It’s a struggle to watch actors I know are good starring in a film that clearly isn’t. Such is the case with Robert Zemeckis’ Here. It’s an hour and 45 minutes of Tom Hanks, Robin Wright, Paul Bettany and more acting in a way that can’t be taken seriously and almost feels pretend. The de-aging is jarring and noticeable, especially when we have to hear Hanks’ 68-year-old voice come out of what’s supposed to be an 18-year-old’s mouth, and the film is poorly lit. It’s a film so soulless I questioned the point of it.

Director Robert Zemeckis Release Date November 15, 2024 Studio(s) MiraMax , Playtone , ImageMovers Distributor(s) TriStar Pictures Writers Eric Roth , Robert Zemeckis Runtime 104 Minutes Expand

Here’s premise is simple: it’s the story of a single house, its history, and the people who have lived inside or on its land. That includes Richard (Hanks) and his family — parents Al (Bettany) and Rose (Kelly Reilly) and wife Margaret (Wright). The film means well and I could see what Zemeckis was trying to do. There are even parts of the film that work and suggest the potential for something truly meaningful and poignant, but it’s in the half-baked and egregious execution that Here stumbles and falls, taking its entire cast and our goodwill with it.

Here’s Story Is All Over The Place

To say I was completely taken out of the movie after its opening included dinosaurs and the ice age briefly would be an understatement. Things don’t get better after that, unfortunately. The script, by Eric Roth and Zemeckis, who adapted it from the graphic novel by Richard McGuire, is full of flat and poorly delivered dialogue. Moments that are meant to be taken seriously — like a friend of Al and Rose who dies of a heart attack after getting up from the couch and dramatically walks a couple of steps before falling over face first — are unintentionally funny.

Here
wants us to
feel
something while watching these paper-thin characters go about their lives in a house that means nothing to us without doing the work to get us there.

Sentimental, and even potentially deep, moments aren’t given enough room to breathe, as the film moves quickly from one scene to the next and from one period to another without much thought to fluidity and cohesiveness. Most of the characters, especially the characters of color, have barely-there stories, and there are even a few scenes featuring Benjamin Franklin’s illegitimate son, William, which are farcical at best and cringeworthy at worst.

There’s a forced sense of emotion throughout. Here wants us to feel something while watching these paper-thin characters go about their lives in a house that means nothing to us without doing the work to get us there. I felt absolutely nothing other than boredom and an emptiness the film itself couldn’t shake. There are also too many characters and we’re overwhelmed with following each of them through to the end.

Related Time Cut Review: Netflix’s Poor Excuse For A Slasher Should’ve Followed Its Dramatic Instincts Both the slasher and time-travel portions of Time Cut are defined by laziness, but there’s one great idea in it I can’t stop thinking about.

Characters die (on and off-screen) at various points throughout the film and Zemeckis’ static camera angles desperately ask us to be moved, to understand what these people are going through, and to relate to them in some way. All you’ll end up feeling, however, is a cold detachment and confusion as to why this was made. I haven’t read the graphic novel, but surely it must be better than this spectacular slog of a film.

Even Here’s Technical Elements Don’t Work

Aside from the questionable line delivery and occasionally painful acting moments, Here isn’t even good on a technical level. The CGI animals look obviously fake, the faces of the de-aged actors are as distracting as a Snapchat filter, and the transitions — announced whenever a white outline, usually in the form of a square or rectangle featuring a different era — get old fast. The lighting is also garish, as though to underscore how saccharine and heartwarming it’s supposed to be, but its approach and tone are more like a commercial (product placement included) or a TV pilot gone wrong.

It’s slow going and there is never anything intriguing enough about the story or characters to hold our attention. Zemeckis is trying something experimental and unique here, but that doesn’t translate to a good or emotional story. The film is more off-putting than anything, as though it belongs to a different era while simultaneously feeling out of time and in its own bubble. It all makes for a strange, somewhat discombobulating viewing experience that you’re better off not having.

Here is now playing in theaters. The film is 104 minutes long and rated PG-13 for thematic material, some suggestive material, brief strong language and smoking.

3/10 A young couple expecting their first child takes in the husband’s estranged, ailing mother. Set in a single room, the story spans multiple generations, capturing moments of love, loss, and everyday life in the same space. Directed by Robert Zemeckis and featuring performances by Tom Hanks, Robin Wright, and Paul Bettany, the film uses groundbreaking technology to de-age actors and presents a unique, stationary camera perspective throughout its runtime.