User Score
7.1

Generally favorable reviews- based on 285 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 18 out of 285

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Feb 28, 2014
    3
    This is a preposterous and laboured actioner that only comes to life in the final twenty minutes when the bad guys are unmasked. The editing tries to create suspense, but the absurdities of the story are strongly resistant to this. There are also attempts at crowd pleasing humour which is woefully unfunny and includes a few jokes which are blatantly racist and homophobic. Liam NeesonThis is a preposterous and laboured actioner that only comes to life in the final twenty minutes when the bad guys are unmasked. The editing tries to create suspense, but the absurdities of the story are strongly resistant to this. There are also attempts at crowd pleasing humour which is woefully unfunny and includes a few jokes which are blatantly racist and homophobic. Liam Neeson should have rested on his laurels instead of trying to be a new Jason Bourne. In fact this film is worse than 'Taken' and that's saying something. Only the landing of the plane offers some genuine excitement. As for poor Julianne Moore, this is certainly 'Far From Heaven'. Expand
  2. Mar 1, 2014
    3
    In 2009, actor Liam Neeson starred in Pierre Morel’s surprise sleeper hit Taken, and what begun was an onslaught of early year/before spring Neeson action releases that solidified the star as playing aging, ‘could-be real life’ superheroes. Since then, there are only two things certain about early action film releases; there will always be one featuring kick-ass icon Jason Statham playingIn 2009, actor Liam Neeson starred in Pierre Morel’s surprise sleeper hit Taken, and what begun was an onslaught of early year/before spring Neeson action releases that solidified the star as playing aging, ‘could-be real life’ superheroes. Since then, there are only two things certain about early action film releases; there will always be one featuring kick-ass icon Jason Statham playing the younger, balder super human hero, and one featuring Neeson, usually playing a wrinkled, more seasoned action star who could very well be your father (or grandfather)–which was badass three films ago. Deep down I am secretly waiting for Hollywood to come to their senses and announce a showdown between the two action superstars. Now talk about a kick-ass early year action release that we kinda saw coming. With something as expected as a Neeson release, also comes the expectation for a cliched, unoriginal, and purely entertaining action story line. Unexpectedly collaborating again with his Unknown director Jaume Collet-Serra, Neeson buckles up for an actioner set in the sky. Unlike the highly entertaining nineties guilty pleasure Air Force One, Non-Stop seems to steer more in the direction of the wholly disastrous Flightplan. After all is said and done, the film becomes a constant re-hashing of previous wind-cutting skyline action films without much original altitude.

    Neeson plays Bill Marks, an ex-NYPD officer whose life has been riddled by alcohol and pity for his inability to deliver as a father and husband. Taking cues from 2012 Flight, the comparison between Washington’s intoxicated and wholly unorthodox airline pilot Whip Whitaker and Neeson’s drunken Air Marshal Marks is almost impossible to ignore–but with less satisfying results. As Marks boards his next plane, arguing with his superiors on the phone, he is on the look out for suspecting terrorists. Like most flights today, everyone who boards seem to be the same blend of miserable, occupied, exhausted and professional. As the flight takes off and Marks grips his armrest, he befriends his by chance, first-class neighbour Jen Summers (Julianne Moore). As they get to know one another, Marks receives an anonymous message via a secure network on his mobile device threatening to kill a passenger on the flight every twenty minutes. As the plane makes its way over the Atlantic, hours from the closest airport, Marks must figure out who is attempting to sabotage the plane and it’s passengers, as well as frame him for a terrorist attack on the very plane he was hired to Marshal.

