“Cabin Crew, please prepare for departure.” While a real aviation geek knows their 359 from their 78X, their F from their Y and their IAD from their DCA, all of us lucky enough to have traveled by air recognise the pilot’s calm voice making that announcement. The captain also announces the name of the copilot, a continuance of the process of ritual reassurance. We know that commercial flights have two pilots. When a pilot died midair on a Turkish Airlines flight last October, the plane was forced to land. According to the Aviation Herald website, a nice site for the above geeks, the aircraft actually had 3 pilots because of the long journey from Seattle to Istanbul but still landed. Surely we all judge “flight risk” in weighing whether to travel by air in the first place. After all, flying is much more suited to the vast number of migrating birds (for which Montrose is world renowned) than to us.
Back in my corporate days, the expression “flight risk” meant the assessment of more senior people that their subordinates might resign if not given an adequate pay rise and/or promotion that year. It was a judgment of how much bargaining power the junior had, assuming, that is, that we wouldn’t prefer for the individual to leave.
“Flight risk” is also the term for describing the behaviour of a witness who may change their mind about testifying in court, especially if they have negotiated some sort of immunity in exchange. They run away, thus destroying the prosecution’s case.
A movie with such a great title as “Flight Risk” (Lionsgate), now playing at the Montrose Playhouse, has a great deal to play around with. What the film actually does is bridge a very slick connection between the first and third meanings.
The witness who needs to be protected, Winston, is introduced in the opening scene. The US Marshal, Madelyn, arrives and escorts him to the airplane which is to fly them across Alaska so he can testify against a crime family. Because the small aircraft only has one pilot, Daryl, presumably some sort of incapacitation will follow. And indeed it does. The vast majority of the events of the film take place inside the tiny plane.
“Flight Risk” doesn’t seem like a great fit for Mark Wahlberg (Daryl). He is very much the physical actor (Lone Survivor (2013) or Patriots Day” (2016), are both great examples of his winning formula). But he has to act this role entirely with his face, as do the other two stars. It reminded me a bit of the more heavyweight movie “Gravity”, from 2013, which, too, is filmed in a confined space with with the same style of close up camera work. This sort of filming requires an unusual emotional range of facial expression from the stars in order to keep us interested. Michelle Dockery (Madolyn) seems the best fitted to the part. The audience realises she has jumped to a(nother) conclusion partly because her face gives away everything. I doubt that the poker players who meet every Tuesday night at the Playhouse would lose much of their money to her. Topher Grace (Winston) is trying too hard to be funny, and is not helped at all by a somewhat clunky script.
Still, at 90 minutes, this movie is tightly edited and extremely light fun. It doesn’t demand anything from us except to suspend disbelief and relax. It also might be the “softest” 15-certificate movie I have seen in a while, feeling more like a 12A. Those (like me) who dislike violence or a lot of guns will enjoy it. Take a point where Madolyn thinks of shooting Daryl inside the plane. He tells her that this will puncture the fuselage – a scene straight out of “Goldfinger” (1964), with Sean Connery and Honor Blackman, also on a small plane. If you can remember how threatening “Goldfinger” is, you are on the right track for “Flight Risk”. It is a great film for a quiet Tuesday afternoon.
What about that aviation geek? Well, his flying days are behind him. I have found the joy of transnational train travel and am not looking back.
Adam Poole
30 January 2025
