HERE - Movie Review

I loved it. Humbling experience and loved the many plots that tie together by the end.

I wouldn’t have guessed you liked Flight, but glad to have that in common. I saw that in a nearly empty theater and stayed to watch the opening scene again immediately after. I loved the way it looked and sounded so much that I didn’t mind how much effort was required to hold onto my suspension of disbelief. The least technical faux pas being that the first officer was panicking in turbulence before the mechanical failure. I get this is to show how cool and in control Denzel’s character was, but it would’ve worked just as well to have the FO act like a real pilot during the turbulence and then draw contrast by having him panic during the actual mechanical failure while Denzel maintains his cool

Yeah I was worried about this one. The last time I was interested in seeing a Zemeckis film was Cast Away in 2000. And it's crazy because everything from then and before was so good but nothing since has intrigued me enough.

I thought it'd be another horror movie as nowadays they're all named one word.

aaaa I'm here to watch the pretty lady idgaf about any of the crap films she watches I'm not spending a dime on any of them 😂

"it's like a thomas kincaide painting-"

BURN IT WITH FIRE!!!

I clicked to just see you. Hope you don't mind. Very attractive
Haven't been to a movie in years.

Sounds like a snorefest

The Walk was so good in 3d

One of the most overradet Directors of all time in my opinion
Rodger Rabbit and Back to the Future are the only two Films i liked from his

She talks too fast with no voice inflection.

Serendipity is the weight of life? Did I hear that correctly?

This movie is similar to Thorton Wilder's play, The Long Christmas Dinner.

Correction: John Debney is the king of American movie cornball musical scores. But yeah, this movie looked super corny nonetheless

Sounds like Zemeckis wanted to make his "Rope"?

Ewww, Tom Hanks, of course it's shit.

love your takes - I found the film just rather frustrating and challenging to peservere through.

I am okay spending money on a movie ticket to see a schmaltzy cryfest. I knew exactly what kind of film this would be and you have confirmed it.

I was thinking of Tree of Life right before you said it lol. Love the review. I'll skip this one

Savage review. I love it.

Points to you for giving the film a shot, but the outcome as you describe it isn't even remotely a surprise. Zemeckis, Hanks, et. al. have become artistically stale, it's as simple as that.

Yes Flight had a good opening alright a naked girl walking back and forth for 10 minutes..That was rough watching with the parents😅

I tend to dislike his films. Like you said, he's technically an amazing director and knows how to make films but I feel he totally relies on technology. There never seems to be any nuance. I'm one of the few who doesn't like Forrest Gump. He's like Spielberg without the beard.

Even seeing the trailer I find my nihilism kicking in.

I like this movie but it is all over the place. There are too many characters to focus on. I wish this movie just chose certain characters to focus on and not focus so much on the others or not at all. I was a little disappointed with this movie.

This would have worked better as a series than a movie. It reminded me of Kubrick’s 2001 but Kubrick did it better.

Looks awful... and I love Terrence Malick's Tree of life, so I will avoid any contact with this movie.

Tree of Life, but by Robert Zemeckis? Hard pass.

Too bad after all these years he couldn't come up with something less hokey that would have corrected Gump's superficiality. I oftentimes don't understand why movies are made. Surely they knew this didn't meet the cut. Yet expended time and money on it. Our lives our limited. Let' s do good things with our time.

The graphic novel is incredible.

That watchmen comic hasnt moved from the same place since 8 years ago😂

Watched “Here” last night. Heavily enjoyed it, I have to say.

Here's my opinion as a huge fan of this movie. I have a view of it that I think a lot of people haven't really considered. I hope this interests somebody.

I see this movie less as Hallmark and more a commentary on Hallmark, the same way I see the original 8 page comic and the graphic novel as commentary on the brutal, beautiful, repetitive banality of life. The movie cuts out a lot and adds just as much, restructuring it so it has a more direct relationship with mass media.

From the point of view of the movie, the people are extremely typical. So are many, from our point of view. Most of the depth of the characters has to be imagined, with the partial exception of the main three, for whom it can be inferred to a degree. It's obviously Margaret's arc, but there are many lines from the male leads that suggest they too are aware of the cookie-cutter banality of lives that they feel trapped inside of.

The radio and television beam into their space culture's ideas of what a person should strive for, what they should value. Al spends decades in decline, comparing himself to his image of what the world has told him he's owed, and what kind of soldier he must be if the world doesn't give it to him. Rich folds his ambitions because culture has told him his dreams cannot be fulfilled, and he ends up imposing his self-defeatism on others.