    Screenwriters John W. Richardson, Christopher Roach and Ryan Engle had the potential to do so much with a script surrounding an Air Marshal in a post-9/11 world, yet the three seemed to diddle-daddle in familiar, mystery/thriller action territory. The characters are just about as interesting as the reasoning behind the terrorist attack. Neeson brings nothing new or special to the role, leaving all that talent behind on the runway. Obvious jabs are directed towards the only clear terrorist stereotype of the film, Dr. Fahim Nasir, played with poise by Omar Metwally, the only Afghan on the flight. Throughout the film, the other passengers questions Marks’ quick and uninterested attitude towards Dr. Nasir, usually resulting in a face with raised eyebrows and a “that’s it?”, even from fellow officer on-board Austin Reilly (Corey Stoll). Non-Stop shows the ignorance and fear that people still carry with them while travelling as so many are still quick to assume terror with Muslims or Middle-Easterners. It was moments like these that make one question the integrity and intelligence of the writers; either they intentionally sought to bring to light this point, or they just felt the need to capitalize on an assumption they figured everyone would make. If you ask me, this alone would make for a much more interesting take on the affects of people on a non-stop flight than what was delivered instead.

    The film is a truly safe, by-the numbers ‘whodunit’ with traces of unoriginal directing and half-assed acting. Marks watches his plane fill up with people with hazy eyes and blurry vision, insinuating his drunken state of mind. It’s too bad the film serves nothing interesting once your strapped in and settled.

    By the time the big twist comes and the baddies are revealed, there are only a few questions that are left running around non-stop; is there anything Moore can’t be good at? How was Collet-Serra able to round out a cast that includes Scoot McNairy, Nate Parker and Lupita Nyong’o? And why the hell is Neeson so inclined to collaborate with his formulaic and unoriginal director a third time in the upcoming Run All Night feature that is set on February 6th 2015, where, as expected, much of the same uncreative action antics will surely take place?
    Expand
  3. Mar 8, 2014
    1
    Just a terrible movie. The premise was absurd. The screenplay was laughable. The special effects will circa 1990. Not only is suspension of disbelief required, but suspension of IQ. I like Julienne Moore and Liam Neeson but both could not lift the quality of this film. Moore is much too flip during what should have been the most horrific experience a human could endure and survive.Just a terrible movie. The premise was absurd. The screenplay was laughable. The special effects will circa 1990. Not only is suspension of disbelief required, but suspension of IQ. I like Julienne Moore and Liam Neeson but both could not lift the quality of this film. Moore is much too flip during what should have been the most horrific experience a human could endure and survive. And to end with a silly love interest on a tarmac is the epitome of absurdity. Expand
  4. Mar 3, 2014
    3
    Liam Neeson is a credible action movie lead and he is fine in Non-Stop. But the writing is so bad and corny, that there are ostensibly tense, serious scenes that actually made me laugh out loud. In the beginning of the movie, the director goes out of his way to make numerous people looks suspicious and creepy. This leads to a great deal of stupidity. I am glad that Julianne Moore gotLiam Neeson is a credible action movie lead and he is fine in Non-Stop. But the writing is so bad and corny, that there are ostensibly tense, serious scenes that actually made me laugh out loud. In the beginning of the movie, the director goes out of his way to make numerous people looks suspicious and creepy. This leads to a great deal of stupidity. I am glad that Julianne Moore got paid well for this dribble, so she can make 2-3 good art movies in the next couple of years. I love action movies as a genre; they are without a doubt my guilty pleasure. But this film is just terrible. Corny, obvious, intermittently being racist and challenging racial stereotypes, stock characters, bad dialogue and, quite frankly, a ridiculous premise. This is a bad movie. Expand
  5. Mar 2, 2014
    4
    I don't think I have ever had a movie annoy me this much - not because the movie is necessarily bad - what was more concerning is that people have actually become so ignorant and illogical that the movie is NOT just treated as entertainment, but plausible. People around me after the movie were actually talking about how this is possible and what can be done to prevent it - seriously...I don't think I have ever had a movie annoy me this much - not because the movie is necessarily bad - what was more concerning is that people have actually become so ignorant and illogical that the movie is NOT just treated as entertainment, but plausible. People around me after the movie were actually talking about how this is possible and what can be done to prevent it - seriously...

