This is the first time 2.5 stars is a win! I was dreading Here, Robert Zemeckis’s latest movie pitch. Because, sadly, the Forrest Gump, Back to the Future guy has made some of the worst films of the last 10 years. I fully expected Here to be one of those movies, but, thankfully, it isn’t. It’s merely, ok. And in my book, ok is WAY better then abject disaster.
Compared to the disastrous pitches of the 2010s/2020s for Bobby Z, this is a decent one. Zemeckis puts the camera in one location, and films thousands of years of history in that one spot. Most of the movie is spent with the Young Family and their generations in the house, including Father Al (Paul Bettany) and his wife Rose (Kelly Reilly), and their son Richard (Tom Hanks) and his relationship with high school sweetheart Margaret (Robin Wright). But we also see indigenous people (Dannie McCallum and Joel Oulette), the first homeowners (Michelle Dockery and Gwilym Lee), and the latest homeowners (Nikki Amuka-Bird, Nicholas Pinnock, and Cache Vanderpuye) as “here” changes over the course of years.
Here has a lot of Forrest Gump energy. The movie’s gimmick is meant to show how things change, but there’s something universal in the people that live in these places regardless of time and person. As a technical movie exercise, there’s a lot to like here. The editing gives the movie its dynamism, constantly time shifting in different fun ways, as parts of the frame will change while others slowly catch up almost like you’re in a vortex. The deaging has gotten better too, as only a few times do you feel like you’re watching something really artificial. This helps the audience buy into Here, and the universal themes its going for: birth, death, aging, loss, ambition, etc. The movie would probably be best as a wordless short film, 30 minutes showcasing these themes like a real life version of the Up montage, which the movie does a couple times to very emotional effect.
But going across that many time periods and characters means shortcuts have to be made. As a result, only a couple of the Young family members become characters, and the rest of the 20ish characters are relegated to thematic bullet points. Some time stuff doesn’t work (I didn’t particularly like the Franklin family stuff in the Revolutionary war), and some is borderline offensive (Zemeckis isn’t exactly qualified to dive deep into African-American and Native American culture, let alone what happens to most of the women in this movie, yeesh). But the movie does stir something inside the audience the minute the main house gets built, and we live inside 4-5 generations of families and their lives. I almost wish Zemeckis had called this film Family instead, and revolved it around all the families living in this one location, which he captures the dynamics of to sometimes stirring emotional catharsis.
Capturing a little magic is better than capturing none at all. Will Here represent the path forward to a Zemeckis renaissance? All my instincts say no, but I’m glad he keeps trying. Just please stop using Tom Hanks’s goodwill as your own sir? I don’t want you dragging America’s dad into the next 3-4 dumpster fire movie experiments you’re going to come up with.