela falta de material sólido para trabalhar.Além disso, a promessa de um filme de ação tenso com elementos de suspense fica muito distante da realidade entregue. As cenas que deveriam ser marcantes falham em causar qualquer impacto, e a história simplesmente não consegue manter o espectador interessado. Em um filme de 90 minutos, o mínimo esperado seria alguma diversão despretensiosa, mas até nisso Ameaça no Ar **** detalhe curioso é que o roteiro do filme figurava na "Blacklist" de 2020, uma lista de roteiros elogiados que ainda não haviam sido produzidos. Essa informação levanta a questão: onde exatamente tudo deu errado? Foi na aquisição pela Lionsgate? Na abordagem de Mel Gibson e Jared Rosenberg? Ou talvez na decisão de transformar a calvície de Wahlberg em um dos pontos centrais da promoção? Seja qual for a resposta, o resultado final é um filme que desperdiça qualquer potencial que poderia ter **** resumo, Ameaça no Ar é uma obra que falha em todos os aspectos possíveis. Sua narrativa é fraca, seus personagens são insossos, e sua execução técnica é vergonhosa. Nem mesmo como entretenimento descartável o filme consegue funcionar, entregando uma experiência apática e sem propósito. Se Mel Gibson esperava usar esse filme como uma plataforma para retornar ao cenário de Hollywood, ele provavelmente precisará reavaliar suas escolhas. Afinal, Ameaça no Ar não passa de um voo sem destino, incapaz de decolar tanto em termos narrativos quanto técnicos.

Flight Risk is set almost entirely within a small airplane with 3 cast members; and that's probably the best thing we can say about it. It's a mess. Bad dialogue, a story that the film never really cares about, and a lot of unintentional comedic moments leaves Flight Risk feeling like a parody instead of a thriller. Topher Grace is basically just playing his normal sarcastic self, while Mark Whalberg goes over the top with his villain performance that spends most of the movie in pointless, over the top situations. Overall, Flight Risk was a huge mess with cringe dialogue, bad visuals including the possible poor use of AI, rough acting and a story you really don't care about because the film didn't really care about it. Brad: 1 Josh: 1 Final: 1

I was unaware that Mel Gibson was the director of this movie when I started watching trailers for it months ago. From what I kept hearing when the early reviews started trickling in, it turns out that it was an intentional omission of said fact. Most of his previous attempts at directing, (At least the ones that I have seen), have been epic "labors of love" which are designed for the more "intelligent" class of movie goers. I am guessing that this was an attempt to reach out to a broader audience. For the record, I spent a majority of my weekends during the 80's and mid 90's in movie theaters. since then, the quality of movies has taken a drastic decline in originality, production, consistency and overall quality. Now, I am lucky if I have an interest in seeing 5-10 movies a year, and this happen to have been my first selection for the year. Anyways, I digress. First things first: the movie as a whole was not quite as bad as most critics have stated. That's not too much, but I would probably take a "wait and see approach" before considering this movie for 2026 razzie fodder. That being said, there were quite a few problems with the overall quality of the movie. For starters, It appeared that the target audience was probably those who enjoyed the late 80's/early 90's action movies that required a person to "leave their brain at the door" and just go along for the ride. Unfortunately, it seemed to fall a bit short on that premise. Rather than pay homage to said genre of films, it seemed to be little more than a cheap carbon copy. One example was the intermittent conversations between Michelle Dockery, (who played the federal marshal in charge of getting her prisoner to New York in order to testify against a mob boss), and flight instructor trying to get on the ground safely, seemed a bit too similar the Bruce Willis/ Reginald vel Johnson combo from the classic Die Hard movie...... only poorly executed, uninteresting, and to some extent... a bit creepy. The payoff of the movie even seemed to be a fax simile of the scene when the two of them finally meet each other for the first time.... minus the chemistry and more nuanced actual ending. Next, and maybe it was just me, but the Topher Grace character seemed too identical to the Joe Pesci character in Lethal Weapon 2.... minus the Charisma. If perhaps they would have given him more depth. Many critics think he was miscast. Perhaps, but I think it was more the script he given that seemed to keep him sedated, much like the morphine he was on for the last 20 minutes or so of the movie. Finally, I thought Mark Wahlberg was the highlight of the movie. I heard one critic who thinks that if was because he was the only one who had a pulse for what the movie was aiming for. Regardless, his greatly diminished as the movie progressed. and he was relegated to taking routine "cartoonish thug beatings". In conclusion, I had no problems with the plot holes, and attempts to create random twists for the purpose of padding to movie to a respectable 90-minute runtime, (the whole "mole" in the agency comes to mind), but if Mel Gibson is going to continue "borrowing" from other movies for the purpose of creating high octane general audience crowd pleasers, he should probably invest in a high quality state of the art copier...... I have no doubt he can afford it.

Regarding the movie "Flight Risk":So uhmmmm - WHAT'S THE DEAL?!! The pro critics at Rotten Tomatoes gave it a 25% rating. Huhhhh?!!!! I don't understand. You know, was the rating skewed because of politics - because Mel Gibson and Mark Wahlberg were involved with it??? I'm coming off a head cold and went to see it last night - with the thought that if it was as bad as the critics gave it - I could easily go home after a half hour or so. But, instead, I was totally enthralled!! It kept me on the edge of my seat until the very end!! Folks, pay no attention to the 25% rating. There's something funny going on with that!! This movie is far superior to just about anything I've seen in the past three months - including "Wicked" (but not "A Complete Unknown" ((that one was the very best!!!)) ). I see at least one or two movies in the theater a week - and this one was more than well worth the price of admission. Gibson always puts on a good show!!!

"Flight Risk" is a really good directorial attempt by Mel Gibson and a really go for broke performance by Mark Wahlberg but it wears out its welcome by the time we get in the air.

Fun film! Great combination of actors. Gibson is as gifted as ever with his direction with a generous dash of humor thrown in for good measure.