Robert Zemeckis Just Wants to Move You

As a film enthusiast who has spent countless hours immersed in the rich tapestry of cinematic history, I find myself deeply moved by Robert Zemeckis‘ latest masterpiece, “Here”. It resonates with me on a profound level, echoing my own musings on time and its fleeting nature.

2024’s film “Here,” directed by Robert Zemeckis, stands out as the least trendy movie of the year, and that’s what makes it special. In an era where many claim to be cinephiles yet primarily stream movies at home, “Here” is a visual spectacle that begs for a theater experience. This film showcases Zemeckis’ innovative and self-assured direction, as his recent releases have either underperformed at the box office or vanished without a trace. The movie’s unapologetic aim to evoke emotions could potentially be criticized as sentimental, with some early reviews already labeling it thus. However, it’s a film that appeals to a wide range of audiences, from young teenagers to elderly individuals, making it an ideal choice for a family outing on a Sunday or holiday. The cast includes the talented duo Tom Hanks and Robin Wright, who previously collaborated with Zemeckis in the critically acclaimed 1994 film “Forrest Gump.

In 2024, these advantages are almost disadvantages, remnants of aspects we no longer value in films. However, Zemeckis – who, over a career spanning four decades, has had some significant successes and a few notable flops – remains hopeful that viewers will discover Here. This isn’t merely because he is confident in the project, but because he recognizes it’s surprising it was even produced. “It contradicts everything happening in the corporate world,” he says during a Zoom call from LA, “regarding whoever decides what movies should be made.” Perhaps due to his previous film, 2018’s sensitive, creative, and slightly peculiar Welcome to Marwen, failing to connect with audiences, he recognizes a rare occurrence. “In reality,” he admits, “I couldn’t make any of the films I made today.” Why? Because, he says with a matter-of-fact calmness, “they’re too original.

In a somewhat humble yet assertive manner, one might say that this could be perceived as arrogance. However, for an individual who has proven expertise in captivating movie audiences within a traditional theater setting – such as with Forrest Gump, Back to the Future and its sequels, Cast Away, and Who Framed Roger Rabbit – it’s more about acknowledging the current state of cinema. Today, most people watch movies alone, which is a significant concern for this individual. It’s easy to overlook the shared experience of laughing with a larger audience or being swept up in a wave of emotion alongside fellow viewers. Despite our claims of wanting something unique, do we truly mean it? If so, the abundance of content based on pre-existing intellectual properties means that finding originality might be challenging.

How likely is it for a film such as “Here” to succeed in a world such as this? Zemeckis seems particularly thankful for the opportunity to discover its potential.

Drawing inspiration from Richard McGuire’s 2014 graphic novel “Here,” which stands out for its innovative visual approach, the film shares an unparalleled technical structure compared to any movie ever produced. Unlike traditional cinema, the camera remains stationary, reminiscent of silent-era films. However, this immobility in “Here” feels refreshing and contemporary due to the dynamic movement and transformation within the frame, not just across days, years, and decades, but through epochs.

As soon as Zemeckis got his hands on McGuire’s book, he envisioned it as a film. However, achieving his desired outcome wasn’t straightforward, not even for a director renowned for mastering special effects. “When I began gathering my team and explained the style of the movie I intended to create, everyone responded with ‘That shouldn’t be an issue.’ And surprisingly, it turned out to be one of our most challenging productions,” Zemeckis recalls, referring to it as a complex puzzle.

Tucked within the enigma lies the core narrative of the story. The postwar pair, Al and Rose, portrayed by Paul Bettany and Kelly Reilly, have a son named Richard, whom Tom Hanks brings to life from his teenage years to old age. During high school, Richard encounters and falls in love with Margaret, played by Robin Wright. She becomes pregnant, they marry, and though they initially reside with Al and Rose, waiting for a place of their own, this never materializes. The family lives together, not always harmoniously. They experience births, deaths, significant health issues, and marital discord. Wright and Hanks provide the emotional backbone of the film, and to portray the younger and older versions of their characters, digital enhancement technology is utilized for their faces and bodies.

