I thought it missed, despite Tom Hanks

Rating: Null/10 (14 January 2002)

I was sure that I'd like this picture because it had a Robinson Crusoe feel to it, and because I love Tom Hanks. Sad to say, it didn't do much for me. Part of the reason has already been said by others, but in addition to those comments [the last third of the movie being not very engaging, the other characters being too flat, etc] I had a bigger problem. There were two major actions for which I didn't understand the motivation [more later] and [POSSIBLE SPOILER!] I felt gypped by having 4 years cut out of the middle. I was really getting involved with the character, his frustrations, the coping-methods he was discovering, etc. and then he is replaced by a bearded stranger who can do anything, preceded by the words "four years later". His coming to terms with his aloneness in battling the semi-hostile elements was the best part of the film. So why did the director fast-forward the film to hurry to an unsatisfactory conclusion? But my big objection was that two pivotal actions were never explained. Why did he leave one package unopened, how did he choose that particular one, and how did it save his life? I'm not normally obtuse, but I could only guess at the reason. I would have appreciated a little more of a hint. The other enigma was the ending. There is a verbal exchange between Tom and the person to whose house he has just left the package, and they have this brief verbal exchange delivered like lines from King Lear, full of portent. Was that supposed to be a metaphor for something I didn't get? This movie left a lot to be desired -- and explained.