THE TERMINAL

[DareDevil]

http://www.empiremovies.com/images/posters/the-terminal.jpg

Release Date: June 18, 2004
Studio: DreamWorks Pictures
Director: Steven Spielberg
Screenwriter: Sacha Gervasi, Jeff Nathanson
Starring: Tom Hanks, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Stanley Tucci, Chi McBride, Diego Luna, Barry "Shabaka" Henley, Kumar Pallana, Zoe Saldana, Eddie Jones, Jude Ciccolella, Kevin Weisman
Genre: Comedy, Romance
MPAA Rating: PG-13 (for brief language and drug references)
Official Website: TheTerminal-themovie.com

Plot Summary: "The Terminal" tells the story of Viktor Navorski (Tom Hanks), a visitor to New York from Eastern Europe, whose homeland erupts in a fiery coup while he is in the air en route to America. Stranded at Kennedy Airport with a passport from nowhere, he is unauthorized to actually enter the United States and must improvise his days and nights in the terminal’s international transit lounge until the war at home is over. As the weeks and months stretch on, Viktor finds the compressed universe of the terminal to be a richly complex world of absurdity, generosity, ambition, amusement, status, serendipity and even romance with a beautiful flight attendant named Amelia (Catherine Zeta-Jones). But Viktor has long worn out his welcome with airport official Frank Dixon, who considers him a bureaucratic glitch, a problem he cannot control but wants desperately

http://us.ent4.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/dreamworks_skg/the_terminal/tom_hanks/teary.jpg

http://us.ent4.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/dreamworks_skg/the_terminal/_group_photos/catherine_zeta_jones4.jpg

[ilovemovies]

I can't wait for this movie! Spielberg, Hanks and Zeta-Jones! You can't beat that unbeatable team!

Funny too because when I first saw the trailer I was underwhelmed but it has really grown on me and I am SO excited to see it!

[Moviefan1234]

It's a Spielberg movie, I'm bloody there. Add in Tom Hanks, Catherine Zeta-Jones and Diego Luna, and I won't be missing it.

[SiriusTJMackey]

I was lucky enough to see a sneak preview of this movie last night, and it continues the Spielberg track record: it's fantastic. I'll come back later with a full review.

[ilovemovies]

Originally posted by SiriusTJMackey
I was lucky enough to see a sneak preview of this movie last night, and it continues the Spielberg track record: it's fantastic. I'll come back later with a full review.

Great to hear!

And not just Spielberg's track record but Hank's as well. What was the last Tom Hanks to get mostly negative reviews (not including the admittedly underwhelming looking The Lady Killers)? I think you would have to go back all the way to The Bonfire of the Vanities to find a Hanks movie that recieved mostly negative reviews!

[Strider]

I'll see anything Steven Spielberg releases, so I'm there! The Terminal looks like a charming romantic comedy, and with two great leads as Tom Hanks and Catherine Zeta-Jones, the film should be good. Hopefully, this will be a good alternative to all the big-budget blockbusters that are raiding the theaters.

Strider

[ilovemovies]

I was going to gasp at the fact that Dustin Putman gave this movie * 1/2 (out of * * * * ) until I then read that he gave Minority Report * * out of * * * * and that was a GREAT movie! So I'll take his review with a grain of salt.

[Kidsilk]

Spielberg....Hanks.....I'm there!!!!!

[MartinGPB]

i saw the sneak preview last night-- LOVED it as well-- beautiful in its simplicity-- especially that the ending was more honest than over-the-top or sentimental--- currently my #3 of 2003 (after Eternal Sunshine and Kill Bill Volume 2)--- btw, Ladykillers is my #4-- dont care what other say, I thought it was classic Coen Brothers and Hanks gave one of his best performances ever

[Fisting Ackbar]

Originally posted by Kidsilk
Spielberg....Hanks.....I'm there!!!!!

Me too.

[DareDevil]

thnx for putting the THE in the title, i realized right after

[Schatten]

Hanks will definitely be able to pull off the accent well. Remember Forrest Gump? Sounds like it's going to be a bitchin' movie! :D

[Nate6]

Looks good to me. I mean, it's furgin' Hanks and Spielberg!!!