In a somewhat disconcerting fashion, the de-aged portrayals of Hanks and Wright initially leave one feeling bewildered, but director Zemeckis, who has been advocating for performance-capture and advanced digital technologies since films like “The Polar Express” (2004) and “Beowulf” (2007), bristles at the notion that audiences may perceive Hanks and Wright’s appearances as “uncanny.” He despises that term. According to him, this response could only stem from viewers knowing they’re watching a cinematic illusion. He clarifies that the effect is merely digital makeup; he considers the outcome flawless and convincing, considering how far de-aging technology has progressed since Martin Scorsese employed it in “The Irishman,” released in 2019. The de-aging in this film was achieved using an AI technology called Metaphysic Live.

When asked if some viewers might find the perfection in the film unsettling, Zemeckis admits that it may require a bit of creative thinking. “It’s like solving an intellectual puzzle,” he explains. “Viewers might think, ‘How can this be? They don’t look their actual age.'” However, he notes that test audiences quickly got past it. “They soon adapted to it.” Although he acknowledges that misused AI could threaten actors’ careers, he believes the technology used in Here is justified from an artistic perspective. “AI is a broad term,” he clarifies. “What I’m doing is simply using advanced computers for digital makeup. I’m not creating any sort of avatar or anything.

In conclusion, Zemeckis could very well be correct that the reunion of a “youthful” Hanks and Wright, after three decades apart, might be charming enough to keep viewers engaged. Nevertheless, not even the classic film Forrest Gump is exempt from the discerning eyes of audiences who believe they’re too refined for it. For each person who fondly recalls the movie with affection, there’s another who criticizes it as overly sentimental. It appears that the only aspect of the film the critics remember is the saccharine quote about life being like a box of chocolates; they disregard its sophisticated craftsmanship and acting, as well as its subtle humor—which one would expect to be evident in a tale about an innocent trying to comprehend 20th-century history—completely.

Robert Zemeckis believes that contemporary viewers, particularly, struggle with understanding the irony in films like “Forrest Gump” because they tend to watch such movies individually and fail to grasp the film’s underlying irony. He suggests they interpret it literally without recognizing its deeper meaning. Zemeckis laments that this appreciation for irony, which he sees as essential in art and life, is gradually fading away. However, there’s a silver lining. Zemeckis’ darkly humorous film “Death Becomes Her,” initially considered a flop, has found new appeal among younger audiences. Additionally, both “Death Becomes Her” and “Back to the Future” have been adapted into Broadway musicals, demonstrating that their essence remains relevant.

Our parents may fall ill or grow old, requiring our care. Babies arrive unexpectedly, yet we find a way to accommodate them. Loved ones leave us, but life continues. At some point, we all ponder the same question: Where did the time go?

The dazzling construction of Here gets at the unanswerability of that question. There’s something searching and wistful about this movie; it couldn’t have been made by a young person. In adapting McGuire’s book, Zemeckis worked with his frequent collaborator (and Forrest Gump screenwriter) Eric Roth, and though the story stretches across centuries, it’s particularly affecting in the way it captures life in mid- to late-20th-century America. When Al brings out his home-movie camera, circa 1960, the family squints into the glare of the light bar necessary for shooting indoors: this is how midcentury parents captured our happiest moments, by nearly blinding us. The family TV in the corner hits the high points of each era (the Beatles on The Ed Sullivan Show) or at least nods at the weird stuff that gets stuck in our brains (the opening sequence of CHiPs).

Films dealing with profound human emotions may be labeled as overly emotional or sentimental. Zemeckis acknowledges this potential criticism. “I believe those who label something as ‘sentimental’ are merely expressing their discomfort with being moved. They fear the emotion and react defensively.” Watching movies individually, without experiencing the collective emotional response, has not served us well. Perhaps it’s time we re-embrace feelings that make us uncomfortable, together, before they disappear entirely.

Read More

• GBP EUR PREDICTION
• PROTEO/USD
• ARIX/USD
• SYNT/USD
• ELF PREDICTION. ELF cryptocurrency
• GARI/USD
• BLENDR/USD
• Redlands review: Stones drugs bust saga is a GAS, GAS, GAS
• ETH PREDICTION. ETH cryptocurrency
• AMP PREDICTION. AMP cryptocurrency

2024-11-01 19:06