Flight Risk (2025) Review: A Turbulent Journey Through Suspense and Action

Mel Gibson’s latest directorial effort, Flight Risk (2025), tests the limits of claustrophobic filmmaking by confining nearly its entire runtime to the inside of a single small airplane. Yet despite that intense, one-location setup, the film somehow manages to oscillate between raw, edgy tension and bouts of unexpected—or perhaps unintentionally comical—dialogue. Featuring performances by Mark Wahlberg (as a deranged pilot), Michelle Dockery (as a fierce U.S. Air Marshal), and Topher Grace (as a snarky fugitive witness), the story unfolds high above the Alaskan wilderness and plunges audiences into a world where no one seems to be who they claim to be.

In many ways, the movie feels like a wild throwback to 1990s action-thrillers. There is a genuine sense of nostalgia in how it mixes suspense, campy jokes, and over-the-top threats in a single confined set. Mark Wahlberg, for instance, appears to be tapping into the same menacing energy he brought to Fear (1996), though this time in an even more amped-up manner. He flashes a handful of conspicuous accents, brandishes a gleeful desire to do horrific things to his passengers, and even commits to shaving his head daily on set—an aesthetic choice that might remind some viewers of classic horror-villain theatrics. In short, this is not the typical heroic Wahlberg we saw in previous collaborations with Gibson, such as Daddy’s Home 2 or Father Stu. Instead, the film marks a return to full-blown villainy, providing a jarring contrast to the well-intentioned characters he often portrays.

At the same time, Michelle Dockery’s character, Madolyn Harris, carries the moral weight of the film on her shoulders. Portraying a deputy U.S. Air Marshal on a crucial mission, she is forced to remain levelheaded while physically overpowering a capable, cackling killer. Audiences who remember Dockery from period dramas like Downton Abbey will find her tough, modern action-hero persona both refreshing and surprising. The entire predicament is complicated by the presence of Winston, played by Topher Grace, a bespectacled accountant-turned-mob-informant who occasionally cracks sarcastic commentary about the plane’s questionable condition or the pilot’s unpredictably menacing behavior. Grace’s comedic side surfaces regularly, but that comedic flair sometimes stands at odds with the film’s darker moments, leaving viewers wondering if they should brace themselves for a classic thriller or an unintentional comedy of errors.

The resulting clash of tones makes Flight Risk fascinating but messy. Mel Gibson’s direction draws on his well-documented eye for tension, so certain sequences—especially those involving violent struggles inside the plane’s cramped aisles—are genuinely harrowing. At times, the camera zeroes in on the actors’ expressions so tightly that it feels downright claustrophobic, amplifying the sense of terror one would realistically feel in such a situation. Yet the film occasionally undercuts that tension by slipping in lines of dialogue that can be juvenile or bizarrely off-color. It is easy to see where some viewers might stifle a laugh simply because it is hard to process how a life-or-death situation can suddenly include quips about bodily functions, or repeated taunts that threaten assault and cruelty in off-puttingly casual ways.

Opinions on this thriller vary wildly. Some critics praise the adrenaline and the bold central performances, while others lambaste the film for jarring tonal shifts and a plot that relies too heavily on contrivances to keep the conflict going. You can see the full range of responses by checking aggregator sites like Metacritic, Rotten Tomatoes, IMDB, TMDB, Wikipedia, JustWatch, Box Office Mojo, Letterboxd, and Movie Insider. The common thread, however, is that Flight Risk plays out with a frantic energy that can be both entertaining and frustrating. Some viewers appreciate the “bad movie night” charm—a cinematic experience where you can shut off your brain, enjoy the spectacle, and roll with the absurdity—while others decry it as a poorly written script propped up by big names and a high concept.

No matter which side of the argument you fall on, there is no denying that Flight Risk channels the spirit of an older generation of action flicks, many of which also took place in small, single-location environments. There is a direct line from films like Speed or Con Air to this new Gibson-Wahlberg collaboration: both rely on the tension that arises when you trap your heroes in a perilous situation where any rash move can unleash destruction. What sets Flight Risk apart—at least from a marketing standpoint—is the extreme unpredictability of Mark Wahlberg’s pilot, who swings wildly from folksy banter to psychopathic threats. Whether that approach feels thrilling or off-putting can be a matter of personal taste.

If you want to explore the movie’s various twists and turns even more deeply, be sure to visit What’s After the Movie. The dedicated page for Flight Risk (2025), found here, includes a summary of the film’s plot and central conflicts, as well as quizzes to test how well you know the story and links to other reviews that compare its reception to similar airborne thrillers. There is also plenty of background information on the cast, from Mark Wahlberg’s daily on-set head-shaving routine (which might be a bigger plot point than expected) to details on how Michelle Dockery handled the demanding fight choreography.

For more articles, reviews, and behind-the-scenes features on Flight Risk (2025) and other new releases, check out the What’s After the Movie blog. You will find fresh insights on whether this film truly stands out among 2025’s thrillers, or if it will ultimately blend into the long roster of “thrown together in a plane” stories that sometimes land as cult classics and other times sputter on arrival.

In the end, Flight Risk (2025) might best be described as a chaotic blend of suspense, camp, psychological menace, and gallows humor. It aims for taut intensity but frequently drifts into outlandish territory, a quality that some audiences might welcome and others might roll their eyes at. Whether you see it as an exciting, briskly paced 90-minute joyride or a messy thriller filled with cringeworthy dialogue, there is an undeniable curiosity factor in watching three actors clash in a single location, holding an entire film aloft on the strength—or weakness—of their performances. If that appeals to you, buckle up. If not, the next flight might be more to your liking.