Mel Gibson's 'Flight Risk': A High-Altitude Dive into Disaster?

Ever since the first trailer for Flight Risk dropped, I've been conflicted. The concept—a stripped-down thriller confined to a small plane with just three main characters—is intriguing. However, the trailer itself was less than stellar, revealing far too much of the plot. I strongly advise avoiding the trailer if you plan to see the film; I despise trailers that spoil significant plot points.

The Premise: A Thrilling Takeoff or a Crash Landing?

The film unfolds on a small plane where U.S. Marshal Madelyn Harris (Michelle Dockery), known for her role in Downtown Abbey, escorts a government witness (Topher Grace, almost unrecognizable with glasses from his That 70’s Show days), to a mob boss's trial. A shocking twist—and a major spoiler—reveals that the pilot (Mark Wahlberg, in his first villainous role since Fear) is the actual assassin. From there, things quickly spiral downward.

Mel Gibson's Directorial Choice: A Departure from Epic Proportions

The film's director, Mel Gibson, is a contentious choice. While controversies have surrounded him, I appreciate much of his earlier work. Braveheart, released before he became a Hollywood pariah, remains a favorite. His direction in Apocalypto and Hacksaw Ridge showcases his talent. Yet, Flight Risk feels like a step in the wrong direction, particularly given the overwhelmingly negative critical response.

Critical Consensus: A Plane Wreck or a Surprisingly Smooth Flight?

As of this writing, Flight Risk sits at a dismal 25% on Rotten Tomatoes. The reviews are brutal. Variety's Todd Gilchrist calls it a “crude, unimaginative, suspenseless adventure whose tension mostly derives from deciding which of its three main characters will prove the most unlikable by the time it ends.” The Globe and Mail's Barry Hertz labels it a “C-grade thriller… further dumbed down… Gibson made every single wrong directorial decision.” Others blame the script, with The Wall Street Journal’s Zachary Barnes stating, “Jared Rosenberg’s witless screenplay has several stretches that no director could make exciting, or even minimally endurable.” The New York Times' Alissa Wilkinson agrees, suggesting the screenplay is the problem, not Gibson's direction. However, not all reviews are negative. Frank Scheck of The Hollywood Reporter offers a positive review, stating, “You’ll be shaking your head at the sheer ludicrousness of it all… But it’s a pretty good bet that you haven’t once felt the desire to look at your phone.” The Daily Telegraph's Robbie Collin calls the plot stupid but “methodically… artisanally stupid, built in accordance with the classic thriller rules.” IGN's Emma Stefansky adds that although the characters and story are familiar, “there’s enough panache to keep it in the air right up until its explosive ending.”

A Disappointing Turn for Gibson's Career?

The overwhelmingly negative reviews highlight the film's flaws, pointing to problems with humor, dialogue, and off-screen voice performances. Even positive reviews acknowledge significant issues. It is a peculiar choice for Gibson, especially considering his past successes. The film's overall reception is certainly a far cry from the critical acclaim of Gibson's earlier works. After the scope of Braveheart, The Passion of the Christ, Apocalypto, and Hacksaw Ridge, this feels like a significant step back. This smaller-scale thriller is a chamber piece, confined almost entirely to the cramped space of a rickety plane. While the concept isn't entirely new, the execution appears lacking according to most critics, falling far short of the ambitious historical epics Gibson is known for. The film's low budget of $25 million is evident in its production values.

The Performances: A Cast in Turbulent Airspace

Despite the script's shortcomings, the acting performances offer moments of intrigue. Dockery’s portrayal of a determined Marshal is commendable. However, Wahlberg's performance as the villain is a mixed bag, his portrayal sometimes falling flat and lacking true menace. Grace's performance as the nervous witness also seems somewhat subdued. In contrast, Dockery is the standout, carrying the film with her skillful performance, delivering a compelling character in the face of the script's imperfections.

Final Verdict: A Bumpy Ride with a Few Unexpected Moments

Flight Risk is ultimately a mixed bag. While it may have some fleeting moments of tension, it largely fails to deliver a truly compelling thriller experience. The film's low budget and simplistic storyline limit its overall impact. It feels more like a made-for-TV movie than a major theatrical release. For a director of Gibson's caliber, this film is a disappointment and seems to stray far from his earlier ambitious and critically acclaimed works.

The film's simplistic premise and predictable plot, combined with uneven performances and questionable directorial choices, leave it underwhelming. While it provides serviceable entertainment, it hardly makes a lasting impression and falls far short of expectations, particularly given Gibson's past successes. Although the film may generate some conversation, it's unlikely to achieve lasting recognition among Gibson's filmography. It ultimately proves a rather forgettable experience, leaving viewers hoping for a more substantial return from the director in future projects. The most intriguing aspect may be the unexpected pairing of Mel Gibson and Mark Wahlberg, two actors not typically associated with this type of low-budget action thriller. However, this unique combination is not enough to save the film from its critical shortcomings.