Shawshank without the redemption

Rating: 3/10 (21 June 2004)

The Terminal starts out with a shaky premise and proceeds to get shakier and shakier as it goes on (and on and on). It seemed to me like Spielberg was counting on Tom Hanks to be so engrossing that nobody would notice how stupid the movie is. The good news: Hanks is great, completely at one with his character and thoroughly believable throughout.
The bad news: The film really begins to go seriously downhill when -=- SPOILER ALERT -=- Stanley Tucci's character is outsmarted by Hanks (there's medicine and a non-existent goat involved) and from here, the film starts turning into a third-rate rehash of the superb movie The Shawshank Redemption, with Tucci's character becoming increasingly angered by Hanks, to the point of trying to sabotage him at every turn (just like the sadistic warden did to Tim Robbins in Shawshank). But there's no redemption here, just an unbelievably contrived sequence where Tucci orders his security people to stop Hanks from leaving the terminal, but of course the head guy sides with Hanks and lets him depart, in the corniest possible way, while Tucci semi-foams at the mouth (he's not really THAT perturbed, you see; the script tries to play it both ways, telegraphing to anyone in the audience with half a brain that this is a pathetic ploy to drag the film out longer by creating a completely unnecessary conflict). -=- END OF SPOILER
There's a ton of other stupid stuff going on as well; I can site a couple but not all (it would make this review much too long) - one of the guys on the food staff employs Hanks (who is making MORE MONEY than Tucci by mid-film, doing 'under-the-table' construction work, totally inconceivable at an airport) to help him woo the woman who constantly stamps Hanks' form "REJECTED"; that's ok, that's cool and charming, but it's thoroughly implausible that she -=- SPOILER ALERT =-= winds up MARRYING this guy, without seemingly getting to know him whatsoever. And Hanks himself begins a relationship with a flight attendant (played by Zeta-Jones); she's yer basic hopelessly-devoted-to-a-married-man sadsack, written as a total cliche, as all the characters wind up being. -=- END OF SPOILER
I want to point out that I came into this movie totally open-minded; I generally like Spielberg as a director and I think Hanks is brilliant, and I'm also a huge fan of the Tuccinator (as I affectionate call him). I was willing to suspend disbelief for the basic shaky plot because I thought the film would at least proceed with some sort of intelligence once the premise was set up. But it's like Spielberg didn't really know what the heck kind of film he was making -- it doesn't really work as a fantasy because there are too many elements of attempted realness involved, it doesn't actually play as a metaphor because Hanks actually has an agenda (involving his father), and it certainly doesn't work as a drama, what with the half-heartedness of the characters' convictions (Tucci's character in particular). It's not a comedy either because nothing really funny happens. It's a mess, really, and by the time the unbelievably unsatisfying ending comes around, my feelings had shifted, as you can see from what I've written here.
My suggestion to Spielberg: Step back, Stevo, step back very far and get a grip. Some clarity of vision is necessary if you're to maintain your godlike-director status for much longer (at least on THIS planet anyway).