On the Line

I think the movie needed someone with a strong villain voice thats all .voices like keifer Sutherland (phone booth),James spader ( The blacklist) or maybe Michael Sheen (unthinkable). Besides that the movie was not bad at all .Mel Gibson played his part very good as a lead character.i mean its not a bad thing to select or give new coming actors and actresses a chance but sometimes its wise to select the best quality so that your movie can sell. I still have faith in you. I mean Quinton Tarantino invested/picked best characters in Django and took awards for that...I think you can also do better.

I'm not sure why there are so many negative reviews of this, as my wife and I (and she is hard to please) both really enjoyed this film.

Yes, there are plenty of riffs from other films, as you'd expect with this kind of storyline, but that's not unusual in any film, and there are plenty of unexpected twists and turns to keep you interested and the film was ended very well.

Gibson fell out of favour with filmmakers for too long and is now rebuilding his career in later life, and while he is a little hammy at times in this, and certainly takes cues from his Ransom performance, he is still a fine actor and he steers this film along nicely. All of the supporting cast, many relatively unknown, give solid performances, nothing too outstanding, but nothing terrible either.

Overall then, an enjoyable thriller with some cool twists that might surprise you. A solid watch.

On the line was a very... interesting movie, the concept is fascinating and that was enough for me to give it a watch. Whilst the acting was decent for the most part, some parts that were intended to be serious made me laugh but that was only once or twice. However the ending was shallow- I get why its like that but I'm not sure why they actually went with it. Time absolutely flew whilst I was watching it though and it kept me on the edge of my seat and that's all I can really ask of a thriller. I'm not sure what but something just kept me watching, was it the concept? Was it the characters? I cant say for sure but what I can say is that its a hit or miss film.

This starts off really well, a good premise and a slightly weird choice of opener. So far so good. Then it just descends into lazy writing. Bad performances from a good 50% of the ensemble and a totally lunatic ending which I won't spoil (if you get that far).

Mel Gibson has his detractors, and I get it, he's had a shocking personal life and expressed some vile views. It has to be said though, Mel is a good actor and knows his way around a scene. Without him I'm pretty certain I'd have made this a two star review. He brings a charisma and a suite of good choices for most of the movie, but by the third act - actually at the start of the second act even Mel can't keep up with hapless direction, the weird dialogue and the lack of any creative spark to cover up the deficiencies in the narrative. In many ways it passes the time, but can feel by the end a massive waste of time.

A little Die Hard, some The Game, and some good old Mel Gibson fun. While On the Line isn't the greatest movie, it held my interest with non-stop suspense. It is a real nail-biter until you realize what is really happening. Mel does a great job of playing Elvis the Talk-show host, and delivers a good believable portrayal of a man on the edge. The story gets moving very early on and builds to a crescendo that might be a bit too predictable. But still very entertaining. It's good to see Mel Gibson in a decent role again, and while this movie wasn't a Lethal Weapon or a Braveheart it was a pretty decent movie.