Tag: Tom Hanks

Here (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Multiple generations of couples and families inhabit the same home over the course of a century.

I knew one thing before sitting down to watch this: the CGI used to de-age Tom Hanks was not good. I have to be honest, that didn’t bother me that much. There are moments where you can see the CGI and you’re brought out of the narrative, but it doesn’t happen anywhere near as much as it could.

Here is a fascinating watch, all taking place at the exact same location over the course of hundreds of years in a non-linear fashion. The non-linear nature was a smart choice because it allows you to see how actions can influence people years later. It also allows for more interesting transitions because you can see the changes.

That leads me to the visual downside. Here doesn’t fade directly from one scene to the next, there’s also no attempt to make it look like it’s one scene. Instead, it brings up a small box on the screen which contains the same location at a different time or with different people, it’s only once you get used to that new scene that the movie moves on fully. It’s visually compelling, but there’s one major drawback. It makes it difficult to be invested in the current scene as you’re always seeing what’s next. It would be like if the “here’s what’s up next” part of television shows happened halfway through the episode instead of at the end. The constant look into the future stops you from focusing on the present, Here never exists in the moment, instead just constantly dangling the narrative carrot in front of you and waiting for you to catch up.

As much as it is cool to see it through the different time periods, there’s a definite focus on what happened after 1945; with the characters from then onwards being the ones we see the most of. To be honest, they’re the only ones needed. Yes, the look into the Lenni-Lenape couple and their courtship and burial rituals are interesting, and the William Franklin connection does come into play in the present-day scenes, but they’re not needed. They feel like narrative sorbets designed to cleanse our palate. The post-Young scenes also aren’t that interesting, seemingly just there to remind us that COVID existed, and police racism still does. If anybody watched this movie without those scenes, nobody would say “hey! This family drama set from 1945-2000 doesn’t focus on 2020 pandemics and race relations enough”. It feels like they were put in there just because Zemeckis feels this is an “important” movie, and “important” movies need to discuss themes.

I hate to sound like a Daily Mail reader, but this needed less politics. If it focused just on the family and their life in the house, it would be a much more interesting watch. I can accept the scenes of the house being built, because the house is a character, so seeing how it was “birthed” could also tie in thematically, but we didn’t need the inventor, the wannabe flier etc. If you cut out all the fluff, it would be much shorter. That’s not too big an improvement, as timing isn’t an issue. The “here’s what’s next” nature of the visuals means that even when you’re not interested, you’re still paying attention, so it flies by much quicker than it should.

In summary, it’s an interesting art experience, not a great movie. As much as I did enjoy the narrative, it feels like it’s trying too hard to move you. It’s so heavy-handed that if it slapped you it would knock you out. As Peter Sobczynski said in his review posted on rogerebert.com “there is a point when you find yourself thinking that the only thing that Zemeckis hasn’t thrown into the mix is a needle drop of ‘Our House’ and then he proceeds to do just that”. It’s not a terrible film, but it’s not one that wouldn’t have worked better as a 20 minute short instead. Also, a simply terrible title that makes it really awkward to talk about.

A Man Called Otto (2022)

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Tom Hanks plays Otto the grouchy man who gets new neighbours who predictably warm his heart (not over an open fire, that would be weird) in this English-language adaptation of the Swedish book “A Man Called Ove”

Some films aren’t for everybody, and that’s okay. They’re too niche, too dark, or just too damn weird for mass audiences to enjoy. This isn’t one of those films, this is the opposite, and this is aimed at almost everybody. It’s a simple story, slickly told, and with one or two swears, but nothing too unpleasant. It even stars the perennial “oh I like him, he is good isn’t he?” everyman Tom Hanks.
That’s probably my biggest issue. I like Tom Hanks, he is obviously very good (and I’m sure that he celebrated actor with multiple awards, appreciates being reassured by a reviewer who is, let’s face it, a nobody), and he is likeable; that’s the problem. Otto is supposed to be a cantankerous grouch, a man who is angry at the world and expresses it through snark. He’s supposed to be someone you genuinely don’t want to spend a minute near in case his abrasiveness washes off on you. It doesn’t work if he’s played by Tom Hanks, he’s just too charming an actor to pull off this character. You spend the entire time knowing he’ll eventually turn good, and you’re just waiting for it to happen. If he was played by someone who generally plays quite villainous or menacing roles then it might have worked better. James Gandolfini would have been perfect if he wasn’t dead (which usually harms career prospects for everybody who is not 2Pac).

The upside of casting Hanks is that more people are likely to see it, which is a good thing as this is something that deserves to be seen. It’s not going to be something you remember for years and years, but it is good enough that six or seven years down the line, you’ll be browsing ParaHulCockFlix and see it, and think “yeah, I remember liking that, let’s watch it”.

Quick note, that was supposed to be an amalgamation of Paramount+, Hulu, Peacock, and Netflix, the fact it nearly says “huge cock flicks” is a genuine accident, but one I’m not changing.

The other positive of casting Tom Hanks is it means his son can play the younger version of him. No, not crazy Colin, but Truman, who doesn’t even have a Wikipedia page. He’s a better actor than his experience would suggest, which is good as any flaws will bring up accusations of nepotism. He more than earns his place in this film, providing the character with youthful hope and warmth which means the turning point when he loses everything is all the more heartbreaking.

