Flightplan Movie
| Resolution | Size | Download | ||
|
1280x720 | 4478.8 MiB | 720p | |
Storyline
TAGLINES
If Someone Took Everything You Live For... How Far Would You Go To Get It Back?
In this modern retelling of a classic urban legend, a mother finds herself at odds with a unremitting flight crew and her own sanity when her daughter vanishes in the middle of a flight, with only a few clues left behind. She must now challenge the boundaries of her will and her mind in her desperate search.
| Jodie Foster | Kyle |
| Peter Sarsgaard | Carson |
| Sean Bean | Captain Rich |
| Kate Beahan | Stephanie |
| Michael Irby | Obaid |
| Assaf Cohen | Ahmed |
| Erika Christensen | Fiona |
| Shane Edelman | Mr. Loud |
| Mary Gallagher | Mrs. Loud |
| Haley Ramm | Brittany Loud |
| Forrest Landis | Rhett Loud |
| Jana Kolesarova | Claudia |
| Brent Sexton | Elias |
| Marlene Lawston | Julia |
| Judith Scott | Estella |
| Robert Schwentke |
6.20 out of 10 (23208 votes)
Visitor Reviews
Flightplan, AKA Quickchange
posted on 26 Aug 2009This movie could be renamed "Quickchange". Not only does it fit with parts of the plot, it fits with a lot of things. First off, it fits with Jodie Foster's acting. She starts off calm, cool and happy...then before you can say "lost kid" she goes completely insane. No slow descent into panic, she's there right off the start and doesn't let up until the end. Another way that "Quickchange" could apply is to how fast the film pulls itself out of the gutter. The first hour and ten minutes or so are awful, full of idiotic characters, poor acting, obvious twists and even a couple plot holes. All of a sudden however, things start to change. A twist is introduced that actually makes sense and that I actually didn't see coming. The acting becomes at least bearable, Foster tones herself down quite a bit, thankfully. All in all, this isn't a bad movie. It really picks up near the end, don't give up too fast! 6/10 PS - Was anyone else reminded of The Lady Vanishes? Much better film, but this reminded me of it in parts.
Kind of like " The Forgotten" on a plane
posted on 26 Aug 2009Have you ever wondered what it would be like if you got on a plane and lost your child and when you started asking around people told you your kid never got on the plane? Then this movie is for you.I was torn when hiring this. Would it be more like "The Forgotten", a decent suspense thriller i saw last year, or more like "Red Eye", one of the dumbest movies ever. For me it turned out to be kind of in the middle.Jodie Foster gets on a plane with her daughter. The daughter runs off at one point and after she's been gone a little long, Jodie Foster goes looking for her. She starts panicking when she can't find her, and eventually it's discovered , according to the flight data, she never got on the plane. Jodie Foster isn't convinced and does all she can to find her, with no luck. The flight staff, including the Captain, US Marshall and a therapist all tell her she's suffering a psychotic episode, but she's not buying it. Who's crazy? See it and find out.
It was OK, but...
posted on 24 Aug 2009I thought the premise of the movie was very interesting. It reminded me of the Forgotten. A person suddenly is told the world isn't what she thought it was. The lead up to the crew declaring that Kyle (Jodie Foster) didn't have a daughter on the plane was excellent. Very reasonable. Foster was excellent as a frantic mother searching for a child, either real or imagined.I had a low expectation of this movie due to the sub-par reviews. But I did not cringe at any of the dialog or acting. In my book that means it was a "decent" movie at the very least.I don't want to reveal the storyline but to be honest, if there wasn't a missing daughter it might have been a little more feasible. Just my opinion.Definitely a watchable movie.
Good airplane movie
posted on 22 Aug 2009It was hard to figure this one out. I was really impressed with the twist in this movie. Jodi Foster, as usual, delivers all of the goods. I am very interested in Mr. Sarrsgarrd and his continued typecast as a weirdo. I can't tell you enough how good he played the air Marshal.:::SPOILER::: When he revealed who he was, I was a little caught off guard. But I was not caught THAT off guard. Those stupid Arabs were funny in the way they were feeling picked on. They need to make more movies like this so that we can be prepared during flights. Great cameo from Viggo Mortensen at the end. I was starting to feel sick during this movie and my elbow is hurting really bad. I hope that it's not the movie that did this to me.
