A tangled and troubling journey

Rating: 10/10 (18 January 2006)

Not one to have quite made a classic (though the first "Back to the Future" film and "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?" come close), Robert Zemeckis never makes less than interesting work. (I have a particular weakness/affinity for it). In some senses, "Forrest Gump" may be his magnum opus - if only because it showcases all of Zemeckis' nuances and idiosyncrasies whilst also somewhat disguising and flaunting its own off-beatedness in a fairly linear - albeit curious - narrative. How do you criticise a film like this? For every negative thrown at Gump, I've seen the film produce a reasonable rebuttal in my own mind. It seems to defy criticism altogether. This unique quality of Gump stems from its refusal to completely yield to its conflicting tonalities and messages. Is it satire, drama or something else? Does it favour the American Dream, slander it or alternatively embrace and shy away from it? Does it champion Forrest's virtuosity, outright demean it or look impartially at it? Do these labels and divides exist at all - is the film merely disinterested in these things or maybe trying to suggest that we shouldn't be bothered and stop dealing in labels and monikers? Many questions - few answers.
Hanks' performance embodies the film. It's pleasant, slick and affecting - yet was it really more Oscar worthy (he won, the others didn't) than Gary Sinise's in the same film or Samuel Jackson's in "Pulp Fiction"? Was the film as a whole deserving of "Best Picture"? Are you sick of reading questions? It's all so damn hard to pin this work to one thing. The film offers itself up for criticism in a number of areas - in its flagrant sentimentality, in its gimmicky "Forrest interacting with famous people" sequences, in its vast extravagancies (e.g. any time Forrest runs and inevitably performs a remarkable feat) - but all these things seem woven into a greater fabric that spins and toys with them and its pure protagonist, like the wind spinning and toying with the pure white feather and contriving it to land at his feet, not to mention the viewer, in a knowing and powerful manner. Truly, there is nothing quite like "Forrest Gump" - nor is there anything like Forrest Gump. Perhaps that is at the root of it all. The film is possibly nothing more than a celebration of individuality. What makes it so profound and transcendental is that the individual of Forrest gives us a unique look at varied and turbulent American history, and more broadly, even more varied and turbulent human experience. We should probably be thankful for that.
I'm sorry for the slightly unconventional review, but as I've said and implied all over, it's an unconventional film and needs to be handled as such. We can all look tough picking up broken glass with Kevlar gloves; when the sharp diamond-like edges can't get to our skin so easily. We can all look good destroying a film with sweeping words; when we've "gloved" ourselves away from its smaller details. But how many of us can dispense with the gloves, picking up broken piece after broken piece, constantly risking exposure to the finer qualities of the glass - glass that may cut us? How many of us can dispense with our harsh words, patiently resolving to consider and explore the finer textures of "Forrest Gump" - a film that may be saying nothing of interest and reward our patience by "cutting" us? It's a tough one. This review has been non-committal. So is the film. See it. Feel it. Live it.