See Abeid-Saba v. Carnival Corp., 184 So.3d 593, 600 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) ("An alternative forum is adequate if it provides for litigation of the subject matter of the dispute and potentially offers redress for plaintiffs' injuries." (quoting King v. Cessna Aircraft Co., 562 F.3d 1374, 1382 (11th Cir. 2009)); GLF Constr. Corp. v. Credinform Int'l, S.A., 225 So.3d 377, 381 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (finding no abuse of discretion where "review of the record, including the transcript of the hearing, establishes that the trial court conducted a proper, adequate analysis" of the Kinney factors).

(quoting King v. Cessna Aircraft Co., 562 F.3d 1374, 1382 (11th Cir. 2009)); GLF Constr. Corp. v. Credinform Int'l, S.A., 225 So.3d 377, 381 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (finding no abuse of discretion where "review of the record, including the transcript of the hearing, establishes that the trial court conducted a proper, adequate analysis" of the Kinney factors).

That being so, our standard of review is for an abuse of discretion. See GLF Constr. Corp. v. Credinform Int'l, S.A., 225 So. 3d 377, 380 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (reviewing the trial court's denial of the motion to dismiss for forum non conveniens for an abuse of discretion). "An abuse of discretion occurs ‘when the judicial action is arbitrary, fanciful, or unreasonable or where no reasonable man would take the view the trial court adopted.’ "

Denials of motions to dismiss based on forum non conveniens are reviewed for an abuse of discretion. See GLF Constr. Corp. v. Credinform Int'l, S.A., 225 So.3d 377, 381 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) ("The decision to grant or deny the motion for dismissal rests in the sound discretion of the trial court, subject to review for abuse of discretion." (quoting Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.061(a) ).

Denials of motions to dismiss based on forum non conveniens are reviewed for an abuse of discretion. See GLF Constr. Corp. v. Credinform Int'l, S.A., 225 So. 3d 377, 381 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) ("The decision to grant or deny the motion for dismissal rests in the sound discretion of the trial court, subject to review for abuse of discretion." (quoting Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.061(a)).

We find the trial court did not abuse its discretion in giving some, but not great, deference to the choice of forum in the instant case: Herrera–Zenil is a permanent resident of Mexico and Brazil, and Mi Cine is a Mexican entity. See Mezerhane, 176 So.3d at 278 (acknowledging that a foreign plaintiff's choice of forum, although not entitled to great deference, is entitled to some deference); GLF Constr. Corp. v. Credinform Int'l, S.A., 225 So.3d 377 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) ; Argandona v. Lloyd's Register of Shipping, 656 So.2d 1311, 1315 (Cope, J. specially concurring) (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (observing that the presumption in favor of the plaintiff's choice of forum "applies with less force when the plaintiff or real parties in interest are foreign .... [A] foreign plaintiff's choice deserves less deference." (quoting Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno, 454 U.S. 235, 255–56, 102 S.Ct. 252, 70 L.Ed.2d 419 (1981) )).