AIR AMERICA
An unfocused war comedy weighed down by corruption and obscenity.
Should You Watch It?
AIR AMERICA has a potentially serious subject: corruption surrounding a secret airline during the Vietnam War. It also includes mildly entertaining crash-landings, rescue operations, and action involving Gene Ryack and Billy Covington, two pilots working in Laos.
But the movie turns its moral outrage into a half-baked, ill-informed conspiracy theory. Its heroes are compromised, its humor is often lewd or silly, and Gene’s flippant attitude toward war weakens the story’s moral center. The film also includes too much profanity and obscenity, along with alcohol abuse and references to prostitution.
Even viewers interested in the historical setting may find the film’s lack of real historical accuracy frustrating. The answer for your family is straightforward: skip it.
The Story
NO SPOILERS — WE KEEP THE SURPRISESDuring the Vietnam War, Gene Ryack flies for Air America, a secret CIA airline operating in Laos. Fired helicopter traffic-pilot Billy Covington joins him and is shocked to discover that the pilots are being shot at while delivering livestock and other supplies to Hmong hill tribes.
As Billy learns more about the airline, he encounters private gunrunning, drug-smuggling, and a powerful official determined to protect the operation.
Is It Any Good?
Two stars means AIR AMERICA offers some mildly entertaining action but falls well short as a satisfying film. The crash-landings and rescue operations provide occasional interest, and one capture sequence involving an exchange of guns has some energy.
The larger problems are its tone and storytelling. The movie’s sixtyish mood and songs do not make its silly antics especially amusing. Its attempt at moral outrage becomes a muddled conspiracy theory, while Gene’s flippant attitude toward war makes him difficult to commend. The script’s language is the film’s biggest hindrance.
The Worldview
AIR AMERICA presents a world of widespread corruption, where military officials tolerate illegal operations and pilots participate in private gunrunning and heroin smuggling. The film tries to express moral outrage at U.S. conduct in Laos, but its explanation of the war becomes a confused theory that the conflict was fought to control the opium trade and fund the war.
The movie also includes Gene’s endorsements of Buddha and slight ridicule of the Christian faith. Senator Davenport is characterized as buffoonish after having “found the Lord,” while the film’s heroes are not models of moral clarity. Gene eventually transports refugees instead of guns, but the source review notes that he is not remorseful.
The film’s central concerns—corruption, greed, war, and the misuse of power—are real moral questions. Scripture warns, “The love of money is a root of all kinds of evils” (1 Timothy 6:10), but the movie’s muddled explanation of war does not provide a clear biblical account of human sin or responsibility.
The Content Guide
The specifics — spoilers included by nature — so you can judge for your own family.
Content Summary
Several profanities and obscenities; lewd joking, obscene gestures and sexual innuendo; references to prostitution; alcohol abuse; and, a slight ridicule of the Christian faith.
Talk About It
Questions for the drive home, the dinner table, or the youth group.
How should Christians respond when people in authority tolerate corruption?
Proverbs 29:2 · Romans 13:1–4The film connects war, money, and the drug trade in a confused way. What does Scripture say about greed and the misuse of power?
1 Timothy 6:9–10 · Micah 6:8What is the difference between feeling troubled by wrongdoing and truly repenting of it?
2 Corinthians 7:10 · 1 John 1:9How should Christians respond when their faith is mocked or treated lightly?
1 Peter 3:15–16 · Colossians 4:5–6The Final Word
AIR AMERICA offers occasional action but is undermined by muddled ideas, compromised heroes, profanity, obscenity, alcohol abuse, and immoral themes. Because its Family Content rating is −3, the clear answer is SKIP IT. For better choices, see.