Life in Flight (2008) User Reviews

It's like a mental and emotional enema after watching one of the Transformer movies

[MBunge · 6/10 · 14 October 2011]

I once read a comment from Jim Shooter, the former Editor-in-Chief of Marvel Comics, that it was okay to tell a "day in the life" story as long as it was about the day you discovered penicillin or saved the world from an alien invasion. There's some truth to that. Heaven knows a lot of storytellers love to wallow in the mundane, keeping it real or getting all meta or something. Every so often, though, it's nice to experience a film that isn't about people getting killed or boy getting plot-hammered together with girl while a joke goes off every 20 seconds. At less than 80 minutes long, Life in Flight manages to satisfy that craving without overstaying its welcome.

Will Sargent (Patrick Wilson) is a New York City architect with a constantly aggravating construction project on one hand and a constantly striving wife (Amy Smart) on the other. Will is on track to merge his company with a larger, ritzier firm. His wife is happy about that. Will…not so much. He has mostly consigned himself to it, until he meets Kate (Lynn Collins). She's a designer herself and the two of them click from almost the first words they speak to each other. While Will and his wife are living in different emotional hemispheres, it's like he and Kate are next door neighbors. Kate thinks there's something going on between them while Will tries not to admit that to himself. Then she finds out he's married and the day comes when he has to sign the merger papers and both of them are forced to stop living their lives the way other people want them to.

Patrick Wilson and Lynn Collins are both elegantly normal. Yes, the drama of their characters isn't like they're living in a war zone or trying to escape from a horde of zombies, but they let us see it's as important to Will and Kate as all our dramas are to us. Nobody else except Amy Smart really has more than an extended cameo in the movie, so the whole shebang rests of Wilson and Collins making us care about Will and Kate. They succeed by diving into the somewhat shallow waters of two people who are unhappy without having much cause to be and making the viewer feel the commonplace depth of his or her own life.

Now, I wouldn't say everything works here. Kate invests a whole lot of emotion into a guy she barely flirts with. You also can't escape the realization at the end of Life in Flight that you've watched the world's most sympathetic view of a guy going through a midlife crisis where the film ends just as he's about to start cheating on his wife. I'm not sure if it was intentional but it made me stop and reevaluate how I felt about the whole thing. And while Amy Smart plays a bitch whose bitchiness is beautifully calibrated to a inch before something Will would feel entitled to object to, the two of them are so out of sync it's hard to believe they would have ever had a second date, let alone got married and had a child.

If you're looking for a distraction, this probably isn't it. It you'd like a mirror to help you see your own life a bit more clearly, take a look at Life in Flight.

nice tribute to NYC,,,,,,terrible film.

[marvinbluth · 4/10 · 26 December 2009]

It was great seeing the locations around NYC, but it was a seriously boring, going nowhere, total disaster of a movie.

How the talented cast said the words, deserves some appreciation, but the film said nothing, and never had an iota of cleverness, or humor.

It seemed more like a film school project, then an actual film.

How Patrick Wilson and Amy Smart got to star in this, is a bigger mystery and more thought-provoking then the actual movie.

Anyone who grew up in NYC, and has been away for a while, might be able to enjoy the various places the film was shot, but, there's many better films to watch.

Total cliche

[tlutzy · 5/10 · 27 April 2021]

A truly terrible script that can't be saved by even a very good actor such as Patrick Wilson. All the other acting is pretty mediocre.

Ugh, Good Cast, Nice Pictures, Miserable Script

[eggboy · 3/10 · 29 April 2008]

Saw this at Tribeca Film Festival and was surprised by the wretched writing. The cast is professional, and the photography, set and production design are all first class. The problem is a script that presents a somewhat dopey male lead, an unredeemable monster (b*tch) of a wife, and a seven-year-itch scenario.

The result is good actors reciting bad lines in overwrought scenes. We bought these tickets expecting that a cast including Patrick Wilson, Amy Smart and several other fine actors would deliver a good result. Tied to that script, they couldn't stay afloat.

The movie inspires me to create a new rule for young filmmakers: don't write a script with an architect as your main character, unless you are remaking "The Fountainhead." And don't remake "The Fountainhead."

A quiet little movie

[sfmoe · 26 December 2009]

I liked this movie. The dialogue felt natural, the conversations unforced and believable. The story explores, in a subtle, non-judgmental way, two people at an emotional crossroads. The wife didn't strike me as shrewish, but rather as oriented to success, not the best match for her husband, who was more reflective, more questioning. I've been there in my own way, so I can relate. I liked the ending. Like the rest of the movie, it felt natural, unforced, organic. The casting was good, with the exception of Fred Weller, who is distractingly obnoxious, which, according to what I've seen him in so far, seems to be his default role. In spite of that, this quiet study made me think, and do some questioning of my own.