The movie intentionally echoes Death of a Salesman and similar works, but its characters are self-aware. Hanks knows he is the artist who gave uo, and Bettany knows he is the self-loathing alcoholic father. They both choose to turn things around, and partially succeed. Their reckonings with their big dreams and small self-images (fiction), the paths they have set for themselves (reality), and the eternal dialectic between them reflect the dialectic between the stories we tell ourselves and the stories we live.

So the movie does rely on the same well-worn plot beats and cliche phrases that most movies won't go near any more, at least not all at once. It has to. It is the mirror the Black family points at the camera, the most generic substance imaginable daring us to find ourselves in it. And when we do, it shows us our own tiny, beautiful place, nestled among the vastly finite echoes of history. It's not only trying to make you think about spaces through time, but how stories and histories echo through time and through each other, and it very pointedly cuts out anything from the future that was in the original because it's going for something slightly different.

I concede that my take on the movie might be seen as a stretch by some. I think the point could have been helped by some stories-within-stories, a few explicit callouts using the TV and radio. But in my mind, there is enough going on with the showcase of cultural expectations changing over time, and the interplay between our dreams, our guessing, fictionalized interpretations of reality, and what reality we construct for ourselves based on those interpretations- and more specifically, what reality we've ended up constructing for ourselves up to this point when we look back from the present-, to infer a degree of metatext.

I loved it. I can't wait to buy it on Blu-Ray. It has a decidedly less literal effect on a small screen, but the setting will help it in other ways. I think it'll be a hit on home video and streaming.

Side note, I was expecting to hate Al. But the movie never lets you give up on him, and by God he made me cry twice.

I think they stole the premise of this movie from "A Ghost Story", if you watched it, you would recall that the "ghost" gets stuck in the house where he lived when he died and he is vaulted in the past and then to the future of people living in that house or on the property of the house. While the overall story is a bit different, the premise is oddly similar.

People always think that the comics to movie pipeline is simple enough since they’re both visual mediums, but sequential storytelling in comics is way too unique to be done proper service in film (and vice versa). The comic “Here” by Richard McGuire is a feat in experimental formalism for comics, but it’s so dry from a narrative standpoint that there’s no way a film adaptation would have the same impact.

People need to let classic works stand on their own instead of half baked attempts at adapting them.

I Like your reviews but I do think this ones a little over critical. I agree with a lot of what you said but I think it really took a big risk in framing with a locked down camera. Yeah it was a little on the nose but the experiment and ambition far outweighs any cliches. Hard not to timestamp scenes Like the 80s one without being obvious as it's a trope now in movies. I was a little more forgiving maybe as my Mum passed from Dementia and that scene was touching. Either way, keep making these great reviews and lots of luck.

Zemeckis is a boomer


It is that simple

There’s an Italian film called The Family directed by Ettore Scola that takes the same premise (sort of) and executes it quite nicely. People should seek that one out instead.

It was the Film Version of Disneys Carousel of Progress 😂😂😬😬

It kind of looks like a worse version of the We Didn’t Start the Fire video.

Have you checked out the French horror movie MADS ?

Despite multiple storylines and things happening within the frame, my attention could not be held for too long.

David here I been a movie buff for over fifty years and I can honestly say I have never seen anything more like this movie. I was born in 1955 so those Hallmark moments you mentioned meant a lot to my childhood, I was nine years old when the Beatles came on Tv in 1964, it was an amazing time. As to the movie I could see people walking out, it’s not a movie for everyone, you really have to understand the big picture of life to understand it. I did find it hard to follow at times. My biggest disappointment was the lighting of the movie. You couldn’t see the expressions of the characters, the movie felt too dark. Perhaps people could wait to see it at home, but worth seeing for some of us. 7 out of ten popcorn boxes from me. See you at the movies.🍿

I liked the movie but then I'm in my seventies.

I just can't watch Tom Hanks anymore. He has spent so much time promoting his extreme left-wing "Pedo-fornia" political nonsense that I just don't buy him as a working class everyman anymore. He's not that good of an actor. I don't care how many awards his co-workers give him.

Idk I love Alan Silvestri's scores. And this one is so 90s nostalgic and lovely. Piano, strings, flute. Sentimental? Sure. I don't care though. It's pretty and he is at least pursuing a melodic theme. So many modern film scores are made with Cubase and sound libraries now. So I'm just thankful that we can still get an actual orchestra in a contemporary score.

I want Bela Tarr to come out of retirement and do a remake

I liked it