[sharkstank]

Originally posted by ilovemovies
I was going to gasp at the fact that Dustin Putman gave this movie * 1/2 (out of * * * * ) until I then read that he gave Minority Report * * out of * * * * and that was a GREAT movie! So I'll take his review with a grain of salt.

i was thinking the same thing. i disagree with him alot.
and it is spielberg and hanks, event though the previews have done nothing for me

WWWWWWWWOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[miguel_montes]

DVD Town reviews THE TERMINAL (http://www.dvdtown.com/article/dvdtownreviewstheterminal/480/?PHPSESSID=4d91924984275ee6ed5e0bf8650f4fa4) (may contain */spoilers/*):

Long-time DVD Town readers know that I am a major fan of Steven Spielberg. I have two "Saving Private Ryan" posters hanging above my bed. I have a shelf devoted to Spielberg and DreamWorks DVDs. I think that "Minority Report" is the best movie of the past five years.

Therefore, it is with great sadness that I write that "The Terminal" is a step or two away from being a bad movie.

"The Terminal" is based on the true-life story of an Iranian man who, after his documents were stolen, was forced to live in the Charles de Gaulle Airport in Paris, France for more than ten years. In the movie, Tom Hanks plays Viktor Navorski, a man from the fictional state of Krakozhia whose passport is no longer valid because his country is in a state of civil unrest. Therefore, the United States no longer recognizes his papers as valid documents. Viktor finds himself stuck in the international terminal in one of New York City's airports. While twiddling his thumbs in the airport for almost a year, Viktor finds himself at odds with Frank Dixon (Stanley Tucci), an executive who gives Viktor a hard time for no good reason. Viktor also meets a host of quirky characters, including Amelia Warren (Catherine Zeta-Jones), a stewardess who always seems to be falling down.

I have a theory that Spielberg basically makes the same movie all the time. This theory arises from a thematic reading of his works. Basically, in every movie, there is a "little boy lost" and a "chase/quest". The protagonist is a "little boy lost" in the following ways: a) he's a little boy; b) he's a grown man with obsessions or hobbies that prevent him from behaving like a rational, responsible adult; c) he's abandoned by a parental figure; d) he's geographically lost; e) he's morally lost. The "chase/quest" is usually a search for a father figure because, for Spielberg, the lack of a father-son bond means that a family can not exist at all.

In "The Terminal", Viktor is a "little boy lost" because, as a stateless person, he is an orphan, unclaimed. He needs to learn how to speak English, which is the equivalent of a child learning how to communicate. He needs to cope with an alien environment, which is the equivalent of the maturation process. He also has a boyish charm because he is played by Tom Hanks (similar to John Anderton in "Minority Report" having a boyish charm because he is played by Tom Cruise). Viktor's chase/quest is to leave the airport for New York City, where he has an important goal to achieve (the real chase/quest).

I don't mind that a moviemaker makes the same movie over and over again. Alfred Hitchcock's thrillers are almost all based on a formula that he developed in Britain during the 1930s, and all of Ang Lee's movies are about people rebelling against parental figures. However, forcing a narrative to fit a mold rather than developing a narrative from a mold can yield disastrous results. For example, it turns out that Viktor's visit to New York City was motivated by a promise that he made to his father. Therefore, Viktor's ultimate chase/quest is to fulfill his father's dream. This makes "The Terminal" thematically consistent with movies like "Minority Report" (Tom Cruise seeking Max von Sydow's approval) and "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade" (Harrison Ford seeking Sean Connery's approval), but because we are not told anything about Viktor's father until very, very, very late in the movie, there is no thematic or emotional resonance that develops from Viktor's chase/quest. We are simply left with a forced plot point.

We're used to seeing love stories from Hollywood end with the man and the woman getting together. At first glance, "The Terminal" seems to be a bold departure from "the usual" because Viktor and Amelia decide to remain a non-couple. However, if you think about Spielberg's world view, the "sad" ending is not entirely unexpected. You see, Amelia is a confused woman with ambiguous sexual morals. Spielberg's heroes end up with good women like the mother in "Empire of the Sun" or the wife in "Minority Report". Therefore, the goody-two-shoes Viktor can't possibly end up with Amelia--not in a Spielberg movie! Even a "brave, downbeat" ending doesn't work (which is awful since an unsubtle brawny summer actioner like "Terminator 3" can make a "brave, downbeat" ending palatable).

Other plot points bother me. A food delivery man asks Viktor to woo a pretty girl for him. Because the girl never knows who the guy during the courtship process, it is entirely unbelievable that she would end up with the guy rather than with Viktor, who has been doing the romancing. Also, why did Spielberg reach into the Cheap-Bag-of-Tricks for the climactic kiss between Viktor and Amelia. At first, a fountain that Viktor built for Amelia as a present doesn't work, but as soon as their lips touch, the water dances and leaps through the air. The moment was so pitiful that I didn't even want to laugh at its awkwardness; instead, I wanted to leave the theatre.

