The Terminal
Eastern Europe in a state of flux. US immigration controls tighter than they have ever been. Paranoia, suspicion and potential threats to security. Doesn’t sound like your average cross-cultural comedy, does it? Directed by Steven Spielberg, this lighter-than-air confection is a delight from beginning to end, with a remarkable deftness of touch which doesn’t leave you feeling smooshy and sentimental but simply satisfied, as is the main character.
Viktor Navorski is a visitor to New York from Krakhozia, a fictional Eastern European country which undergoes a military coup while he is in flight across the Atlantic. By the time he lands, his country is no longer recognised as valid by the UN and all entry visas have been revoked, rendering him an unacceptable anomaly. He can’t be sent home, as he has no home to go to, and he can’t be allowed into the US because his passport is invalid. So airport controller Dixon (Stanley Tucci) allows him to stay in the international transfer lounge until the situation is sorted. Little does either of them know that it will end up being a nine-month sorting-out period…
Tom Hanks went through an amazingly successful period in the mid-nineties with a run of astonishingly bad films - the two prime contenders being the so-PC-it-destroys-its-own-message Philadelphia and the ridiculous Forrest Gump, both of which earned him best actor Oscars, though the Academy only knows how. He has made it his job to play the ‘everyman’ to perfection, and people seem to love him for doing this. I have never understood why. The only roles I have really enjoyed of his are some of his early comedies (a good example being The Money Pit, a so-so movie with a great display of slapstick and comedic timing from Hanks, and of course Big, which really rocketed him into the big time and the crap movies) and films where he steps out of his “loveable nice guy” persona into something with a bit more meat on the role - Road to Perdition, The Green Mile or Catch Me If You Can for example. So I was a little concerned about The Terminal, knowing that it was a ’soft’ Spielberg. But what saves the film from descending into schmaltz is in fact Hanks’ performance, and the fact that he has to portray someone very linguistically limited for most of the proceedings. Navorski is still more or less an everyman, but such a fish-out-of-water too, and Hanks rediscovers some of his comedy talents in the portrayal of this lost guy, stuck in the system.
Sadly, Catherine Zeta-Jones as the love interest can’t match him for watchability in the least bit. Frankly, I doubt if she could match the watchability of a motionless wooden stick. While Navorski makes marvellous efforts to secure his entry into the US, bring together two co-workers in the airport (such a sweet sub-plot), get himself a job, learn English and impress Zeta-Jones’ air hostess, she minces around unconvincingly trying to sort out her own stupidity. You’re fighting a losing battle, woman! You’re played by Catherine Zeta-Jones, therefore doomed to dumbness for eternity! Why she was cast in the role is beyond me, but then I don’t really know why I even know the woman’s name, bearing in mind her “talent”.
The rest of the ensemble around Hanks is well-assembled and keeps the proceedings light, especially the Indian cleaner who delights in causing passengers to slip on his wet patches just to brighten his day, who is also convinced that Navorski is a spy. Tucci as the airport controller has an interesting journey though the movie, and is an effective foil: another everyman, but on the other side of the bureaucratic process. In terms of content there is very little to cause offense, with the exception of a bit of swearing, to my memory. Largely recommended.
I really enjoyed this film - I think Tom Hanks is brilliant.
Comment by Sarah — 16 April, 2006 @ 9:17 pm
Me too, a very touching performance by Hanks - but must agree that Zeta Jones was naff.
Comment by nikki — 17 April, 2006 @ 2:59 pm
“A Steven Spielberg Film” - these four words elevate the movie bearing them to immediate must-see status. Unfortunately, The Terminal wasn’t a hit. When I saw it the cinema was almost empty which was a shame as its a rather underrated effort. I must add a special mention for John Williams wonderfully playful score.
Regarding Tom Hanks, I agree he is superb here, but unlike Mark I don’t have such a problem with his 90s output. OK, Philadelphia was unmitigated flatulence, but I saw Forrest Gump again recently and must grudgingly admit that over the years I have gone from disliking it to thinking its something of a flawed masterpiece. It didn’t deserve to beat The Shawshank Redemption to Best Picture, but it is far better than the cynical side of one thinks, if you watch it refusing to look for the half-baked paranoid political ideas I read into it as a student.
Comment by Simon — 18 April, 2006 @ 9:16 am
Good review, though I think Zeta-Jones was less rubbish, just too ordinary as she always is. I have a problem with “ordinary” actors/actresses such as Jodie Foster and Nicholas Cage for example, and Zeta-Jones is at the more ordinary end of that spectrum.
The film is brilliant, and I would quite possibly list it as action/comedy because it actually makes an airport look an interesting place to be and is very, very funny indeed throughout.
Hanks makes the film great, as it is mostly a one-man story akin to Castaway (which I also thought was brilliant) with a few other characters added to remind you it is based within civilisation, but I would also say that Tucci played a very convincing bad guy. I’ll probably end up buying it on DVD sometime.
Chris
Comment by Chris — 9 May, 2006 @ 1:30 pm