Some movies ask you to ignore reality. Carry-On asks you to toss it out of the nearest airport window, preferably mid-flight. This Netflix thriller review covers a film that tries to blend tension, action, and a cat-and-mouse dynamic into a holiday airport setting. The result? A movie that’s entertaining in the way fast food is satisfying. Quick, greasy, and better if you don’t think about it too much.
Plot Without Spoilers
The premise is simple. A shady figure (Jason Bateman) corners an unsuspecting rookie TSA agent (Taron Egerton) on Christmas Eve, forcing him into a situation with high stakes and even higher implausibility. The film quickly escalates from casual threats to full-blown chaos, involving airport security, the LAPD, and what can only be described as the most relaxed TSA officers ever put on screen.
That’s all you need to know. The less you question the logistics, the better.
Where Carry-On Takes Off
If you’re here for tension and airport mayhem, Carry-On delivers just enough. The pacing never lags. Egerton does a solid job selling the “everyman caught in something bigger” angle. Bateman fully embraces the menace role, making every scene he’s in at least interesting.
There are moments of genuine suspense, with some well-staged sequences that keep the momentum going. The film doesn’t waste time over-explaining things. Probably because that would highlight the many plot holes.
If you go in expecting realism, you’re setting yourself up for disappointment. If you go in expecting a fun, pulpy airport thriller, you might have a decent time. Provided you’re willing to overlook a lot.
Where It Crashes
Let’s be blunt. Carry-On is aggressively dumb. And not in the way that makes it more fun.
The film operates in a world where security is nonexistent or staffed exclusively by people on their first day. You will see things that make no sense, even within the heightened reality of an action thriller. A man openly running through LAX with a weapon? No problem. Airport bathrooms functioning like secret hideouts where nobody else ever enters? Sure. LAPD officers making national security decisions based on what someone’s girlfriend tells them? Why not.
And then there’s the sheer lack of urgency from almost every character. At one point, with a literal crisis unfolding, our protagonist takes a leisurely lunch. That’s not a joke. A lunch. There are times when he seems utterly indifferent to the chaos around him. As if his role in the story is merely a mild inconvenience.
Now, let’s address the Jason Bateman of it all. His character should be fascinating, but the movie never fully explores his motivations. He’s menacing, yes, but without real depth. This wouldn’t be a problem if the film leaned into the absurdity. It tries too hard to be serious at times, which only makes the glaring plot issues even worse.
The Die Hard Problem
A lot of people will inevitably compare Carry-On to Die Hard. Because, well, it’s an airport action-thriller set during Christmas. But let’s be clear. Those comparisons do not hold up.
Die Hard worked because it had a protagonist who made smart, calculated decisions. A villain with clear motivations. An environment that felt tangible and well-thought-out. Carry-On, on the other hand, operates in a world where logic is a distant memory. Motivations are murky at best. The setting exists only to serve the next plot twist, no matter how nonsensical.
Copaganda? Maybe. But Mostly Just Bad Logic.
Some have pointed out that Carry-On glorifies the security apparatus of U.S. airports in the same way Top Gun: Maverick did for the Navy. But honestly, that gives the film too much credit. If anything, Carry-On makes TSA look comically incompetent. As if major international airports operate under the honor system.
Yes, it has those action-movie moments where law enforcement is portrayed as heroic underdogs. But it also shows them as wildly ineffective. Unable to stop a threat that should be neutralized within minutes. If it’s propaganda, it’s not very good at it.
Final Boarding Call
Here’s the bottom line. Carry-On is a dumb thriller that can be fun if you’re in the right mood. Bateman chews scenery. Egerton does his best with what he’s given. The pace moves fast enough that you won’t have time to question every absurd choice. Unless you’re reading reviews like this one.
But the sheer number of head-scratching moments is hard to ignore. Even if you accept that this is meant to be pure entertainment, the sheer lack of logic makes it difficult to fully enjoy.
If you’re looking for an airtight thriller, this is not it. If you want something that makes sense, also not it. If you’re okay with a ridiculous, sometimes entertaining mess, Carry-On might be worth the ride. Just don’t expect a smooth landing.
Rating: 5/10
If you’re wondering whether this Taron Egerton movie is worth watching, the answer depends on how much nonsense you can tolerate.
For more reviews, here.
