This counts as a quest.
With the basic criteria, quests ARE, in fact, everywhere. The film, The Hangover, is an example of a modern quest. I'm going to go from the character of Stuart (Ed Helms)'s character. So, on the way to Las Vegas, the gang's beautiful, vintage Mercedes Benz is almost totaled by an eighteen-wheeler thanks to Alan (Zach Galifianakis). The dragon on his path is his girlfriend who hates him and not-so-secretly cheated on him on a cruise. The Holy Grail becomes finding Doug (Justin Lee Bartha). The evil knight being, of course, Mr. Chow (Ken Jeong). The princess is the prostitute with a aheart of gold he marries on accident (Heather Graham). While this likely seems like a stretch, it shows that the quest structure can be fitted to anything.
There's usually more to a quest (or any story really) than what meets the eye. It's often noted that the hero fails their quest. This happens to keep people engaged and to build characters that are more static. Good quests have static characters because no one likes to watch a Nancy Drew. Every character should have flaws if writers expect the characters to resonate with an audience.
Anyway, Foster points out that questers are almost always young. Is this because of lack of self knowledge within younger folks or is it because people enjoy watching/reading about older people less? There is a tremendous amount of self growth and knowledge that occurs at every age, especially once people retire.
The first thing that pops into my head is the film Last Vegas which stars Robert De Niro, Morgan Freeman, Kevin Kline, and Michael Douglas. This is the story of four elderly men who discover lots about themselves both past and present on their trip to Las Vegas. It's just like The Hangover, but for the 65+ crowd.
The main character, Billy (Michael Douglas), is engaged to a woman fifty years his junior and wants nothing more than to get all of his buddies together for a bachelor party in Las Vegas. His friends are all down for it, except for Paddy (Robert De Niro)because Billy failed to attend his wife's funeral. Eventually, Archie (Morgan Freeman) and Sam (Kevin Kline) just kidnap the stubborn man and bring him to the airport.
While in Vegas, each have their own adventure, and even though he's engaged, Billy falls for a woman his own age. The trouble with this is, so does Paddy!
Sam has been given a hall pass to cheat on his wife, so he's at work on this while Archie plans a wild party for the villa they have rented. Diana (Mary Steenbergen), the woman both Billy and Paddy have fallen for is flirting wildly with each. Billy reveals to Diana that in their formative years, there was a love triangle between Paddy, Paddy's eventual wife, and himself. One night, Paddy's eventual wife (I think her name is Sophie) shows up at Billy's house to tell him that she wants to be with him over Paddy. Billy tells Sophie to go to Paddy instead because he is the better man for her. Current day Paddy overhears this conversation with Diana and becomes very upset. Everything is resolved because Paddy realizes Sophie wouldn't have been married to him for fifty years if she didn't really love him and Diana ends up with Billy. Each character learns a valuable lesson and nothing goes as planned.
This is not the finest film, but it disproves (not singularly) Foster's claim that quests don't happen to old people (Golden Girls, hello??).
It's a bit odd to think of every little story as a quest, even Last Vegas. I think what's interesting is what makes any one particular quest intriguing. Last Vegas and The Hangover are essentially the same movie, the main difference being age and popularity (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/30/last-vegas-review_n_4178823.html). Hangover has a couple of sequels, whereas Last Vegas has zero. Why do sequels exist? Why isn't the quest finished in one bout? Apart from money, I don't understand why a second and third Hangover needed to exist.
The other answer is that all sequels and quests are not created equal. For example, The Godfather Part II is critically acclaimed, whereas Caddyshack II is not. Many sequels are a sad continuation of the first film/book/quest. However, if all quests are basically the same, why aren't sequels more successful? My best guess is because people are always expecting MORE.
There is nothing new under the sun and most audiences are subliminally aware of this as the Oscars have pointed out. Movies don't win Best Picture anymore because of plot alone; they win for advances in production. This takes away from people caring about the quest if there is little or no spectacle (i.e. why The Hangover did better than Last Vegas).
