'Here's' Another Boring Movie

Robert Zemeckis has created some magnificent films, such as Back to the Future, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Forrest Gump, and Castaway. However, at a certain point in his career, Zemeckis started to stumble. He couldn't stop fumbling around with photo realism animation that looked more like an FMV sequence from a modern-day video game than something real. Zemekis' latest outing, Here, is one of the most forgettable snooze-worthy films I've seen this year. It's a film that has an interesting setup but dreadfully poor execution. Throughout the movie, I wondered why it wasn't just a play instead.

Here is a concept that could be gimmicky. Did I just write could be? It certainly was. The Room in Here is a plot device to further move our characters through the generations that they've owned the house. It's a psychological softball in comparison to films just like it, such as Ghost Story. The only thing is Ghost Story is complicated, letting the audience interpret or absorb the film themselves. Here shouts its themes to the audience as if they have the IQ of a ten-year-old. Even worse, the film was so boring I had trouble maintaining my consciousness during it.

Here is about three generations of families living under the same roof. It's a sentimental movie about nostalgia that's about as meaningful as a cement truck dumping its concrete mix into the ground. It's been a while since I saw a film where I was inspired, knowing the film isn't a full two hours. Giving me mercy at an hour and forty-four minutes. When the film did reach its conclusion, I couldn't help but feel robbed. I watched an entire movie that thinks it's more inventive than it really is. It's merely a play like Doubt or Fences was. The only difference is those had more of an appeal than Here does.

The film has outdated-looking visual effects. At one point, we're in the Jurassic period on a part of land the house will later be built in. Unlike Terrance Malick's The Tree of Life, there's not much to interpret from this. It's a silly attempt at showing what billions of years of life on planet Earth looked like from the perspective of the house. The dinosaurs look terrible. Even if released back when Jurassic Park came out, these Dino effects would look pretty sketchy in comparison to Spielberg's classic. That's only the tip of the visual effects iceberg.

The de-aging of stars Tom Hanks (Richard) and Robin Wright (Margaret) looks awful. It's almost like their faces are floating on some other body. Even worse, whenever Tom Hanks speaks, he has the voice of an older man. Why they couldn't have hired different actors instead is beyond me. It would have saved the production a huge chunk of its budget, but it's trying to Benjamin Button its actors, unable to let them go. The strongest performance in the film comes from Paul Bettany (Al). He carries a great deal of charisma, wit, and charm, while Hanks plays more of a restrained character in comparison to Bettany.

Not all things in the film are awful. There's a great line where Tom Hanks says, "Sometimes you worry so bad things don't happen." To those who've never been to a shrink, that's called catastrophizing. Why waste your life worrying about the terrible things that are going to happen and act on what you can change? That's a beautiful sentiment told from a story based on a 2014 Graphic Novel. If it was based on that, why not make another animated close to live action film again? Or a 2d animation that looks like the visuals ripped straight from the graphic novel? Even if the film had those styles, it wouldn't take away from its sluggish script. Here wasn't the reunion between Forrest Gump and Jenny I've been waiting for.