Making "The Terminal" after "Catch Me If You Can" was a bad idea. Both movies have a lot of scenes set in airports, and the faux-sneaky, light-hearted moments and airport motif probably encouraged composer John Williams to use music that sounds like leftovers from "Catch Me If You Can" sessions. Also, like "Catch Me If You Can", "The Terminal" is tonally inconsistent. Therefore, in addition to a bad case of deja vu, you get more of the "should I be serious or funny" see-sawing that generally weakened "Catch Me If You Can".

There will be some who refer to "The Terminal" as a dramedy, a drama with comedic elements, or a comedy with dramatic elements. I think that the movie actually isn't any of the above. Rather, it's a disjointed series of dramatic and comedic moments that do not gel into a cohesive whole. There are some scenes that are incredibly devastating. Viktor running around from TV to TV, reacting with horror and anguish to the war in Krakozhia is one. Viktor helping a desperate man trying to get medication to his dying father in Russia is another. Both sequences made me want to weep in sorrow. Then there are slapsticky moments that had me laughing so hard that I was clutching my stomach. A dramedy is supposed to make people cry in joy and laugh at sorrows. Since "The Terminal" makes us cry at sorrows and laugh in joy (which are the standard responses), it is two moods fighting for dominance. As the battle is a draw, the movie is a badly-assembled product.

I also don't like the movie from a visual standpoint. As I wrote in my review of the "Catch Me If You Can" DVD, "...cinematographer Janusz Kaminski has a predilection for using odd camera angles that flood the negative with harsh lights. The resultant effect forces the viewer to shield his/her eyes sometimes, something that can be distracting when watching a movie." Since the airport terminal in the movie is filled with white and metallic surfaces, there are several times when harsh light reflections/refractions blur or obscure a lot of what was on the screen. The effect is especially distracting during a scene in which the camera is pointed at a fountain comprised partially with mirror shards. The light is so busy dancing in your eyes that you're not even looking at the screen for most of the time. The Kaminski style of lighting-to-induce-lens-flares can be cool or stylish. However, not every movie that Kaminski shoots with Spielberg has to look the same, and trying to out-lens-flare himself all the time is unproductive.

As with "Catch Me If You Can" and "Amistad", "The Terminal" is longer than it needs to be. We're long past the point in time in which someone could say "No" to Spielberg, so no one is going to tell him when his movies need to be trimmed. "The Terminal" is less than two-hours long, but it has a plodding opening act, a haphazardly-edited middle act, and a plodding final act. Near the end of the movie, there's a false beat when the movie stops to consider the airport police possibly not letting Viktor leave the airport. A cop tells Viktor that he can't go to NYC, and then he gives him his winter coat so that Viktor won't be cold. WTF? Even with a consistent tone, the movie would still feel lumpy.

"The Terminal" is the first Spielberg movie that I won't buy in a long time. It gets a "5" on DVD Town's "10-scale" from me.

Yunda Eddie Feng

[Poeman]

My review for the Terminal * Little Spoilers*

I just saw the screening of the Terminal, which stars Tom Hanks, and Catherine Zita Jones. Those may be the big stars of this Steven Spilberg film, but his sub characters are what make this film succeed. The story follows a man with the name of Bictor korvasky or something of that sort, and he is asked to stay in the Terminal because his country is no longer in control and they are at war. He has no clue about whats going on, it great to watch this part. lol. I love Tom Hanks as this character, he keeps up with his accent very strongly and never loses the pace of the movie.
Spielberg is not known for doing romantic films, and he should clearly stay away from them. This movie is not exactly a romantic comedy, though it looks like it is,and i wanted it to be :mad: . Speilberg tried to hard. BUT The movie is excellent and excellent with the story and all the pieces of the film. It never slows down and the other characters make the film enjoyable more then our main female lead. Catherine Zita jones plays Amelie Warren, and man did Steven Speilberg ruin this character by the time we reach the end. She seemed very cool, and she jumps into the film during half way into it. The movie would have been better without her.
Watch out for this funny character Zupta, this indian mop cleaner of the airport, hes the juggler. He is so cool :cool:. The boy from Dirt Dancing havana heights is in the movie also, and he does a great job. the movie IS PURE BRILLIANT until the last 5-10 minutes. You are left in dissapointment yet again by spielgberg with his craptacular endings!!!!. DAMN IT Spielberg end a film when it needs to end.
I suggest you go see this film, i loved it very much till that lame ending. So much laughs and a good time but you wished better for Bictor when the film ends. WATCH THIS film though, because it is the second best " Romantic/Comedy" of the year right behind Eternal Sunshine Of the Spotless mind. A fun good time at the movies :cool: and oh yeah the movie flowed with its length :)

RATING: 8.5/10

[Benny]

It's a Spielberg and Hanks movie, yet I can't say that I'm too excited for it. It doesn't look that great unfortunately. I'll probably get around to seeing it eventually, but I'm not dying to see it tomorrow.