Flightplan - a terrible, terrible film
posted on 16 Aug 2009This short review does contain spoilers, so you may not want to read on should you be foolish enough to want to watch this film.Described as a tense thriller, I'll admit that if you get into it, Flightplan does provide a few. But there are some key aspects to the film that ruin it.The plot revolves around the lead character (Jodie Foster) losing her daughter on-board a plane yet nobody believes her and thinks she is delusional. The main reason for everyone thinking she is mad, is how can you lose a child in such a confined space as a plane? The tension is meant to build as it becomes more and more likely that there is no child as the plane is searched and nothing found.The fundamental problem with this is that such a premise only works when you emphasise the closed confined space within which all the action is taking place. Yet the events are unfolding on the biggest plane cabin I have ever seen - so there is no sense of claustrophobia at all. Passengers are swanning around, strolling up and down the aisles. Foster at certain times sprints up the aisle and so on, and we all know that any attempt to get to the toilet involves bumping yourself on various seat arms and people as you wind your way forward.The whole plot itself is preposterous. A simple premise in some ways, but when the twist unfolds, you realise how impossible it would have been to plan. Fair enough there is an insider or two, but for the plane load of people to believe that Foster is mad, it requires none of the 400 passengers to have seen the daughter, and for her to have been out of her seat looking out the window just at the moment a crew member (who isn't in on it) walks past.Other annoying part of this film include the adding of voiceovers to certain scenes. Foster at various points walks past the passengers (either down the aisle of the plane, or the airport etc) This is usually a tool for communicating how they all view her (mad, delusional or devoted mother) We get the point, so why do we have to have a dubbed voice stating the bloody obvious, just in case we didn't get it.Foster's performance is good and believable amongst a film that is truly unbelievable, so if you're a fan its worth watching this film for that reason alone.Otherwise steer clear.
Easily the worst movie Jodie Foster has ever been in
posted on 16 Aug 2009Once you know what the story is about, the movie becomes as predictable and cliché as can be. To get there, the first hour is pretty good, I'd say. But after wards, everything goes by the board. This movie should be like RED EYE: even though the latter's last part was cliché also, at least it was presented with a lot of excitement. In Flightplan, the climax is anti-climatic, and chances are that, by that time, you will be so bored that you won't give a damn. I didn't like either the way the movie tries to work in another level, in trying to portray the negative side of prejudice feelings against "arabs" in planes. The message is so heavy handed (it looks as it was intended for children to get it) that becomes ridiculous and out of place. The statement is valuable, and it deserves a little more respect than to leave it as a footnote in a so-so movie.
The Little Lady Vanishes
posted on 14 Aug 2009Even though the DVD contains no less than 5 "making of" vignettes, not once is mention made of the fact that the plot of this film is a clear re-make of Hitchcock's 1938 thriller "The Lady Vanishes" -- which was itself adapted from an earlier novel. While I have nothing against re-makes per se -- indeed, if it weren't for re-makes, Hollywood would probably have to shut down, given the lack of truly original plot material in recent years -- I'm appalled to hear the film's creators expounding as if the film were an original plot idea. Moreover, unlike Hitch's original, the script here is a virtual sieve of plot holes big enough to fly a "474" jumbo jet through. The cast and director do a fine job of putting the script on-screen, but the question remains -- if plagiarism is a no-no in book publishing, how 'bout in screen writing?
