Starts off great... ends up languishing near mediocrity.

Steven Spielberg's 'The Terminal' begins with a nifty premise, rife with possibilities, but he allows it to drift away into the schmaltzy realm of feel-good comedy and cheesy romance. The first half of the film is often intriguing and consistently amusing in its originality. Based loosely on the true story of a man who was forced to live at the Charles de Gaulle International airport in Paris, this film works best when it focuses on the specific details of Victor Navorsky's (Hanks) day-to-day life surviving in the airport lounge. It is a fascinating predicament to have someone caught in limbo, not allowed to enter the United States and unable to return to his home country (the fictional Krakozhia) which doesn't exist anymore. But the film falls apart after it has exhausted the original premise and delves into romantic and comedic subplots which fail on virtually every level.

The film manages to remain barely recommendable because of a laudable performance turned in by Tom Hanks. He is fantastic as Victor Navorsky, the everyman who barely understands the language and will do anything to abide by the rules laid out by the head of airport security, Frank Dixon (Tucci). Victor is a good man who carries around a secretive can of peanuts whose contents remain a mystery for the bulk of the film. He doesn't have any money but he manages to cope by using some very ingenious methods. It is fun watching him navigate the airport, making his life as comfortable as can be given the circumstances.

The surrounding characters, however, are the downfall of the movie. Tucci is asked to play Dixon as a one dimensional caricature, solely obsessed with making Victor's life a living hell. There is no nuance or humanity in the role and it feels like a bad-guy character from a Jean Claude Van Damme action movie.

Catherine Zeta Jones plays a highly unlikable love interest for Victor. She is a flight attendant and the other woman in a love triangle with a married man. She can't seem to break away from the destructive situation. At no point did I ever really buy into Victor's emotional attraction to her. Perhaps his interest is based solely on sexual attraction, which would be understandable given Zeta Jones' legendary beauty. But if that is all there is, it is hardly worthy material for a movie romance.

There are other minor subplots involving some of the airport employees, including a grossly unrealistic and thinly explored romance between an INS agent and a food services driver. You won't believe a moment of that cheesy tale. There are also a number of appearances made by an Indian janitor that are meant for comic relief. The first time you see him is mildly amusing. The second time induces a minor chuckle. The 37th time you see him will make you want to stand up and throw your popcorn at the screen. Spielberg overuses this mediocre character gag beyond belief.

Like I said, the only time this film is successful is when Hanks dominates the action. He lifts this film from cheesy schmaltz to passable entertainment with a pleasant message. And, amazingly, he manages to do this despite the efforts of Spielberg whose typically recognizable directorial signature is completely missing from this film.

Spielberg goes for cutesy all too often in this movie. It is enough to make an experienced filmgoer roll his eyes and cringe. Usually, Spielberg manages to be one of the stars of his own films. 'The Terminal' feels like it could have been directed by Gary Marshall or Nora Ephron. I half expected a Meg Ryan or Kate Hudson type to come along and fall in love with Victor at the end.

This isn't a bad film, but it is disappointing considering the vast talent involved. Half of the film is meritorious of a B+... the other half deserves a D+. Hence, I give it my most average grade of C+ as it teeters between interesting character study and cornball romantic comedy. 'The Terminal' is best suited for television viewing rather than costly trip to the theatre. And that is something I did not ever expect to say about a Steven Spielberg film.

© Written by TC Candler

How We Rated This Film TC Candler - C+ Richard Propes - B- Jacob Hall - C+

Richard Propes' Comment

This is not a bad film, much thanks to the conviction and authentic performance by Tom Hanks. Yet, it didn't nearly reach its potential. It feels like it wants to be a feel good movie...yet, there's enough harshness in it that the good feeling gets dulled. It feels like it wants to be a moral fable, but this morality gets confused and muddled. It feels like it wants to be about this man, Viktor Navorski...yet, VERY unwisely, the film goes off in other directions and we don't learn nearly enough about Navorski. It feels like it wants to be a truly great movie, however, it's not...sadly, it's not. For the performance of Tom Hanks alone, I recommend this film but be aware you will finish watching the film and start shaking your head and thinking about what could have been.

 Jacob Hall's Comment

This is sentimental, light, and pointless junk. But it's well made, well-intended, well acted junk. Maybe if you are looking for something light, it may be suitable, but as for me: I expect quality from the talent of this film.