I so look forward to the day when Tom Hanks no longer picks roles where he is a symbol, a myth, a metaphor, a representation of something else, a stand-in for an idea or a concept, a comment-on-the-American-personality, a comment-on-humanity, an expansion on the theme of man-vs.-himself, a role-model, or an archetype.
I look forward to the day when he plays a regular old guy again. Just your regular Joe who has some shit happen to him. Who reacts like a regular guy. Who has bad days, but without it meaning some big thing for the human race. Who gets cranky, who has sex, who plays with his kids, who has a normal life. Who is not burdened with having to be an archetype or a symbol of the effervescent human spirit.
Tom Hanks is way too far into the stratosphere of his own celebrity status right now. This is not a criticism – it happens to people. Actors who become that huge have to fight against it. Cary Grant went through it. Marlon Brando consciously rejected being archetypal. He eventually rejected having a career! But Tom Hanks’ career now seems to be commenting solely on the fact that he is a massive star. Which is a bit inevitable. You see it happen all the time with people (talented people, I mean) who reach that level of stardom.
But I am now tired of Hanks playing archetypes and symbols and Steven Spielberg’s alter ego. Don’t get me wrong. He’s always good.
I just miss seeing him play an actual human being.
Yeah, but I still miss Wilson.
Heh.
One of the most shameless examples of product placement I think I’ve ever seen!
Again, I pretty much enjoyed him in all those roles (except for Forrest Gump which annoyed me enormously. I’m still annoyed, and I saw that stupid movie years ago).
I recently re-watched Sleepless in Seattle and realized I had forgotten how great he is, how charming, how FUNNY when he’s just playing a regular old guy.
I mean, I’m happy he’s had so much success – and the whole Lady-Killers thing (which was a failure) may have been his way of trying to crack that celebrity glitter which is now around his career.
This is probably opening a can of worms, but…what was your problem with Forrest Gump?
I thought he was pretty good, kind of quirky, in Catch Me If You Can.
heh heh heh Briefly:
— I thought it glorified being stupid. We were supposed to think he was great and wise, but I just think he was stupid.
— “Life’s a box of chocolates”. THAT’S HIS WORDS OF WISDOM? Sorry, but the guy is a halfwit. I don’t see him as wise. And I don’t want to look at him as the epitome of the American dream or spirit or the 20th century, or whatever the heck he was supposed to be.
— He just happened to be in the right place at the right time. That’s it. He didn’t do anything special, or extraordinary. I thought it was a self-conscious plot device, moving him from era to era … without him doing a damn thing to deserve it.
I literally could not understand why so many people flipped over this movie. It was one of those moments when I sat in the movie theatre, thinking: “Wow. I am completely out of sync. I think this sucks, and I’m actually a little bit offended by it, too.” heh heh
Yeah – I liked that movie a lot too, Emily.
I don’t think Forrest Gump glorified being stupid, so much as the point was that he was too stupid to realize he can’t, which helped him succeed where others might not have taken the chance for recognizing obstacles.
I didn’t think he was stupid, either. I thought he was simple and innocent. I don’t intend to defend the film. I liked parts of it a lot, but I thought the whole running back and forth across the country section was forced and unnecessary, and it ruined the rhythm of the movie. While not the brightest bulb in the box, Forest was open, trusting, loyal, loving, devoted to his friends and family, inarguably decent, responsible, brave—need I go on? Those aren’t entirely negative attributes. I think people responded to a character with a core of decency who remained positive in spite of obstacles that might have ruined a smarter, but lesser, man.
I loved Hanks films where he just plays some doofy guy, like Splash, The Money Pit (one of my favorites), Big, to name a few. Simple story lines, but so enjoyable. Catch Me If You Can was a very entertaining movie, I didn’t know what to expect when we went to the theater to see it, but I was very happy with what I saw.
Well, like I said, I was way out of sync in my response to it. Forrest himself knew who he was (when he says to Robin Wright at the end, looking at his son): “Is he smart … or is he like …” and then wells up. The best moment in the movie.
I just didn’t like the mythic element to the movie – that he was supposed to be some big symbol. I didn’t buy it.