You'll be left wishing they'd done more careful plotting
posted on 14 Aug 2009* SPOILERS * Jodie Foster does her best to lift this thriller above its rather amateurish script. The plotting as all of the earmarks of a script written by a committee. The concept is promising. Kyle Pratt, an intelligent woman (a designer of jet engines) boards an ultra jumbo jet liner and her little girl disappears somewhere on the cavernous plane. Perhaps this was designed merely as a showcase of Foster's talents, but many opportunities were overlooked to make this a great thriller, on a par with, say, Harrison Ford's "The Fugitive" (1993). For too much of the movie we're led to believe Foster's character is merely insane. This doesn't provide enough dramatic tension. It doesn't give the audience any fun of looking at clues and trying to stay one step ahead of the story. The twist comes too late and too predictably in the final 20 minutes.The character of the villain Carson, played by Peter Sarsgaard, never seems to find his focus. One minute he's completely evil and in the next shot he's a Boy Scout. Maybe this was meant to confuse the audience, but it takes us out of the movie at times. Sean Bean plays Captain Rich. His performance is the best in the film, but there isn't enough of him. He's a leading character but becomes a mere extra. An opportunity was missed at his exit for his character to "get a clue" of what was actually going on and take heroic action. (One wonders if he did in an earlier draft of the script, but this was cut to keep the focus on Foster's character?)The set, a gigantic, super jumbo jet, provided a great opportunity for a grand search for the little girl. Our heroine, someone who knows this plane inside and out, should have had some "James Bond moments" to use her knowledge to her advantage. But much of this movie ends up being a talking head film rather than the action film (e.g. "Snakes On A Plane") we are expecting.As for Foster, we are grateful she isn't dressed like a Fifth Avenue runway model, as is the cliché for most female leads (e.g. "Charlie's Angels"). Unfortunately, in Hollywood, a strong and intelligent female still has to be portrayed as emotionally unstable, bordering on insane. I kept thinking to myself, if Harrison Ford were in this role, he wouldn't be playing insane. He'd quickly grasp the conspiracy and start trying to figure out who were the good guys and who were the bad. He'd test them. Ask them subtle questions that he'd already know the answers to. (And the audience would get to play right along). He'd disappear in the plane and eavesdrop on conversations, reading lips or tapping in to the intercoms and in- flight entertainment system. He'd use things in the plane to his advantage, such as tapping into video monitoring cameras in the cargo hold. Another missed opportunity is the little girl. For all we know, she's already dead or never existed in the first place. Hitchcock fans know that the master of thrillers always insisted that you had to show the audience the time bomb ticking under the table to have suspense. If two people are chatting and the table blows up, there's no suspense. In sum, "Flightplan" is a mildly entertaining thriller with some great performances, but you'll be left wishing there had been more careful plotting.
Unholy Blightplan
posted on 12 Aug 2009Story summary (from the movie trailers): A woman and her daughter board a plane. The daughter goes missing and others on the plane claim that the daughter never existed.My review The trailer summarizes the first 45 minutes of the movie, literally. You could watch the trailer, get briefed on what is happening , then watch the remaining 55 minutes to see how it unfolds. THAT next portion is where the movie falls apart. The main reason to watch this movie (which was my reason, at least) is to find out the answer to the question: "What happened to the daughter and why would other people on the plane deny ever seeing her?" How could it be that a whole airplane, have some 400+ passengers and NO ONE remembers seeing the daughter? Did aliens abduct her secretly? Is it some sort of government cover-up? Was it some strange science-fiction warped reality thing happening?Unfortunately the answer is an unbelievably implausible piece of claptrap.***Major Spoilers next. BUT!! You may want to read the spoiler to save yourself from watching the last 45 minutes of the movie***The daughter is kidnapped by a fellow passenger (the air Marshall) and his accomplice (one of the flight attendants). This was done with the pretense that the mother would go 'crazy' looking for her daughter. Then, the plan is that the 'crazy' woman will make her way to the cargo hold and open the digitally locked coffin that her dead husband is in, where a bomb has been hidden. Then the air Marshall can convince the captain that the woman is secretly a hijacker with a bomb on the plane and convince the captain to have the airline wire money to a bank account. Then, the plan is that the FBI would shoot the woman, thinking she is a terrorist/hijacker and the girl would be 'vaporised' by the bomb that the air Marshall and his accomplice had planted on the plane.Whoa. What an unbelievably complicated and contrived plan. The plan is based on SOOOOO many random factors (mostly on people and their reacts) that it is ridiculous to see anyone actually thinking the plan would work. The script seems like it was written with the first part in mind (mother frantic about missing daughter on airplane), THEN the writers had to come up with a reason, fast!! They concocted the whole 'secret hijacker for money plan', BUT with NO research into how that part of the plot would be handled when you thought about the impact.Oh, yes as to the answer to the big question: Why did the other passengers/crew claim that they did not see the daughter? Simply, because (highly improbable!!!), NO ONE did see her. That is the answer. No intricate conspiracy. No sci-fi explanation. Just bad writing.I give the movie 4 out of 10. The movie gets 1 out of ten for the first 45 minutes which *were* interesting, 0 out of 10 for the stupid plot that happened in the second half and 3 out of 10 for the good job done by the actors (who did good with what they were given).
