Tom Hanks & Robin Wright’s Reunion Receives Surprising Rotten Tomatoes Score

Tom Hanks & Robin Wright's Reunion Receives Surprising Rotten Tomatoes Score

As a movie enthusiast with over three decades of cinematic adventures under my belt, I must confess that I’ve seen my fair share of films that left me scratching my head. The latest addition to this peculiar club seems to be Robert Zemeckis’ ambitious project, “Here.” With a Rotten Tomatoes score that resembles a dismal weather forecast, it’s safe to say that the critics aren’t exactly enamored with this Forrest Gump reunion.


The eagerly anticipated “reunion” of Robin Wright and Robert Zemeckis for the movie “Forrest Gump,” unfortunately, isn’t winning praise from critics. This is evident in its dismal Rotten Tomatoes score. The puzzling choice to film the movie using a single-frame format (distinct from a single-shot sequence) has led to a low Tomatometer rating of just 33%, based on 33 reviews currently on RT. MovieWeb’s Will Sayre describes it as “a strange, daring film that falls short.” That’s being generous.

In his review for Newsday, Rafer Guzman praises director Robert Zemeckis for attempting to grapple with big ideas – the hazy past, the uncertain present, and the eerie sensation of simply existing. Contrastingly, Chris Evangelista from SlashFilm criticizes the recent collaboration between Tom Hanks, Wright, and Zemeckis, labeling it as insincere or inauthentic.

After applying all the digital de-aging techniques, Here exudes a strongly artificial or insincere vibe instead.

Derek Smith of Slant Magazine gives Here one of its worst scores at 1.5 out of 4 stars and writes:

This passage could be rephrased as follows: “The content here is made up of many moments, some small and others large, but it seems to lack seriousness. Instead, it primarily aims to evoke emotion by providing symbols that we can associate with our own feelings or experiences.

Here Could Be Headed for a Heartbreak

In a potential setback for director Robert Zemeckis’ recent project, the de-aging and single-frame method may have proven detrimental. Fortunately, for Tom Hanks and Robin Wright’s reunion, the film is opening on a weekend that lacks major fall blockbusters, offering some hope it could compete with new releases such as “Juror #2” and the re-release of “Godzilla Minus One.” However, it’s undeniable that the critical reviews aren’t helping its cause. As Odie Henderson from the Boston Globe puts it:

Combine a wide performance range and a predictable script with a rigid filming style, and the result feels more like an unfunny sitcom or, even less appealing, an amateur school play where fifth-graders attempted to replicate Eugene O’Neill’s work and ‘Death of a Salesman.’

Mashable’s Kristy Puchko offers a modicum of praise, yet not enough to prevent her from assigning a “splat” rating on Rotten Tomatoes. In her words, “Here is an attempt at unique storytelling and creative framing that falls flat.” Nevertheless, she admires the director’s audacity for attempting such a venture, even with the film’s flaws. “Zemeckis’ passion and emotional depth shine through, despite the movie’s imperfections,” Puchko notes. Meanwhile, TheWrap’s William Bibbiani criticizes the film again, likening it to an unrefined dinner theater performance.

Ryan Lattanzio from IndieWire provides an uncommon rating that isn’t poor. In his review of the movie, he states, “If you’ve ever pondered about the previous inhabitants while going through or living in a house, this film will strike a chord with you.” However, if you don’t have any curiosity, then there’s nothing in it for you ultimately.

Beginning on November 1, “Here” will be screening in cinemas. If you’re undecided about whether to catch Hanks, Wright, and Zemeckis’ joint project on the big screen, take a look at MovieWeb’s comprehensive review of “Here.” The review suggests that this one-of-a-kind exploration into lifespan storytelling across frames generates a blend of positive and negative outcomes. In the end, the reviewer, Will Sayre, awarded it 3 out of 5 stars (equivalent to 6 out of 10). So perhaps it’s not as terrible as some might think?

Read More

Sorry. No data so far.

2024-10-30 15:01