Kim Gentes

Its decent SCIFI... but somehow it seems wrong

Not as bad, not as good

I wish there was something to highlight from this film. I like Reese Witherspoon and Mark Ruffalo, and they do work well together as a tension of characters. But the story is weak, and even for those who want to believe in ghosts :) this movie will make you think it was written by one. The content is thin, vaporous and empty. There are plenty of attempts at emotion and endearment, but most fail. The moral lesson in the film goes from "make something worthwhile out of your life" to "don't give up on camatose patients". And just as you think the story might settle down into a direction, you realize that ther writer had no intent on a plot with brains. Instead, it ends like it begins with one unbelievable miracle after another to "resolve" the plot.

The characters are charming and warm, but just about everything else in the movie is dissappointing. I sure hope this isn't "just like heaven".

Foster brings her usual great effort; direction and story are weak

Flightplan had a nice little idea going for it. But the direction and script are essentially flawed. The reason the movie survives the "see-ability" test is because of the intense acting ability of Jodie Foster. Her presence and focus on the believability of her character holds it all together. This film is a C- rate film without her, but makes a B minus grade just from the pull of her performance.

Flightplan is basically about a woman who is going through amazing traumatic stress, who thinks she has had her daughter stolen from her on a airliner, during the flight. The story hinges around the fact that Foster's character goes in an out of hallucinations, in an attempt to deal with the recent death of her husband, who's body she is returning (on that same plane, in the cargo) to the US to be buried. Because of this, and a clever idea in the plot, you don't know whether the daughter is actually on the plane, and kidnapped, or whether Foster's character has simply hallucinated the daughter's presence on the plane as well. The story is much more compelling that it would seem, but as you watch the movie unfold, the plot has lots of holes in it.

There are the obvious problems with realistically trying to determine who each step of the events could ever happen to set up the movie in the place it tries to take you (the daughter not being seen by others, someone taking her on a airliner, during flight, etc). There are plenty of theories thrown around for each item, but ultimately when you get the answers as the movie wraps up, you don't really feel like the story was very "waterproof". There is also the issue of the final scene where the hero survives a cataclysmic explosion. Again, they try to explain it away, but it doesn't satisfy the viewer with reason.

Still, the compelling psychodrama led by Foster is enough to keep you thinking someone must be crazy, even if it isn't her. Ultimately, this is enough for this film to make the big screen and it will be enough for it to have a good run as a DVD rental.

It just would have been nice if the directing and screenwriting were as strong as the acting for the star.

Surprisingly crisp. worthwhile seeing

This film is not what you are thinking. Yes, it is a "chick flick", but it brings some real issues into film. Office politics, parenting rights for the mentally ill, and care for the aged are not exactly the high stakes you expect Cameron Diaz to be playing for in any movie. But here, she executes almost perfect anti-syncronicity with Toni Collette as the yin/yang sisters who love/hate each other. And you believe it.

There are faults with the movie, but it does a great job of staying realistic, while still being a story you can enjoy as a triumphant romance. I love that all the little loose ends are not tied up neatly with each character and that even the conflict resolution between the characters is more acknowledged than obliterated with a tearful, unrealistic last minute encounter. It does lift you emotionally and it is a heroic film, but it isn't at the expense of your brain and what seems like reason.

Shirely McClain, though one of my most disliked actresses, does a very good job of being a distrusting grandmother. Toni Collette is perfect as the misfit, high powered executive sister. And Diaz is practically every other character she has played as the sleazy, witless, morally empty blond, who finds some wake up medicine in caring for dieing patients at an aged care facility in Florida. It's not overly raught with sappy scenes and dialog, but moves from reality to "fantasy" (when good things happen) in spurts and starts, like real life.

Guys, this will be one of those few movies you can go to and enjoy with your lady, and both of you will be glad you did.

Intruiging premise. graphic to a fault

The plot of "A History of Violence" was interesting enough. The characters were plausable and you enjoyed getting to know the situations and lives of these people.

But unless you are ready for explicit gore and unhidden violence, you will likely not be prepared for what you get with this movie. The previews and advertisements give you a hint of a hidden life and a forboding past that may be catching up with the main character. But you don't really expect that you will see that violence flying in your face, blood spurting on your shoes and gruesome portions of victim's mouths hanging ragged from their faces as they gurgle their last heaves of breath.

The interplay between a man and his wife that moves from fairytale to abuse-tainted inter-connectedness is a thoughtful conflict. Its an interesting moral tale, but ultimately more fantasy than harsh reality, leaving the viewer feeling abused. Perhaps, this was the intent of the directors David Cronenberg & Josh Olsen whose talents have been used on much less loftier pursuits in movies like Jason X, Existenz, Scanners, the Fly, and a list of B-movie animal/infestation fright films. In any case, the numbing changes in the characters seem less than realistic, though still interesting. It seemed to me that here Josh Olsen (director and screenwiter) bit off more than we could chew with the staircase scene. Not because of the sex or violence, but because they are trying to give a mom and wife a third persona to match her husbands recently discovered violence ridden history. I suppose this is to try to reveal some codependent empathy between them. It just doesn't seem to work much more than shock effect.

The movie doesn't leave you with any mystery, even though it thinks it does. It's like the directors thought they accomplished something that all of us in the theatre thought they had failed at. A remake of this would be in order. They hit some points well, craft Vigo Mortensen as Tom Stall and develop the character well. Again some of the family conflict works, but about half way into the film it all unravels and you are left wondering why someone didn't hire an editor to critique this story.

Worthwhile seeing on DVD, but way, way too graphic for anyone under 17, or possibly even 21. No woman will handle seeing this gore, and likely only people who enjoy extreme gore violence will even be ready for the scenes (though brief) of splattering, gurgling violence. Thankfully those scenes are brief.

Mortensen does fairly well in this picture, and Belo is clearly an emotionally engaging actress. Harris' character is thoughtless and is forced to handling unbelievable script and dialog (the mall scene is just plain stupid). William Hurt's brief appearance is so silly it is somewhat comical, though he is meant to be a menacing and powerfully thoughtless killer.

All the possibilities where there for a good film, but the screenwriting and directing tank this promising concept to a C movie that is just reasonable for DVD rental.