Don't actors read the script before they agree to perform!

[danreyessat · 1/10 · 23 April 2021]

Patrick Wilson usually makes good choices!

Unfortunately this film wasn't one of them. It was painful very painful to watch his movie. Hopefully Patrick Wilson will read the next script before he agrees to be in it! I really do wonder how it even has a three star rating, those people Musta had some really good weed or brownies While watching. I love the LITTLE CHILDREN! Instead of watching this movie you should watch that one.

Every cliché in the book

[stockpicker01-1 · 1/10 · 27 April 2008]

Just saw the premiere at the Tribeca Film Festival, with all the people there (and all the blocked off seats...us $15 ticket buyers could only sit on the side or the last two rows) you would have thought it was some big to-do. But honestly, about the worst movie I've seen in a long time. Every possible bad movie cliché is in this one, including the flock of birds referred to in the title (spoiler alert...the birds turn out to be...PIGEONS!!!). And then the obligatory shrewish wife, unhappy husband, the other woman, so and so forth. The directors' commentary afterward was completely inane..turns out the characters are supposed to be on some continuum of fear that we all have, which is why the characters have similar names like "Kate" and "Catherine." I didn't see that one coming!

How this movie ever got made is beyond me. Fly far away from this one.

A slick urban morality tale that knows its limits

[orson-13 · 7/10 · 3 April 2013]

Patrick Wilson seems born to these sensitive professional male roles that require a rethinking of the smooth path the character is on. Director Tracey Hecht has a firm hand on an interesting and large cast and her script meshes the characters deftly,creating some drama without knocking heads. The film is realistically and interestingly placed within the world of architectural design and construction while at the same time offering an older New York office milieu kind of story. Without being cliché wealthy types, the main characters are likable genteel professionals on the way up, but reconsidering some avenues of personal and professional fulfillment. Amy Smart is charming, Wilson spot on, and Lynn Collins solid. Cinematography is excellent as are sets and locations. It's a truly unpretentious film and so may not be exciting enough for some.

Wretched

[gracenotesstudio · 3/10 · 7 February 2012]

*****Warning: May contain spoilers****** I agree with what the previous reviewers have said. However, I'm sick of Hollywood's glamorizing and justifying immoral behavior. There IS no justification for this man's behavior, regardless of his circumstances. ALL marriages have difficulties at times, but that doesn't give us all a license to cheat on our spouses. The architect's willingness to leave his wife for someone else because he's tired of her behavior and expectations, merely adds to the stereotype that men are incapable of making wise decisions independent of their sexual appetites. The only reason I gave the movie a 3 rather than a 1, is that Patrick Wilson, who is one of my favorite actors, is one of the stars. I AM a bit disappointed in his choice of acting vehicles, however.

What I hate about Netflix

[stewiegriffin6666-737-240878 · 1/10 · 14 July 2013]

Sometimes the movies that show up on Netflix are a gamble. Hadn't heard of Life in Flight, thought I take a chance. Ugh, I lost this bet. I GET the movie, its just poorly done. Cliché story, bad script, cliché characters, overdone sets, overdone costuming. I mean, what the hell was Kate wearing in her opening scene? This movie just tried way to hard. I don't know who financed the movie and I don't know how it got into Tribeca, but the writer-director needs to put this one behind her and focus her filmmaking talents on more substance, less cheese. I admit I didn't watch the whole movie because I couldn't, every second of it was killing me. Let's start with the first scene with Catherine and Will in bed. How can she still be lying in bed if she's that agitated about starting her day. Will notices the look on her face, but puts the moves on her anyway, instead of asking "Hey what's up? Why so stressed?" Why make it that she's a megabitch and him totally clueless in the first scene! It just doesn't work. The obviousness made me want to wretch. Another 17 minutes and I was done. Just awful!

Are you happy?

