Mediocre story propped up by outstanding Hanks performance

Rating: 7/10 (17 July 2001)

The last time Tom Hanks teamed up with director Robert Zemeckis the result was `Forrest Gump'. I can safely say this is no `Forrest Gump'. FG was a terrific story, further enhanced by outstanding acting. This is a decent story propped up by phenomenal acting.
The initial premise was intriguing. A Fedex employee is stranded on a deserted island and is forced to use his ingenuity to survive. At first, it is fascinating watching Chuck (Tom Hanks) adapt to his stark environment. However, after about an hour of screen time devoted solely to his island exploits, the film begged for a cut to somewhere else. There were numerous themes that were running simultaneous to his island struggles. There was the search and rescue, and Kelly's (Helen Hunt) coming to terms with his loss to mention the two most obvious themes that were completely neglected.
Instead, Zemeckis decided that we should have all Tom all the time, which despite his gargantuan talent and over the top performance, became just a bit more Tom than I could stand. Zemeckis did a superb job with the photography and induced one of Hanks best performances. Unfortunately, the film became one-dimensional and began to bog down. The ending brought no relief from the drudgery, leaving viewers adrift without the emotional release necessary to bring the story to closure.
Tom Hanks was in top form. He deservedly was nominated for yet another best actor award by the Academy (his fifth). It seems everywhere I turn lately I see Helen Hunt. She made four films in 2000 and I have seen them all in the last two months. This was one of her better performances of the year, though the part was small.
The film grossed over $200 million, which shows that for most people just being able to see Tom Hanks is enough. I rated it 7/10. The one-dimensional story and flat ending stifled my enthusiasm despite a tour de force performance by Hanks.