The rest of the cast is good too, the kids aren’t annoying, and Mariana Treviño provides her character with enough passion and life that she doesn’t seem pushy and annoying.

Everybody involved in this is obviously very good, and nobody is slacking. So why is this only “very good” and not amazing? There’s the aforementioned “Hanks is too nice” issue, but it does also occasionally come off a bit too “all young people are useless, old people are amazing and know everything”. It’s so boomer and “old man yells at cloud” that the fact the character’s reaction to someone being trans is “your father kicked you out because of that? Then he’s an idiot”, it is weirdly affirming that a character who is supposed to be mean and hate people, is still pro-trans rights. So if you’re anti-them, then you’re not only an idiot but also a special kind of hateful. He’s completely serious too, no “JK”.

My other issue is how the film opens, it shows him buying rope to make a noose at a hardware store. But he doesn’t attempt suicide until about 15 minutes later, with quite a few scenes and characters in between. If the failed suicide was earlier, then it would have flowed a bit better.

So in summary, you should see this, it’s very fun, and at times very sad. Also, it made me want to see the original adaptation (available on Mubi) plus read the book (available in bookstores, obviously)

Elvis (2022)

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick summary: Through the eyes of Tom Parker, this film chronicles the rise of one of the biggest stars in music history.

This is weird. I’m still not entirely sure about it. It’s either the best bad film, or the worst good film. It does some things brilliantly, and when it’s good, it’s very good. There are moments which will break your heart, moments which will astound you, moments which will teach you about American culture and the importance of music. Then there are moments which make you wonder if the filmmakers have ever seen a movie before. Moments where they make terrible decisions in how to display the narrative, moments where the editing is so bad it almost gives you a headache.

When I say “bad editing”, I’m not talking about complicated scenes which need editing and they’ve just made some weird choices. There are moments where two people are having a conversation and there is so little faith in the dialogue and performance that there’s a cut every few seconds just to keep things exciting. It doesn’t quite reach Bohemian Rhapsody levels of headache-inducing, but it’s the closest a big-budget film has got.

I know, you don’t expect subtlety and restraint from a Baz Luhrmann film. You know it’s not exactly going to be a calm and relaxed drama, but a little bit of restraint would help this film. There are scenes where all it needed to do was stay still, let the emotions wash over you as the conversation happens in front of you. The weird non-chronological nature at the beginning doesn’t help it either. As the film goes on it does develop into a more traditional narrative, but at the start, it jumps back and forth between different times and locations at an almost baffling pace. A lot of this film belongs amongst the worst I’ve seen all year.

But when it’s good, it’s very good. There are times where you forget you’re watching a modern film, it slips into feeling like life observation so easily. But then something breaks the immersion like hearing an Eminem song. But otherwise it all feels very real. The emotional beats it hits are pretty damn impressive, and it will make you feel things, which is difficult considering everybody going in knows how it ends.

In terms of casting, Tom Hanks is…..he’s okay. I’m not sure what would have been lost by casting someone less well-known and with a more natural accent. The supporting cast are all good without being remarkable. Really, this is all about the lead though. Austin Butler is phenomenal, he doesn’t just do an Elvis impression, the way he carries himself throughout is perfect. Elvis is a difficult role to play as everybody does an impression of him. Everybody has seen so many films of him that any missteps will be noticed. Plus, his fans are very obsessive so will notice differences. He does everything so well that you genuinely forget you’re not watching Elvis himself at times.

The familiarity everybody has with him does somewhat hurt the story too. Everybody knows a lot about him, and this doesn’t really tell you anything new. It is a LONG film, but it doesn’t have much to say. It feels like an edited version of something bigger.

I am opposed to unnatural splitting of movies into trilogies etc, but I feel that would have helped it here. Especially since the story is very episodic in nature, it has a basic narrative of “Parker is a bastard” but that’s not enough to really anchor the whole thing, so it splinters into episodic storytelling that causes it to constantly stop and start. You could easily split this into three movies, and I know EXACTLY where you could split them:

  1. The rise of Elvis, his relationship with black music (one great thing about this film is it puts the fact he was influenced by black artists out there), and how the police tried to shut him down. You end this when he defies the police and to avoid being arrested is sent to the army.
  2. Army and then his transition into an actor. End this when records his comeback special, performing songs his manager doesn’t want him too, but being so damn good that it revives his career.
  3. Vegas Elvis.

All of this is covered in the film. It’s weird as it feels like every one of those sections has it’s own three act structure within it. But because they’re all fit into one they feel rushed (even though it is nearly 3 hours long). If they were split then it would allow the effects of each story to be explored more. We saw a lot of how Elvis reacted to events, but we didn’t see how the world reacted to him. He goes from completely unknown to Biggest Star In The World in a small montage so you don’t really get a sense of how it happened.

If you hoping to use this to pass a test about Elvis, you’re out of luck. But if you were using this to UNDERSTAND Elvis, to work out why he was such a big deal, you couldn’t ask for anything better.

In summary: it’s obviously very good and has some excellence, but it feels like it’s being harmed by external forces trying to push it in a direction it doesn’t want to go in. Which is kind of perfect for an Elvis movie when you think about it