[GOWBTW · 10/10 · 14 June 2011]

Life is good, if it's really is. Being successful can be a plus or a minus. Here you got a designer who is married, successful, yet something was missing in his life: Happiness. This man has a wife who takes care of their son happens to be a follower rather than a supporter. At his job site he meets a beautiful woman who not only helps him out with his business, she helps him out on life. He takes heed of her words, especially about the birds flying in a certain direction. It turns out that his life isn't all he wanted to be. His wife was more of a go-getter and crowd pleaser, satisfying her needs instead of asking her husband how he feels about it. It was not a good marriage from the get-go, being materialistic and non-communicative, that can destroy a marriage. But the more understanding woman who took a job in the West Coast, automatically got homesick already. Both of those people have suffered similar consequences. Successfullness can be a plus or a minus in you life. Being steadfast is necessary to be living well. The fast-life will send you crashing fast, and being slow can get you fired. This movie teaches a lesson about being happy. Those two were a perfect match. It help me be happy, it'll do the same for you, too. 5 stars!

What is the point?

[mvksmall · 1/10 · 9 November 2012]

Life in Flight is truly full of badly written characters and horrific messages. Great- end a marriage and FAMILY because he's a bad communicator, and he's "unhappy". He can't communicate with his son because his wife bullies him away from it?? Come on... So then he turns away from both of them. He even admits that he "pretended" to want the career advancement that his wife is fighting, on their behalf, for. Why lie in the first place? And then run off with a woman that can't tell pigeons from sparrows, who obsesses with him on the basis of a few conversations. Heads up, lady, if he does this to his wife and son, he'll do it to you, too. How can this be an "Inspiring family drama?" If you have the least sense of moral responsibility, don't waste your time.

You make life choices, and some times they can't satisfy everyone.

[TxMike · 22 December 2011]

Small movie set and filmed in New York. Watched it on Netflix streaming.

Patrick Wilson is Will, up and coming architect who has received a fair bit of notice. His small group is working on a big project with a large firm, and for two years they have been courting each other. Will expects to sign with them.

His wife is Amy Smart is Catherine. She seems to be a good match, they have a small boy of 7. But Catherine is a bit pushy, driving forward Will's career move. It would be good for them, and would make her happy.

But Lynn Collins (of Klein High in Houston) is Kate, an independent designer, that comes on board as part of the bigger project. Kate just wants to get established, but Will is taken by her unusual outlook, and helps him see things he has never noticed before. Like the flocks of pigeons that fly about from the work site. Thus the title of the movie, "Life in Flight." The movie is not Earth-shaking, and lasts less than 90 minutes. But it is a nice story about figuring out what you really want to do. Plus we like Patrick Wilson, and don't miss any episodes of his 2011 TV series, "A Gifted Man."

Spoiler: At contract signing time Will can't go through with it, he really knows then that it isn't what he wants to do. He wants to live more, spend more time with his wife and son. But it doesn't work out that way, Catherine takes it as a personal affront that he backed out of the merger, and it breaks up their marriage. As the movie ends we see that Will and Kate have a chance to explore their mutual attractions, after she turned down a job in Los Angeles, preferring to stay in New York.

Great, Insparational, Refreshing

[czardesign · 10/10 · 17 April 2011]

Great movie despite the mediocre cast. Inspiring, shows that life is more than the chase for a dollar and selling out in order to feel like you can become someone. The movie is about staying true to nature of being human. I thought it was great because it inspires the search for something real not materialistic but soulful in the concrete jungle where the human connection has been displaced by sensual pleasures and the endless chase for the next big thing and happiness thats never found. The movie inspires stepping back and evaluating life's values, slowing down, smelling the roses and hearing the long lost voice of the yearning soul within self as well as someone else. I recommend this movie to everyone.

Thoughtful and Well-Played

[dansview · 8/10 · 26 March 2013]

This was a particular demographic that you don't always see in a New York-based film.

I don't think any of these people are native to the city. They are white, educated, and urban, but no one in the group of friends is Jewish, Italian, identifiably Irish, Gay, or over-the-top Liberal. This is in contrast to the Sydney Pollack, Woody Allen, Ed Burns type of N.Y. based relationship picture.

Also, they don't fit the "yuppie" stereotype entirely, because they are architects and radio station personnel, as opposed to lawyers,doctors, stock brokers, fashion editors, and art gallery owners.

The difference being that architects actually create something of lasting value, rather than fix, sell, or trade something. Radio guys are non-traditional professionals, by virtue of the underdog nature of their medium.

You see a view of N.Y. devoid of urban squalor, violence, dirty snow, rude people, profanity, sirens, homeless, and dilapidated housing. These characters live in neighborhoods with upscale brownstones and funky gentrified apartments. They frequent rooftop coffee hangouts, and homey diners with lovable old waitresses.

Our main character takes cabs, and doesn't have to sit on some dingy subway. The female lead enters a subway staircase, but we don't see the grim reality of her ride. So you come away thinking that you can live in New York and be oblivious to thugs, foreigners, crime, etc. Maybe some can.

