Life in Flight

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.