Liam Neeson’s latest thriller was supposed to be a high-flying flick, but it never reached its cruising altitude.

“Non-Stop,” directed by Jaume Collet-Serra and starring Neeson and Julianne Moore, is entertaining enough through much of its storytelling, but does not deliver in terms of script and characterization.

While en route to London from New York, U.S. Air Marshal Bill Marks (Neeson) receives a text message from someone threatening to kill a person on board every 20 minutes unless $150 million gets transferred to an offshore account. Instantly suspecting that the texts are part of a prank being played on him by his coworker Jack Hammond (Anson Mount), another Air Marshal onboard, Marks goes to confront him.

But when Hammond pulls a gun on Marks, it becomes clear that one of the flight’s passengers is behind the texts, and they mean business.

Marks elicits the help of flight attendants Nancy (Michelle Dockery) and Gwen (Lupita Nyong’o), as well as passengers Jen Summers (Moore) and Austin Reilly (Corey Stoll) in order to figure out who is behind the threats. The rest of the film displays a chess game between Marks and the anonymous villain, with each trying to stay one move ahead of the other.

A clever aspect of the film was that the antagonists were able to frame Marks, making it appear that he was severely abusing his powers as an Air Marshal. To most of the passengers onboard, and the law enforcement on the ground, it appears that Marks was the threat to the safety of the flight.

This made Marks’ mission especially challenging, as he was up against many of the flight’s other 150 passengers, as well as the killer, for much of the movie.

Technology was also highlighted well in the movie, as the usage of smartphones was critical to the plot. This aspect made the film unique in its modernity. In fact, one of the ways Marks was made to look like an officer gone rogue was through a cellphone video of him taking a passenger into custody while searching for the killer. Passengers were able to watch television and news reports of the so-called hijacking while on board, and learned about Marks’ troubled past.

Besides those strengths, “Non-Stop” did not have much to it. The non-action moments hurt the flow of the film. Neeson was forced to make emotional pleas to his superiors, as well as those on board, which is drastically opposite from what has made his past movies successful.

Additionally, there were multiple occasions that seemed totally out of place for what was supposed to be a heart-pounding thriller. Though Marks was consistently under time pressure, there were times where he stopped to take a long drink of bourbon and smoke a cigarette. Though he was characterized as an alcoholic, it made no sense that Marks would take such a break under the threat of someone dying every 20 minutes.

The dialogue was also messy at times. Though it made sense that many of the passengers talked in nervous, hushed tones, or were angered how Marks was attempting to control the plane, much of what they said was unhelpful to solving the mystery of who was behind the threats. Neeson’s character was especially coarse in both what he said and in his manner of speaking.

Though much of the movie was realistic enough for an action movie, writers John Richardson and Christopher Roach’s ending was rushed and seemed poorly planned, as the motives the antagonist had were weak. Additionally, the conclusion turned into a political statement, which soured the taste of the entire film.

With nonsensical writing, average discourse and a mediocre ending, “Non-Stop” seemed to be gasping for air. It never even took off.

Published on March 5, 2014 at 12:34 am