Two words: Panic Plane.
posted on 10 Aug 2009Panic Room takes to the air, reaching new heights of intrigue and suspense. The similarities are immediately noticeable. Jodie Foster again playing the smart, strong, stoic role, recently left without a husband (this time as a result of his apparent suicide), then dealing with outrageous circumstances that threaten the life of her young daughter as well as that of the crew and passengers. The supporting cast shrinks in the presence of Foster's powerful performance. The setting is a fantasy-flight for airline passengers everywhere: a complete absence of engine noise, turbulence, or even the ubiquitous crying infant on the palatial sized Airbus A380. This is a very good Jodie Foster flick which would have been great if the producers had stuck to their flight plan through the entire movie. Instead, the viewer is subjected to the all too common Hollywood bumpy landing ending. So fasten your seat belts, stow your troubles in the overhead compartment and hold onto your popcorn as you depart on an otherwise entertaining adventure.
Good enough thriller, but what is it really about?
posted on 10 Aug 2009Jodie Foster plays Kyle, a propulsion engineer living and working in Germany, but who has just lost her husband. She is pretty much in a funk, and sometimes imagines that her husband is still with her. We see her ask him to go outside with her for a few minutes, but then we see her outside alone. Kyle and her young daughter are flying back home to New York with her dead husband in the airplane's cargo bay, in a coffin. So, almost all of the movie takes place in the airplane, a new design, and the biggest plane ever made. Kyle just happens to have worked on the design and knows just about everything about it. Or, was that planned, we begin to wonder. As night falls and the plane heads west, cruising at 36,000 feet, Kyle gets sleepy and nods off, only to awake 3 hours later with no sign of her daughter. No one seems to remember seeing a 6-year-old, her name is not on the manifest, and she cannot be located on either of the two decks of the plane. So, was there really a daughter, or is this more of Kyle's imagining things??Peter Sarsgaard is superb as Carson, the air marshal on the flight. Sean Bean is also quite good as Captain Rich, in charge of the flight. The suspense is set up nicely and we can believe both possibilities, that Kyle is imagining things, and also that the crew may be in a conspiracy to kidnap the daughter. If so, why?? MAJOR SPOILERS FOLLOW. Her daughter was real, and she in fact had been taken and hidden within the bowels of the airplane, and drugged so that she would remain asleep. The bad guy was the air marshal Carson, who figured out a way to get explosives into the plane via the casket. In fact, Kyle's husband didn't jump off the roof, he was pushed off by Carson to set up the heist, involving $5MIllion being wired to an account to ward off exploding the plane. His "flightplan" was to kill Kyle at the end and pin it on her, but she was too smart, got the upper hand, including the detonator, tricked Carson into being in the compartment alone, so she could blow him up. The movie was really about Kyle finding herself again, breaking out of her funk, energized by the prospect of losing her daughter.
Bad plot, not to shabby acting
posted on 08 Aug 2009Well... watched this last night, and it wasn't horrible, but it wasn't very good either. Apart from the technical mistakes, the ridiculous story was very hard to believe - the whole plot had way too many sinkholes - and the fact that they would need a much bigger team to pull the whole deal off...The setup inside the plane was kind of okay - it's a confined space, you kind of know that the girl HAS to be there, or maybe the mother IS delusional - but they manage to ruin it all...I wouldn't really recommend seeing this movie - it's not really a suspense thriller, airplane-buffs will not be satisfied, cause the actual action inside the plane is not really appreciative of the confined space, and naught is done to use the plane (as a location) for what it's worth.Better to watch Passenger 57 or even Executive Decision. And that's saying a lot.
