The_Phantom_Projectionist I first noticed Dean Cochran for his role in A DANGEROUS PLACE, and after seeing that he can perform a pretty good fight scene, I thought it'd be cool to see him headline a movie. I need to learn to specify my wishes, because even though AIR MARSHAL does indeed turn Dean into a leading man, the vehicle itself is pretty darn dreadful. With poor action scenes and a seriously flawed screenplay, this is definitely one of the worst offerings from the Nu Image / Millennium catalogue.The story: When a trans-European flight is hijacked by extremists, an undercover air marshal (Cochran) must find a way to save the passengers before the plane is shot down by the military.This movie was released in 2003, but might as well have been released 20 years earlier given its mindset. Hollywood never tires of vilifying Arab characters, but AIR MARSHAL is so irredeemably embarrassing in its heavy-handed Islamophobia that one would almost think it's an ironic statement against it. The whole movie actually feels like a farce on traditional action: moments of idiotic heroism (e.g. the captain's roller coaster flying) flow smoothly into the most harebrained coincidences (e.g. the friendly stowaway), while women fawn over hero Dean for no real reason and a child (Luke Leavitt) is *almost* sucked out of a sprung window…(SPOILER) an hour before he helps land the plane, putting his video game experience to good use.Eli Danker leads the hijackers, and even though his character is a walking cliché, he's a rare example of competent acting in the film. There's also good old Tim Thomerson playing a hostaged senator, but he's mainly = there to pad the cast and doesn't do anything cool. Dean Cochran looks like he's enjoying himself but is stuck playing a completely unremarkable character. It's a relief when he can stop talking and fight, but the four cramped brawls likewise lack any shred of uniqueness (no shortage of slow motion, though). A narrow body jet is an awkward place to stage an action flick to begin with, but the characters don't care at all about wantonly firing guns – even purposely shooting the window that the aforementioned boy gets to see the outside of.I'd see another Dean Cochran action vehicle, if such a thing ever came about, but only if it were helmed by a completely different set of filmmakers. I haven't gotten into the ridiculously transparent special effects, but only because they're the least of this one's problems. It's worth skipping.

Wizard-8 I briefly looked at the other user comments for this movie before posting my own. Yes, this is too close to EXECUTIVE DECISION for its own good. Yes, there are laughable bits like how they misspell a certain country's name in the first few minutes. And there are other things, like how the terrorist's activities are a bit too uncomfortably close to what has happened in real life. Plus there's the fact that much of the movie is shot with a jiggly camera to simulate turbulence I guess, but is VERY distracting. The movie is full of flaws, yes. But at the same time, I can't say I was BORED with this movie. The bad parts of the movie are often entertaining in their own right. And there are some action sequences (like hand-to-hand combat) that aren't that badly done. This movie is probably too flawed to actively seek out, but if you come across it on a slow day, it just may make 90 or so minutes pass by.

dergeier117 Really, the five stars are due to the efforts of the choreographer and screenwriter alone, due to some nice-looking fight work (the fistfight in the hold with one fire axe wielding terrorist is a very nice piece of action) and some clever ideas in the script. The concept of a power struggle among the terrorists, right down to the fact that there is only five guns for six hijackers, is a definite step in the right direction, and should have been fleshed out more. It was a plot thread that caught my interest immediately. The rest of the film is poorly handled. Cinematography is poor, almost ruining the good choreography I praised earlier.The special effects team didn't even try. Additionally, a character who shares my first name is shot and killed helping the titular character escape, a sacrifice that goes completely unnoticed and unappreciated by him. That kinda bothered me.All in all, I can think of worse uses of 90 minutes.

Air America Echoing the more caustic remarks of the other reviewers, but on a single point; the first scene in the film is a title to give us the setting: "Lybia." Wrong! (It could be worse. Later they could have spelled Europe, "Eupore.")Going to the next scene, we see a Lt. Col. in front of a map showing locations and on which to map progress: "Libya." So glaring accuracy errors pointed out by other posters aside, even the most uninitiated in military matters or warfare will see that a major faux pas is committed in the first five minutes of the film. Oh well, I got the used DVD for $3, so I don't have a lot invested. I am just hoping as I view it now, that I can overlook the errors of the other posters and get $3 in value from it.