But I was the only person in the nation who felt that way, obviously!
The last thing I really, truly liked Tom Hanks in was Philadelphia. After that, I just got sick of him.
Sheila, I COMPLETELY agree with your assessment of Forrest Gump. I couldn’t stand it. One of my film professors also couldn’t stand it, and it sparked an ugly three-hour class debate. I realized that people who loved that movie REALLY loved it. Same for people who really hated it.
I too loathed Forrest Gump. I used to really enjoy Tom Hanks but after his success in Philadelphia, I grew tired of him. Something about him changed. He was also EVERYWHERE. Part of it wasn’t his fault because the entertainment shows and magazines practically canonized the guy. I’m just surprised that he didn’t suffer the usual trashing after the monumental build up. Is it wrong that I’m disappointed that it hasn’t happened?
When Tom Hanks came to my school and did a seminar, he talked about those couple of years where he was nominated for Oscars just for crossing the damn street. He said, “Nothing can prepare you for that kind of attention, and nothing should. It is unnatural. In every way.”
I really like Tom Hanks. I’m a Bosom Buddies fanatic from way back. I knew him when!!
I think the inevitable trashing didn’t occur with him because all that success never seemed to go to his head. Success came to him (at least that level of it) relatively late … so he seemed to take it more in stride than other younger stars. He never seemed obnoxious, or full of himself. At least he never seemed so to me.
Drop by Blockbuster and pick up Bachelor Party.
hahahahaha Val!!
I LOVE Bachelor Party! heh heh heh
That party scene is like one of those huge complicated crowded pictures out of Mad magazine. You keep seeing these little weird things going on in the corners of the screen …
It’s not as good as the party scene in 16 Candles but it’s up there!!
I think what I enjoyed the most about The Lady Killers is that Hanks actually seemed to be enjoying himself for a change. He had that quality in the “old days,” but it has been missing of late. Hopefully his over-the-top, scenery-chewing performance in The Lady Killers will mark a re-birth.
Two things about Gump.
First, everyone told him he was stupid his entire life, if they weren’t telling him how dumb he was they were taking advantage of his lack of wits. He didn’t do anything exciting or extraordinary, he was just an everyman who cared about others more than himself. Jenny crapped on that guy his entire life, even as far as compromising his health in her attempts to salvage the mess that was her own life. He took everyone in regardless of how they treated him.
Two, the movie sucks compared to the book. It is highly recommended reading.
Oh, and I’ve seen Forrest Gump exactly once and plan to take that statistic to the grave. For me, Jenny was the killer. Love Robin Wright, hated Jenny. I literally had to suppress the urge to yell “jump already!” at one point in the film.
And speaking of the classic, “fun” films: Volunteers STILL cracks me up.
CJ, Believe me, all of my friends who thought it was so fantastic told me time and again what I was missing. I can see their points, but I didn’t like it anyway. I understand that I am in a minute percentile. I don’t mean it as an insult to those who like it – so please don’t take it that way. I just found it to be condescending.
My grandmother fell asleep when we took her to Star Wars. We, all the kids, COULD NOT BELIEVE IT – but there you have it. Wasn’t her cuppa tea.
No offense taken. Not over a movie, if you insult my dog though we could have a problem…
heh heh heh. Never!!
Best Hanks movie: Joe vs the Volcano. Loved it. Totally underrated.
Joe vs. the Volcano is indeed a gem. Written by one of my favorite contemporary playwrights … mr. John Patrick Shanley.
Meg Ryan saying in that monotone voice, “I have no response to that” makes me laugh every time I see it!!
She was great in that, too. Why oh why did she go under the knife?????
Meg Ryan went under the knife? Why would someone that gorgeous do something like that?
I’m a fan of ‘The Man with One Red Shoe’. It had a lot of silent humor, and great skit interaction.
“I have to pee…”
That, along with The Money Pit, and Splash are my favorite comedies that he did.
‘Nothing in Common’ is a great film in my opinion, because I had no idea that it was a drama until I literally felt the pain in my stomach.
His most recent works make me feel like I’m watching an old friend moving into a good job that they deserve.