***Spoiler****
posted on 02 Aug 2009WARNING!!! SPOILER!!!! The movie is TERRIBLE. Seems we have a new "Jane Fonda Jr." using her "acting" career to promote politics and look at the world thru "rose-colored glasses" against the country she lives in and gets a paycheck from.In light of 9/11 (look how quickly we've all forgotten & it's ironic this comes out right after the anniversary)I was appalled and disgusted at this movie and the way it portrays our Airline Employees (flight attendants) and our brave, courageous, patriotic, highly-trained Federal Air Marshalls who have probably sacrificed more lucrative careers for patriotic duty (which they've probably done all their lives) and this is the way one of our own depicts them.We have shown throughout the ages just how weak and easily influential a vast majority of Americans can be this movie will once again influence those who look at the reality through "rose-colored glasses". God forbid if another 9/11 were to happen & people who have seen this movie and are easily influenced will not take action or not have faith in our flight crews and Marshalls. I fly quite a lot and I see how a lot of passengers are...they're lazy and RUDE!!! They ignore the flight attendants and have no respect for others talking on the cell phone, demanding this or that thinking the flight attendants are waitresses when their number one priority is safety. Let's not forget the Jet Blue flight 09/21/05 that made an emergency landing in LAX, without these brave, dedicated people it could have been worse with total panic aboard the plane but in this situation the passengers trusted the crew and treated them as the professionals they are and everything went very smoothly and luckily mechanically as safe a landing as could be hoped. Foster better do some talking quick, there are those who do not view movies as "entertainment" but as reality or strongly associate them with reality and this will cause problems in the future.Foster should be thankful that she lives in such a great country as the USA, that will allow her to have a successful life and promote a movie like this that does nothing but degrade and shame those who sacrificed their lives on 9/11 and their co-workers and Marshalls who continue to protect this country and do their jobs proudly day in/out with personal sacrifice!
The conclusion is obvious from the off-set and it is Red Eye that emerges as the best 'in-flight' thriller of the year
posted on 31 Jul 2009STAR RATING: ***** The Works **** Just Misses the Mark *** That Little Bit In Between ** Lagging Behind * The Pits Following on from the earlier-released Red Eye, Jodie Foster takes the lead role after a long break since her last film The Altar Boys (last one I can remember anyway, which I don't even think was released over here?) in 2005's second 'in-flight' thriller movie Flight Plan, a movie with an intriguing premise that is actually a lot less intriguing if you think about it.She plays a woman who has recently lost her husband. She has to fly the body over to another part of the country for the funeral, along with her young daughter. The stress of the situation, along with the natural need for sleep, causes her to fall asleep, only to awaken and find her daughter missing. Her natural panic and alarm causes the cabin crew, headed by the level-headed captain (Sean Bean) to search the plane from top to bottom in the hope of finding the missing daughter. The woman is horrified to learn the search has been unsuccessful and that worse than that, there is apparently no record to show that her daughter was even on the plane to begin with. As the senselessness and the nightmarishness of the situation take her over, she begins to suspect something is not right and sets off on a desperate quest to discover what happened to her missing child.As I said above, this film is sort of competing with Wes Craven's Red Eye as 2005's best 'in-flight' thriller movie. Sadly, it's a competition it has lost.It seems to be striving as a high-concept sort of film, and at first glance it may appear to be this way. And Foster is a good choice in the lead role, as she's an actress who usually pulls this sort of film off with aplomb. This is her second thriller since Panic Room and in many ways she is playing moreorless the same character she played in that film with regards to the missing husband and daughter in peril characters. But although it may look very original and classy, the conclusion is really rather obvious from the off-set and the film actually emerges as very predictable right up till the end. It's suspenseful and classy enough, but you just sort of roll with it as opposed to trying to figure out what is going on. Also, the movie, unlike Red Eye, seems to take advantage of the opportunity of being set on an airplane and using it to ease 9/11 hostilities by having some arab characters on board and having them be the ones immediately suspected of being behind the plot, with one passenger getting all unjustifiably irate with them, only for one of them to emerge as very kind, helpful and misunderstood in the final scene. Some will think this a good thing, others might see it as a little cynical and patronizing.As for the rest of the cast, Bean is likable enough as the practical, no-nonsense pilot but his character doesn't really have much more depth to him than that. And Peter Sarsgard is also fairly effective as the federal agent on board the plane, with an underlying air of menace about him that is pleasing. But they are all playing to a film that is fundamentally undeserving of their efforts. For the most thrilling and truly gripping 'in-flight' thriller of the year, Red Eye's your winner. **
Stupid plot line, Foster's performance so annoying
posted on 29 Jul 2009Many others have commented on the total stupidity of the plot of this movie and I totally agree. I just wanted to say that many have praised Jodie Foster's performance, I found it intensely irritating.Her being so intense and erratic from so early on was just too much for over an hour and a half. Having said that it did keep you gripped but only because you wanted to jump in the TV and slap her. If I had been Sean Bean I would have been a lot more forceful with her as she was acting absolutely barmy. Passenger reactions were unrealistic, and her blowing up the plane and surviving from such a short distance away? Absolutely laughable. That thing would have been jam packed with fuel and would have turned into a huge fireball. Just plain silly and with Foster's intense but oh so irritating performance mixed in it made for rather uncomfortable viewing throughout. Not one I would recommend.