    There are so many flaws in this movie that it is absurd that people treat this as viable. I am not going to point out the flaws and spoil the movie for those that have not seen it and want to be entertained. Just take the movie as what it is meant to be entertainment and NOT even close to realistically possible.
    Expand
  6. Apr 2, 2014
    3
    It's great to see Northern Irish actor Liam Neeson successfully opening an action film and Non-Stop starts out promisingly enough, however the plot soon loses rhyme and reason and I found myself losing interest and sympathy for any of the characters. The last 30 minutes were so daft it was difficult to watch. However, most people love it so what do I know?
  7. Jun 15, 2014
    4
    Non-Stop looks like "Taken" on a plane but, unfortunately, it was nowhere near as enjoyable to watch. Liam Neeson is still awesome but the plot was horrible and the "twist" at the end tried to force some mediocre and cliched anti-war agenda. Honestly, this is one of the most disappointing Neeson films I've seen.
  8. Sep 26, 2014
    0
    A ridiculousness movie with a story so outrageous that it sets a new low for Hollywood. A list actors hopefully getting well paid and vastly underused. The screenplay is ludicrous and the action scenes are pathetic. What a waste of actors.
  9. Jul 4, 2014
    2
    Good enough movie, but the ending was so absurd it just ruined it. The film makers wanted to have the Tea-Party as the villains, but obviously have no clue as to what the Tea-Party actually stands for. So you get action and drama rounded off with jarring nonsensical monologues at the end. Such a shame they had to ruin the film with their daft liberal hang-ups.
    Would give 6, but knocking
    Good enough movie, but the ending was so absurd it just ruined it. The film makers wanted to have the Tea-Party as the villains, but obviously have no clue as to what the Tea-Party actually stands for. So you get action and drama rounded off with jarring nonsensical monologues at the end. Such a shame they had to ruin the film with their daft liberal hang-ups.
    Would give 6, but knocking off 4 for the ending, it was that bad.
    Expand
  10. Mar 20, 2014
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Lets not take this film too seriously, if one was to do that they may break down and end up looking like Cate Blanchet did at the end of Blue Jasmine.

    Liam Neeson teams up once again with Jaume Collet-Serra to play a grizzly, alcoholic, divorced, troubled and killing machine veteran. In this movie, he is also federal air marshal on a business class transatlantic flight. What is remarkable about Neeson’s performance in recent roles is that he manages to play it straight all the way through even as the events around him become drastically implausible. The audience will laugh aloud as Non-Stop ticks of its checklist of clichés. Is this necessarily a bad thing? It wouldn’t appear that way if we place ourselves in the seats of a mass audience after a virtual ride of entertainment.

    The varied and actually rather interesting ensemble cast keeps us guessing as to whether they are good or bad guys. Playing the flight attendants we have Lupita Nyong’o, Oscar winner for 12 Years a Slave, who has about three throwaway lines of “What is going on?” and Michelle Dockery, our fantastic Lady Mary from Downtown Abbey. Among the passengers, Julianne Moore plays Bill’s (Neeson) seatmate as a relatively suspicious lady who becomes a female obstacle of wonder for Bill by the end. Corey Stoll from House of Cards plays a New York cop who is the first to take real test amongst Bill’s actions, though, of course, in the end they salute in brotherhood as fellow men of the law.

    Liam Neeson provides the comedic relief in this movie. He is emotionally troubled as always and uses this emotion to fuel his brutal hand-to-hand combat in toilet cubicles and tight aisle spaces. We know everyone who tries to mess with him is making a big mistake, if only they had seen him take on the pack of wolves in The Gray and the callous villains in Taken.

    The screenplay, written by a bunch of guys, has a few slapdash twists and a few touches of sentimentality amidst the fists and thrills. In light of modern technology, a boy on the flight is able to video Bill acting violently towards a passenger and post it online to a viral reception, which in turn stirs news reporters to broadcast the event and consequently alert the flight passengers on their TVs. Technology isn’t on Bills side here. Bill has also recently lost his daughter, at which point some of us may confuse what film we are watching, and consequently acts excessively mawkish towards the young girl who happens to be all alone on this flight.

