Get PJ Media on your Apple

PJM Lifestyle

5 Reasons to Book a Non-Stop Ticket

Liam Neeson's new action thriller is really badass. Don't miss it.

by
John Boot

Bio

February 28, 2014 - 7:00 am
Page 1 of 5  Next ->   View as Single Page

non_stop_poster-620x356

Liam Neeson is back in fine form with an old-school whodunnit packaged as an action thriller, Non-Stop. Fans of the over-the-top action style of Taken may wish it had more stunts and less Agatha Christie, but it’s a solid piece of entertainment. Here are five reasons it works:

1) The setup is grabby.

Neeson plays a down-at-heel federal air marshal with a bad attitude and a drinking problem (he takes a belt of whiskey before getting on the plane, then tries to order a gin and tonic when he’s on it) but a kindly way with children. It turns out he’s harboring one of those routine Deep Dark Movie Secrets, but his backstory does both make him easy to identify with and mark him with a possible red flag when, in the middle of a flight halfway across the Atlantic, he starts getting text messages informing him that someone on the plane is going to die every 20 minutes unless $150 million is wired into a specified bank account.

When people do indeed start dying — though none in a way that can be definitely tied to terrorism — air marshal Bill Marks discovers that security people on the ground have reason to believe he is the one hijacking the plane, for his own profit.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
John Nolte's review on Breitbart.com rips it big time saying it's ending its typical left wing.

34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/28/the-movie-beck-hated-so-much-he-revealed-all-the-spoilers-to-keep-you-from-going/

Glenn Beck says it's about an anti-government military guy. Sounds like a political sucker-punch to me.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (22)
All Comments   (22)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
I thought it was a terrific movie and am disappointed that so many are apparently willing to forgo viewing it based on the opinions of reviewers. I saw no axes being ground and thoroughly enjoyed it as terrific action adventure.

I saw absolutely nothing sympathetic in the depiction of the wack-jobs that tried to take down the plane, making them complete outliers in their personae as military veterans. And that goes double for the one who’d lost a loved one on 9/11. So for me it failed utterly as liberal propaganda, if that was indeed its purpose--something I confess I very much doubt was part of the motive for making the movie.

On the other hand, representatives of the TSA bureaucracy, and by less than subtle inference, our entire Potemkin domestic security charade, with the glaring exception of our action hero, were clearly portrayed as almost universally clueless if not downright loathsome, an opinion I’d venture to say is shared by a huge majority of Americans.

I enjoyed both “Taken” movies although I thought they were needlessly lurid and graphic. This movie, however, sacrificed none of their riveting quality while being more tasteful and restrained. Since I think in addition to being a gifted actor, Neeson’s also a terrific antidote to all the chorus boy protagonists being shoved down our throats as de facto role models for what children should emulate, women want, and fish fear (to quote the T-shirt), I hope that this is the beginning of a trend and not a fluke.
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
It seems like it would take a lot of work to make sure there was "absolutely nothing sympathetic" about a child of someone killed on 9/11 and U.S. military veteran, but that does seem to be how Hollywood thinks these days.
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
"I saw absolutely nothing sympathetic in the depiction of the wack-jobs that tried to take down the plane, making them complete outliers in their personae as military veterans."

You miss the point. Ask yourself: Why does Hollywood once again make American soldiers (in this case veterans) the villains? Have you not noticed that, over and over, Hollywood tells us that Christians and conservatives are the dangerous fanatics, and yet in the real world the vast majority of terrorist acts are committed by muslims and leftists?

I am tired of Hollywood's attacks and refuse to support its lies.

We should not make excuses for what Hollywood does.
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
"You miss the point."

Right back at you if you think I'm in any way an apologist for Hollywood.

But hey, knock yourself out!
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
I won't see this movie. I'm so furious at the plot that I want to go stand in front of the theatre with a sign and steer people away. The utter corrupt sickness of casting a 9/11 survivor as a mass murderer leaves me speechless. Adding on the help of a war veteran who is willing to slaughter innocents? These people are sick and hateful. I despise them, and now I despise Liam Neeson too. He should have refused this job.
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
One reason to NOT buy a ticket: The villain is an embittered 9/11 survivor.

Once again, Hollywood makes villains of the people least likely to do evil, and John Boot wants us to pay to see this movie???
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
Regardless of the plot, I wouldn't go to a theater just to see a film. Movie theaters are Hollywood's version of Newspapers, in the Internet Age. Newspapers are just further along because the internet developed around printed word before it started streaming.

I'm predicting that movie theaters as we know them will disappear in a few years.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
To be fair, Neeson never really came out as an action star until fairly late in his career. He was firmly in the "serious actor" column until Taken, which was filmed when he was in his 50s. He didn't become an action star until he was pretty long in the tooth, so he grew into it, while the others were growing out of it. His A-list appeal has always been worldly, grizzled and seasoned, compared to the swashbuckling bravado or hypermachismo of the other actors you mention. Look at Neeson in the 80s, in Excalibur or The Mission... or Schindler's List, for G-d's sake. He was hardly the action hero type early on.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
I disagree, Rob Roy was certainly an "action movie", for one.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
Darkman (1990) could be considered an "action movie".
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
John Nolte's review on Breitbart.com rips it big time saying it's ending its typical left wing.

34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
How could the author miss this:

"The terrorist is a 9/11 family member. Yes, you read that right; the terrorist is a 9/11 family-member who lost a loved-one in the World Trade Center on that terrible September morning.

It gets worse…

After 9/11, this 9/11 family member-turned-terrorist then joined the military but found himself disillusioned by the pointless wars.
And now…

The 9/11 family member-turned-terrorist is upset because America hasn’t done enough to ensure there will never be another 9/11. And so he figures that if he can get an air marshal blamed for a terrorist attack, America will wake up and anally probe us before we’re allowed on a plane, or something.

It gets worse…

The villain’s sidekick is a member of the American military willing to murder 150 innocent people for a payday.

It gets worse…

The one passenger on the plane who is forever helpful, kind, reasonable, noble, and never under suspicion is a Muslim doctor dressed in traditional Muslim garb including a full beard.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/03/screw-you-hollywood-another-insane-thriller-non-stop-makes-9-11-family-member-us-military-the-terrorists/#!
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
Going by the stories so far on the plot points (crazed 9/11 victim's family member, only-in-it-for-the-money military guy, noble Muslim passenger) this sounds like the standard Hollywood story that thinks it's being cutting edge but actually is just using every stereotypical plot point Hollywood's used against Americans for the past 40 years (because they truly believe everyone who isn't as enlightened as them in flyover country is a potential crazed 9/11 victim's family member, and that anyone in the U.S. military would have no qualms about murdering hundreds of their own countrymen for a big payout).

My guess word-of-mouth on the storyline and who the bad guys are kills it at the box office next weekend.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
There's always a sucker punch. Always.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
On the agenda for tomorrow. Now I'm looking forward to it even more!
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/28/the-movie-beck-hated-so-much-he-revealed-all-the-spoilers-to-keep-you-from-going/

Glenn Beck says it's about an anti-government military guy. Sounds like a political sucker-punch to me.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
They probably would have made a Vietnam veteran the terrorist villain except Vietnam veterans are getting a little long in the tooth for that now.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
George Washington was also an anti-government military guy. This movie sounds like it was made by some really sick people to me.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
George Washington was actually an anti-monarchy guy, not anti-government. Like most of the founding fathers he wanted more representation in Parliament, not abolish the government.
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All