Hijack ’93: Where is the Story? Where is The Film?

Play Network Studios’ ‘Hijack ‘93‘ dramatizes the 1993 Nigerian Airways hijacking in a fictionalized retelling. This release feels particularly timely, given Nollywood’s recent criticism for not delving into Nigerian history. Let’s dive into what works—and what doesn’t—in this reimagined thriller.

Plot

To dismantle their military-backed government, four men hijack an airplane, leveraging passengers onboard in the name of social change. The hijackers’ demand for political change escalates as they threaten to set the plane ablaze within 72 hours if their pleas are not acknowledged Unfortunately, the pacing is inconsistent, speeding up and then stalling entirely, which weakens the tension. At the 38-minute, the story still felt like it hadn’t taken off, creating an overall disjointed viewing experience.

Story

Hijack ’93 is a fictional retelling, the film fills in gaps with unconvincing character backstories for the hijackers, but these additions don’t create much connection or insight into their motivations. The real-life hijacking demanded Moshood Abiola be named president after the annulment of the 1993 election, a historical context that could have lent depth to the plot. While we acknowledge the risks of addressing sensitive topics, a deeper dive into the political backdrop could have strengthened the story’s impact.

Performances

The acting is either subpar or barely passable, even from some well-known cast members. Jessica Lorraine’s portrayal of Marie falls flat, and Allison Precious Emmanuel, who plays Ben/Owiwi, struggles to convey a clear motivation, making his actions appear erratic. The hijacking scene lacks tension; the hijackers’ lack of authority and passive passenger reactions detract from the film’s intensity. Nnamdi Agbo as Omar/Skipper and Adam Garba as Kayode/Eruku manage to give somewhat believable performances, while Sani Mu’azu delivered in a brief scene as Judge Tanko, offering Omar a bribe.

Generally, there’s a striking absence of a compelling performance. Most of the actors had soulless and emotionless characters.

Technical Aspects

While the cinematography, set design, and props in Hijack ’93 are palpable, the film fails to capture the early 90s era convincingly. There are notable anachronisms—soldiers in camouflage (a uniform introduced in 2014) and costumes that don’t quite reflect the period. Though efforts to convey the era through makeup, such as the classic lip lining, show attention to detail, it isn’t consistent. The score is a bore. Hijack 93’s lack of tension is highlighted by the underwhelming score.

Final Thoughts

Some elements feel out of place. For example, Ben’s dramatic line, “Avenge me,” feels out of place for the setting. Character names are confusing, with real and code names used interchangeably, making it hard to track. While a tribal argument mid-hijack is very Nigerian and plausible, it felt unnecessary. Also, the soldiers’ quick trust in Ada’s accusation of Temitope without evidence strains credibility. That said, the twist that one of the flight attendants was in on the hijack was an interesting touch.

If you are wondering why this film feels empty, it’s because there is no story here. The screenplay is weak, the film feels like an underdeveloped idea and lacks key elements of the thriller genre. There is little or no presence of tension and suspense.

Verdict

‘Hijack ‘93’ misses key opportunities to deliver a coherent narrative. Trying to juggle action, history, and drama sacrifices pacing, character depth, and historical authenticity. Ultimately, with inconsistent storytelling, poor pacing, and unremarkable acting, the film earns a 1.5/5 rating. ‘Hijack ‘93’ is now streaming on Netflix.

Rating: 1.5/5

About The Author

Uju Okosieme

See author's posts