Waking up with morning breath, a stressed wife, and loads of responsibility isn't too sexy, as we see clearly in the opening scene. Being a grown up can be a real drag.

I love the male lead. He's trying so earnestly to hold it all together, and you get the sense that he really cares about the work. He's a stoic Anglo who is good with technical stuff and short on expression, but he gets things done. We need those types. (not the type you normally associate with N.Y. either.) I love his facial expressions as we see him contemplating new concepts.

Introducing a blissfully compatible designer couple was a beautiful way to show our character what it can be like to have a lover who shares your outlook and interests. You can tell that he's taking it in and admiring them. Nicely played small roles for that couple. Bravo. Very natural. I totally believed them.

There's an old 70s song that goes: "Oh it's sad to belong to someone else, when the right one comes along." Hey, I support people toughing-it-out when marriage hits a rocky point. I agree with the other reviewers on this point, but sometimes people have irreconcilable differences.

My favorite scene is where the female lead finally breaks down and shares her true sadness. Remember, we hear early on that she had a wrenching breakup just a year ago, and at 30 or so, she is starting to feel fragile. I loved the emotional honesty of this scene. Well played, lady.

This script also gave supporting characters a chance to shine and add some real flavor, even though the picture centered on two refined people. The guy's best friend was spunky and caring. The girl's brother was funky and deadpan.

I didn't think the birds-in-flight metaphor was trite. I loved it. Or maybe you simply see it as a way to show that this woman appreciated nature and the subtle pleasures of life, and had the ability to wake up this very busy man. Watch his face when she first tells him about the birds, and then later when he watches them the first and second times.

Stop assuming that they are going to sleep together while he is separated. Maybe not. Just because they went out for a drink, does not mean that they were going to go overboard before a divorce. You cynics are expecting the worst, but there's no reason to believe that either of these people are the type to take adultery or divorce lightly.

This movie does not slam you over the head with any points. "Wall Street" did and Devil Wears Prada played on New York stereotypes.

It's a simple portrayal of real people, real problems, subtle moments, and the often confusing moral, social, and strategic dilemmas we all face. Beautiful photography.

Shocked that they let this crap in Tribeca Fest.

[endecottp · 4 May 2008]

Seriously one of the worst, most clichéd, extremely boring and annoying movies I've seen in a long long time. The movie ran only 78 minutes and felt like five hours. The script was just awful. The acting not much better. Who let this vanity project get out to the public? All involved should be ashamed and the screening committee at Tribeca should hang their heads low for letting this into the festival. It really tarnishes Tribeca's reputation. You would not want to know or associate with any of the characters in this movie, if they came anywhere near, you would run really fast the other way. They are stupid, vapid and walking clichés, with not an interesting thought or aspect to their beings. The ones that are supposed to be better are even stupider and more empty. While watching the film one can perfectly understand and sympathize with whomever came up withe the slogan "die yuppie scum" . The movie takes place in New York City and uses many familiar locations, the only entertainment value I found as a New Yorker was trying to identify where each shot was filmed . But let me tell you that lasted split seconds so don't even think of going for that reason. It is an insult to New York, New Yorkers and the Tribeca Festival. I really don't like being this harsh on a film because I know no one sets out to make a bad film and everyone works extremely hard to make it all happen. But I felt really ripped off of $15 x3. Why, after seeing the final product would anyone so carelessly and arrogantly consider unveiling it to the public and having them pay for it to boot, while so many good Independent films never get this kind of exposure or even get made.

A Simple But Thought Provoking Family Drama

[tabuno · 8/10 · 18 January 2019]

19 January 2012. Not since Closer (2004) has a movie presented the dynamics of human relationships. With Life in Flight, it is both more simple and less intensely dramatic and polished, yet at the same time it is more subtle and in some ways more authentic in its depiction and resonating of real life though it comes off with less energy and compelling appeal. It's depiction and presentation style is more in line with Lars and the Real Girl (2007) though addressing different familial subject matter. In some ways there's a bit of the self-reflective element of Anne Hathaway's character as found in The Devil Wears Prada (2006) and the existential dilemma as found in Sliding Doors (1998) which in that movie's case was even more imaginatively done as more captivating. Nor does Life in Flight have the sharpness and singular dramatic crisp bite of American Beauty (2000) nor Shopgirl (2005). Nevertheless, Life in Flight has a substantive quality pertinent to contemporary life and provokes valuable reflection on living in today's world.