feeldb

Foolproof

2003 · 94 min · Director: William Phillips ★ IMDb 6.4 · 12,048 ratings

Show plot summary (may contain spoilers)

Twenty-something Torontonians and friends Kevin, Sam and Rob play a game they call Foolproof: they plan foolproof heists, but without the intention of actually carrying them out. They have a few rules in the game, including the three having the necessary technical and physical abilities to carry out the tasks required for the heist, the plan cannot include loaded guns, and there is no violence meaning that no one gets hurt. They try to be as meticulous if not more so than the best high stakes thieves. The fun is in knowing they could do it if they truly wanted. Their collective lives change when someone breaks into Sam's apartment and steals their latest plan for a jewelry warehouse heist. After the warehouse is hit, the culprit identifies himself to them as Leo 'The Touch' Gillette, a known but never convicted high stakes thief who will stop at nothing to get what he wants. He tells them that the break-in at Sam's apartment was not by accident, and that part of his grand plan is to use them to map and carry out a $20 million theft of bonds for him. Since he has evidence of their involvement in the warehouse heist, they feel they have no other option but to help him. Their friendship is tested as they try to figure out how best to get themselves out of this predicament, sometimes each looking out solely for him or herself. But their view of helping The Touch may change as they actually begin to work on a real heist with real stakes.

Ask Kadri

Trailer for Foolproof

Playing the trailer connects to YouTube. No connection is made until you choose to play.

Rate how it felt
Working…

Your viewing check-in

Emotional fingerprint

Foolproof (2003) — Movie. Top emotional signals: Excitement 30%, Humor 25%, Tension 20%. Source: AI estimate. Shares describe emotional signal, not percentages of people. Your experience may differ. How we measure

  1. Humor25%

AI estimate · no viewer votes yet

How we measure

AI estimate

Share of emotional signal, not the percentage of people or a probability of enjoyment.

Each viewer contributes one response, split equally across their selected emotions. When available, an automated estimate supplies a prior that is blended with those responses. Counts include distinct viewers, not automated estimates or archived anonymous votes. Fewer than 3 viewers is an early estimate; more responses do not guarantee certainty.

Why it feels this way

The strongest emotional signals are Excitement, Humor, Tension. Genres: Comedy, Crime, Action. AI estimate.

Is it worth watching?

Consider this title if you are looking for Excitement, Humor and Tension. Its IMDb rating of 6.4/10 suggests a generally positive audience reception. For these leading emotions, its Feel Score is 66/100.

How did it make you feel?

Votes are saved to the fingerprint once you’re signed in.

Pick up to three · 0/3

1
2
3

Emotional journey

AI · from subtitles
  • Tension
  • Curiosity
  • Excitement

Not enough subtitle evidence

No dominant emotion

Dominant emotion: Curiosity

Dominant emotion: Humor

Dominant emotion: Tension

Dominant emotion: Excitement

Dominant emotion: Relief

Tension
Curiosity
Excitement
Emotional journey Emotional intensity over the film’s runtime, from quieter to stronger on a fixed 0–1 scale. Hatched intervals have insufficient subtitle evidence. The table provides the values.
Ending hidden

Dominant emotion

Intensity dips around 8 %, then rises around 18 %, then peaks around 83 %.Ending hidden

Emotional journey
%Approximate minuteDominant emotionOverall intensityTensionCuriosityExcitement
2.5 %≈ 2′Curiosity48 %25 %47 %30 %
7.5 %≈ 7′Humor48 %23 %45 %25 %
12.5 %≈ 12′Curiosity51 %30 %51 %21 %
17.5 %≈ 16′Curiosity61 %49 %56 %19 %
22.5 %≈ 21′Tension68 %63 %51 %19 %
27.5 %≈ 26′Tension61 %55 %51 %23 %
32.5 %≈ 31′Curiosity55 %39 %51 %26 %
37.5 %≈ 35′Humor59 %40 %40 %26 %
42.5 %≈ 40′Tension61 %54 %34 %25 %
47.5 %≈ 45′Tension64 %63 %34 %36 %
52.5 %≈ 49′Excitement73 %70 %31 %53 %
57.5 %≈ 54′Tension73 %70 %35 %48 %
62.5 %≈ 59′Tension65 %63 %45 %35 %
67.5 %≈ 63′Tension64 %63 %53 %31 %
72.5 %≈ 68′Tension69 %69 %53 %34 %
77.5 %≈ 73′Tension79 %79 %46 %49 %
82.5 %≈ 78′Tension80 %76 %46 %56 %
87.5 %≈ 82′Relief74 %64 %48 %54 %
92.5 %≈ 87′Relief71 %50 %33 %55 %
97.5 %≈ 92′Humor65 %28 %17 %48 %
Man in a hole

Rags to riches: The emotional tone rises from negative to positive.

Riches to rags: The emotional tone falls from positive to negative.

Man in a hole: The tone falls, then recovers.

Icarus: The tone rises, then falls.

Cinderella: The tone rises, falls, then rises again.

Oedipus: The tone falls, rises, then falls again.

AI reading of the film’s English subtitles (dialogue and sound cues) — not viewer votes. How we measure ↗

Kadri — your film companion

AI

Ask anything about Foolproof. From the film’s own dialogue and FeelDB data, at your spoiler level.

Kadri

Hi, I’m Kadri. Ask me anything about Foolproof — I’ll stay inside your spoiler line.

Premise only
Enter to send · Shift + Enter for a new line
Afterward Reveal viewer responses · may contain spoilers

Viewer responses about feelings after the title ended, separate from feelings while watching. No AI estimates.

0 responses so far

Feeling details appear after at least 3 viewers respond, to protect privacy.

Cast

JJ
Joris Jarsky

JJ
Joris Jarsky

Rob

David Suchet

Leo Gillette

David Hewlett

Lawrence Yeager

JA
James Allodi

Detective Mason

SS
Sean Sullivan

Stan

TS
Tara Slone

Maggie

SG
Soo Garay

Hamish Receptionist

WH
William House

Stanley Q. Hamish

WC
Wai Choy

Harry

DM
Duff MacDonald

Harlon

LC
Laura Catalano

Sandi

PC
Philip Craig

Albert Humphrey

AZ
Allen Zarnett

Patrice Security Guard

HC
Ho Chow

Police Technician

LL
Leford Lawes

Junior Detective

Details

Directed by
William Phillips
Written by
William Phillips
Type
Movies
Released
2003
Runtime
94 min
Country
Canada
Ratings
★ IMDb 6.4 · 12,048 ratings
Feels mostly
Excitement
Data updated

Where to watch

Data: JustWatch · Wikidata

Feels similar

More like this →

Emotion overlap shows mood similarity, not a prediction of enjoyment.