I do relate more to the younger Tom Hanks, mainly because he did so terribly well by just being in a room, and functioning. You didn’t have to hear any dialogue, you could just watch him, much like one watches their cat sneak up on a cricket. I don’t think that sort of thing is gone within him, I just acknowledge that he did it well. He inspires me in some of my work in that way; becoming that person that you notice before you go back to your work, or press the call button on the elevator, or while you’re waiting for a bus.
‘Cast Away’ demonstrated a lot of that skill. I’d like to see more. I almost saw some of that in ‘Road to Perdition’ in a scene involving an envelope in a nightclub, but I agree with Red, a lot of his work nowadays is too symbolic.
If you look at Meg Ryan’s blown-up lips you can see that she is a little collagen-happy right now. Maybe she did it to add another 10 years to her “I’m young and cute and a romantic lead” career.
Anyone see In the Cut? Very disturbing movie. Good, though. Mark Ruffalo is incredible in it.
wutzizname:
A very nice analysis. I agree. He never “did too much”. All he had to do was just stand there and listen (just!! like that’s so easy!) – and he was interesting to watch.
I’ve been reading all this stuff about Cary Grant recently (surprise surprise) and this one writer talks about how early in his career, when the “Cary Grant persona” hadn’t been solidified, he had a lot more freedom. Later on (like in Affair to Remember, To Catch a Thief) – the roles he played HAD to comment on the fact that it was Cary Grant, huge star, who was playing them. These are still excellent movies – but you can’t get away from the fact that the guy was a huge star.
Same with Tom Hanks. I’m sure Mr. Hanks will be around forever, and his career will go through many incarnations.
I anxiously awaitng someone to greenlight Bosom Buddies: The Motion Picture.
Chiming in a bit late, I was glad to see Tom do Ladykillers, for the reason mentioned above. He looked like he was just out there having fun.
He’s a subtle, physical comedian. Actually, one of the best we have. He shows it best in Big, but you can see a lot of the same in movies like Bachelor Party, Splash and even Volunteers.
He knows how to move his person around on the movie screen to maximize comedic affect.
It’s bugged me to see all the drama from him over the past decade. Because he’s got a gift for comedy that we the viewer haven’t gotten to see much. It comes naturally to him, and like a lot of people to whom things come naturally, it’s taken for granted.
i could only watch the first few minutes of gump before i turned it off. i thought it was the stupidest thing i’d ever seen.
count me in with those who just didn’t “get” Forrest Gump. I had people explain to me why it was so great and still – I just didn’t “get” it, it wasn’t a meaningful life-changing experience (which is what some of my friends who loved the movie declared it to be).
I will make the observation that most of the people I talked to who went all breathless about the movie were members of the Boomer generation, and I’m a member of “generation X,” so maybe I’m just too cynical and television-hardened to appreciate The Wonder that is Gump.
But I kinda think that’s not it.
i’ve never been able to figure out where i belong generationally. born in 64 puts me sort of post-boom and certainly pre-x.
Red, did you see “Terminal”? What did you think of him in that – playing a foreigner who barely knows the language?
I’m not sure what roles specifically (besides Gump) that he plays “archetypes” or “concepts”?
Barry – No, I didn’t see Terminal. I was afraid it was going to be another symbolic performance. Should I see it?
To me, it was the one-three punch of Forrest Gump, Castaway and Saving Private Ryan which got to me.
I am not saying he wasn’t effective in those parts. But by the time he said, “Earn it” inSaving Private Ryan, I had officially had it. I rolled my eyes when he said that line. And he said it well!! But to me, his acting had gotten very self-important, and message-y.
All of these roles were, in some way, symbolic – they were all “big message” roles. He was playing a THEME, as opposed to a character.
Which is fine, but I miss the Tom Hanks of Splash and Sleepless in Seattle.
Now there are exceptions – LadyKillers, Catch me if you can … But these weren’t huge hits, so obviously Hanks is now being REWARDED for being a symbol of American life, the American spirit, the human spirit, whatever.
Oh, and please remember. This is just my opinion. I know I sound certain, but it’s just an opinion. :)