    So, this is yet another hijack movie in which the pay-off is frankly preposterous, but in which there are occasional heightened moments of action. It doesn’t match up to Air Force One or Con Air, but it does nevertheless have a powerful statement behind it. Lets just say it reaches for some sharp post 9/11 political commentary that entirely exceeds its grasp and becomes utterly excruciating.

    I am not one myself for flying, but even if you are, certainly do not watch this film on a transatlantic flight.
    Expand
  11. Jun 7, 2014
    2
    I don’t know if it was the allergies or how bad this movie was because my eyes really hurt. Liam Neeson stars in this flat-out flop of an action film as a U.S Air Marshal. The plot had some potential but lost sight of that five minutes in. The simplicity of the much used action movie format “transfer the money or people die” got boring quick. If there was anything that made this movie anyI don’t know if it was the allergies or how bad this movie was because my eyes really hurt. Liam Neeson stars in this flat-out flop of an action film as a U.S Air Marshal. The plot had some potential but lost sight of that five minutes in. The simplicity of the much used action movie format “transfer the money or people die” got boring quick. If there was anything that made this movie any different from the many others like it’s kind it was the unique airplane setting. One thing that the setting failed to do was make you feel claustrophobic, which should have been a huge priority for the makers. Something this movie had on its side was it’s cool templets used throughout to show viewers a unique perspective of the threatening texts received that lead the movie’s plot. There were also some cool transitions but that's about it. In terms of script critique it was a mess from the start. Poor dialogue and bad characters rained on the pity party which started around the ten minute mark. One thing that really surprised me was how bad the acting really was. Liam Neeson does a decent job in this movie, he was just dealt a terrible storyline that no actor can carry, especially with such a lame supporting cast and a weak script (humor was interjected at the most unrealistic times, throughout the whole movie). He has played great rolls before; I loved his work in Taken and The Gray, and he was the only saving grace of this film. I often found myself yelling at the TV in frustration, out of how unrealistic the movie was. Any sort of entertainment was blocked by stupidity. Toward the end of the movie it became so overly cliché I wanted to turn it off knowing I wouldn't miss anything; I should have done that in the beginning. Skipping this movie is probably a wise choice because Non-Stop was nonstop terrible.  Expand
  12. Jul 8, 2014
    0
    I can't imagine the money wasted in this movie. I can't imagine the money wasted in this "movie" All those clichés were just : wow ! Wait, an arabic pro neuroscientist nuclear doctor or **** like that, the bad guy who is bad cause he lost his father blablabla, the N-Y cops, Liam Neeson who is an old alcoholic depressive mourning daddy and so many bull****
    The improbabilities in the plane
    I can't imagine the money wasted in this movie. I can't imagine the money wasted in this "movie" All those clichés were just : wow ! Wait, an arabic pro neuroscientist nuclear doctor or **** like that, the bad guy who is bad cause he lost his father blablabla, the N-Y cops, Liam Neeson who is an old alcoholic depressive mourning daddy and so many bull****
    The improbabilities in the plane crash, the gun scene... Juste too much for me
    Expand
Metascore
56

Mixed or average reviews - based on 41 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 19 out of 41
  2. Negative: 3 out of 41
  1. Reviewed by: Drew McWeeny
    Apr 18, 2014
    50
    It's a completely average film that makes a few terrible choices.
  2. 60
    The key to a good B-mystery is that all the actors should be a little stilted. You should never know the difference between an actor acting badly and an actor doing a masterful acting job of someone acting badly. In Non-Stop, there is much excellent bad acting.
  3. Reviewed by: Richard Corliss
    Feb 28, 2014
    50
    Shot in grainy, unflattering closeups occasionally alleviated by flashily edited fight scenes, Non-Stop is no more or less than what it intends to be: the kind of midlevel brainless entertainment you might watch, between meals and naps, on an international flight. Try to enjoy the ride — and no texting, please.