Here movie review & film summary (2024) - Movie16

 

Robert Zemeckis’ Here: A Missed Opportunity to Capture the Human Experience

Imagine a sentimental holiday commercial stretched out to feature-length—a glossy montage of love, family, and life’s milestones that ultimately feels as empty as it is pretty. That, in essence, is Robert Zemeckis' Here, a well-intentioned but hollow exploration of humanity. Based on Richard McGuire’s acclaimed 2014 graphic novel, the film attempts to encapsulate the grand tapestry of human history by focusing on a single location over time. However, what could have been a profound meditation on our shared existence is instead a shallow and frustratingly artificial spectacle.

The Concept

At its core, Here centers on a fixed location, spanning from prehistoric times to the far future. Through frames-within-frames, we see this spot evolve—from open land traversed by dinosaurs to a Native American settlement, and eventually, to a home that witnesses generations of families living their lives. While the premise is intriguing, the execution falls short of translating the graphic novel’s static, thought-provoking imagery into a compelling cinematic experience.

The early scenes offer glimpses of history, from Benjamin Franklin’s estranged son passing through the area to a couple in the 1940s discovering a landmark invention. As time progresses, the location becomes the Young family’s home, where post-World War II soldier Al (Paul Bettany) and his wife Rose (Kelly Reilly) raise their children. Their son, Richard (Tom Hanks), eventually moves back in with his wife Margaret (Robin Wright) and their growing family due to financial struggles. Across decades, we observe moments both grand and mundane: births, deaths, arguments, and quiet reflections.

Missed Opportunities

Zemeckis aims to capture a sweeping portrait of life itself, but the film struggles to connect its ambitious themes with emotionally resonant storytelling. Unlike his earlier work, such as Forrest Gump, which balanced sentimentality with sharp social commentary, Here often feels saccharine and unearned. The characters’ experiences, while universal on paper, rarely evoke genuine emotion on screen.

One key issue lies in the film’s fragmented narrative. Just as a scene begins to build emotional weight, it abruptly transitions to another era. While this technique aims to highlight the interconnectedness of human experiences, it instead feels disjointed and shallow. For example, a leaky roof segues awkwardly into a scene of Margaret’s water breaking—an attempt at thematic resonance that lands as heavy-handed.

Representation Without Depth

The film briefly touches on marginalized perspectives, including scenes involving Native Americans and a Black family that occupies the house after the Youngs. Unfortunately, these moments feel tokenistic rather than integral. They hint at deeper societal issues but ultimately serve as fleeting diversions rather than meaningful commentary.

The Visuals

The visual concept of a single, fixed camera angle offers a unique perspective, but it quickly becomes repetitive and stifling. Cinematographer Don Burgess captures some striking imagery, particularly in the earlier, outdoor sequences, but the film’s reliance on computerized de-aging technology undermines its authenticity. While de-aging worked sparingly in films like The Irishman, its constant use in Here creates a distracting, plastic-like effect, especially for Wright’s character.

Performances

The ensemble cast, featuring accomplished actors like Tom Hanks and Robin Wright, delivers performances that are competent but largely uninspired. Hanks, often the heart of Zemeckis’ films, struggles to bring depth to Richard, whose arc of artistic aspirations crushed by practicality feels overly familiar. Wright, saddled with clunky dialogue about the passage of time, fares no better. Bettany and Reilly bring some emotional grounding to the early post-war scenes, but their contributions are overshadowed by the film’s broader flaws.

Interestingly, the film’s most engaging characters appear in a vignette set in the 1940s, featuring a quirky couple (David Flynn and Ophelia Lovibond) whose eccentric energy briefly injects life into the narrative. Unfortunately, their story is abandoned just as it begins to resonate.

A Clumsy Symphony

Zemeckis seems to believe that by throwing every conceivable human emotion into the mix, he can create a symphony of life’s highs and lows. Instead, the result is an overbearing cacophony that lacks subtlety or nuance. Moments that should inspire awe or introspection come off as manipulative and cloying. The film’s heavy-handed use of music, including an on-the-nose needle drop of “Our House,” only amplifies its lack of subtlety.

Find more o IMDB & Rotten Tomatoes & Wikipedia

Conclusion

Despite its lofty ambitions, Here fails to rise above its shortcomings. Zemeckis’ fixation on technological gimmicks and sentimentality undermines what could have been a profound exploration of the human condition. Instead of celebrating life’s complexity, the film offers a shallow imitation of its beauty.

For all its attempts to evoke awe and wonder, Here ultimately feels like a missed opportunity—a sentimentalized journey through time that leaves little lasting impact. While Zemeckis has proven his skill in the past, this film highlights the dangers of prioritizing concept over substance.

Verdict: Here offers fleeting moments of beauty but ultimately falls flat, failing to capture the emotional depth of its source material.