On the Line

On The Line

Overall this was all good fun, at best it was a TV movie with a few twists, the acting was firm and where it was clunky that was entirely deliberate as you will see as the plot unfolds.

Mel Gibson was good and I must say I really rather enjoyed it, some critics on here are overly harsh or picky this was never meant to be an Oscar contender lol. The direction was crisp the side actors delivered, the music was good and unobtrusive and there was a good deal of comic gags throughout despite this being a thriller

I'm gonna give this a firm 6 outta 10 for pure entertainment, for me it was a downloader to watch on the home cinema with ice cream midweek.

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 by Romuald Boulanger is a resourceful and well-acted Mel Gibson vehicle in which director smartly puts his star front and center for an hour and the half and charisma does the rest.

Mel Gibson's recent output - with the exception of extraordinary Father Stu - consists of so-called geezer teasers which featured him supporting roles simply distributed throughout the runtime in order to make him seem like an important character. However, unlike Bruce Willis whose late pre-retirement output was based around similar projects, Mel Gibson never phoned it in and always did his best even with low-grade material.

Thus giving Mel Gibson the actual spotlight and making the film that really relies on his star power in a leading role is a coup not just for this project but for Mel's fans as well. After a long while, maybe after Blood Father made by another Frenchman Jean-Francois Richet we see Mel actually running the proceedings with authority.

The first act of the picture feels not only genuinely inspired but loads of gallows humour and the genuine sense that Elvis Cooney is a real edgelord feels as if Mel was really hands on even when it comes to the script. In later developments which rely on the closed quarters thriller dynamics and feel slightly mechanical, Mel Gibson elevates the material.

Boulanger surrounds Gibson with an international cast with some great elements but their multiple accents do remind us that film is set in Los Angeles but shot in Paris. Maybe, some decisions could have been different when it comes to either setting or cast, but otherwise the production is resourceful and decently mounted.

In the end, the only element that could have been better is the thriller element. With more inventive set-up, something along the lines of good Blumhouse work and with Mel's performance which is already there this could have been a classic.

Anyhow it's a really good programmer with an inspired turn by Mel Gibson.

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.

Very enjoyable entertainment, good twists and a fabulous Mel Gibson. No masterpiece but a nice flick!

Don't understand the bad reviews.

In my book it's all about managing expectations. If you choose a movie because the plot line interests you, you like the cast and you're in for a relaxing few hours in front of the telly then you're rarely disappointed.

Although if you are a movie Connaisseur or critic, you might want to apply different criteria to pick your movies to avoid disappointment.

In this case it did what it said on the tin and provided very enjoyable light entertainment, a good portion of suspense and a good ending.