Suspenseful but full of holes.
posted on 23 Jul 2009In addition to all the other observations made by reviewers regarding flaws in story logic, I want to raise an additional question. Why was the Air Marshall willing to return to the plane when Jodie Foster commanded him to come back? Why didn't he just walk away and blow up the plan with her and her daughter? And another thing, why was he willing to give up his gun to the Captain when Jodie told him to? Of course, it turned out that he had another gun hidden on his leg, but why so compliant? The only reason I can think of for his coming back was so they could have the drama of the chase at the end. Of course, Jodie got the "upper hand" when she knocked the Air Marshall out and took the detonator from him. It was just plot convenience, as far as I can see.
Flying mystery.
posted on 19 Jul 2009Kyle gets on a flight with her wandering daughter and then takes a nap. When she wakes up, she cannot find her daughter. She searches the plane and tries to get the crew to help her but they keep telling her stories about her daughter. The stories make no sense and the whole crew make Kyle look super crazy. There are only a couple of areas that this story can go since it takes place on a plane. I liked that idea because it left the viewer limited but on the other hand, the ending was predictable because I had several in my head already. I knew about the thing on the window and that made me figure it out long before the ending. Plus, I could read the faces of the crew and knew that something was going on. It's a pretty good mystery but just slightly limited.
Movie that doesn't really take off
posted on 15 Jul 2009"Flightplan" is a starring vehicle for Jodie Foster who, as in her last film ("Panic Room"), is a young mother coping without a father in looking after a daughter in danger in markedly contained surroundings. It is good to see a strong central role for an actress and Foster gives a fine performance full of resilience and resourcefulness.Sean Bean, as the pilot of the ultra-new Aalto Air E-474 airliner, and Peter Sarsgaard, as the aircraft's sky marshal, are in good form and Greta Scacchi makes surprise appearance as a therapist, all of whom are convinced that propulsion engineer and recently-widowed Kyle Pratt (Foster) is fantasising the disappearance of her daughter.There are some taut Hitchcock-like scenes, but ultimately the movie fails to take off because there are just too many implausibilities and an improbable and unsatisfactory ending.
Coming soon to a video store bargain bin near you! (spoilers)
posted on 15 Jul 2009Flightplan is a deceptive thriller, not because of the plot itself, but what the filmmakers do with it, conveniently genre switching midway through a film, with the latter half looking, albeit, like your standard good-guy/bad-guy battle on an airplane, promising big effects and interesting moments despite the cliché, but actually becomes so abrupt that you're wishing that, close to the end when you're led to believe that all is resolved among the characters, that it would continue and bring you into yet another series of events. A twist, even a ritual twist, but all of this cannot possibly be said and done in under an hour and a half, can it? Oh it can. And it does. And for that, Flightplan becomes instantly mediocre.Jodi Foster, in her usual threatened mom roles of recent, plays a grieving widow who is joined by her six-year-old daughter as they fly her husband's body to Long Island, their new residence. Aboard an airplane (the Concord?) the size of a shopping mall, the young girl suddenly goes missing and, when there are no witnesses to her whereabouts, all become skeptical of the young girl's existence. In the post-9/11 days of airline paranoia, you can believe that this crazy lady in a desperate search for her kid, creating much calamity on the plane, would probably be more quickly restrained than she had been.But, what might be a tasty psychological thriller, soon turns into standard action fare as we learn that Foster and her daughter are indeed targets of some crafty thieves who intend to use her as their "crazy woman on board" scapegoat in order to carry out their plans to get some money. Even this might whet the filmgoers appetite, despite the sudden curveball, but it is about this point where standards take you so far and then leave you hanging. This, and the more unbelievable moments aboard, it is one film that ends all too easily to have been a good thriller.
The went through all that trouble to build a plane
posted on 28 Aug 2009In the DVD there is a bonus mini documentary on how they built and designed a plane for this movie. It is quite impressive. They designed every little detail in that plane; every nook and cranny of the kitchen, made special rails for the camera to move, etc. And then u think to yourself if only they have invested more in the plot itself which is quite trivial and seems like an 'I have seen this already' kind of plot. It is a shame that Hollywood seems to invest much more in the visual effects then in the actual script of the movie. Because this is the real caveat of this one – beautifully directed, great actors, but a very weak story line.