[MadsenOMC]

SPOILERS!

I was totally wrong about this one. I expected to either dislike it or completely hate it. Hanks playing another saint, and one with a bad accent no less. Spielberg making another overly sentimental, mushy melodrama. A trailer that didn't do much for me. And overall, pretty mixed reviews. Well, I'm happy to be wrong. I really liked it, even though I think it's good and not great due to some flaws that are impossible to ignore. I really don't like slapstick humor, and I got a little tired of all the people falling down and running into things. I don't find it funny and it's a tad overdone. I also thought both romances were weak and wish they had left them out entirely. Tucci's character is also a problem. He's completely one-dimensional and a cartoonish villain. The movie's also a little too long. Thankfully, while I do think these are problems that drag the movie down, they didn't ruin it for me. I didn't find it to be overly sentimental or too sappy. I bought it, thanks to another great Hanks performance (though I am sick of him playing saints). He really carries the movie. I felt for him the whole way through. I also loved his relationship to the other airport employees. I laughed a lot and I even got choked up once or twice. Not the finest effort from Hanks or Spielberg, but a solid movie. I was engaged throughout, and I felt with a smile on my face.

7/10

[TheGodSon]

Originally posted by MadsenOMC
SPOILERS!

I was totally wrong about this one. I expected to either dislike it or completely hate it. Hanks playing another saint, and one with a bad accent no less. Spielberg making another overly sentimental, mushy melodrama. A trailer that didn't do much for me. And overall, pretty mixed reviews. Well, I'm happy to be wrong. I really liked it, even though I think it's good and not great due to some flaws that are impossible to ignore. I really don't like slapstick humor, and I got a little tired of all the people falling down and running into things. I don't find it funny and it's a tad overdone. I also thought both romances were weak and wish they had left them out entirely. Tucci's character is also a problem. He's completely one-dimensional and a cartoonish villain. The movie's also a little too long. Thankfully, while I do think these are problems that drag the movie down, they didn't ruin it for me. I didn't find it to be overly sentimental or too sappy. I bought it, thanks to another great Hanks performance (though I am sick of him playing saints). He really carries the movie. I felt for him the whole way through. I also loved his relationship to the other airport employees. I laughed a lot and I even got choked up once or twice. Not the finest effort from Hanks or Spielberg, but a solid movie. I was engaged throughout, and I felt with a smile on my face.

7/10


MINOR SPOILERS!


Pretty much sums up my feelings about the movie. I liked it more than I thought. It did drag just a tad at the last 1/3 of the movie and it just seemed like it didn't know how to end itself. Other than some minor flaws I would reccommend you see this in theatres. It's a Spielberg movie for pete's sake...GO SEE IT!

7.5/10.

[jackson13]

Lordy, lordy lordy, what a great movie.


*Spoilers*


The scene with the janitor running towards the plane with the mop will be in my head for a long time. What an emotional, inspiring scene. Great movie, great story, great acting, great ending, GREAT MOVIE.

9/10

[Lynn Minmei]

I liked this a lot. The usual Tom Hanks acting, which is to say, terrific. Stanley Tucci did a pretty fine job as well, and was very unlikeable.

I thought the ending was well done as well.

9/10

[chinton]

Looks like Ill be in the minority again. I just dont get what was so g reat about this movie at all. Stanely Tucci and Tom Hanks were great but aside from that this movie was a whole lot of nothin.


First we have the love story whcih was shallow and really not done well with no resolution. Zeta Jones was sadly very miscast. Her charaters was barely explained or given any backstory.

Also it just didnt seem like there was much to the movie aside from Hanks acting kooky. Most of this film just seemed to say foreigners are kooky and silly.

The sacharine stuff with all the different employess was also really annoying me towards the end. Alll in all the only two good things about this movie were Hanks and Tucci.


Also the scene with the janitor and the airplane was really silly. To me that was the worst scene as I thought it was quite funny. I dont think they intended that




4/10

[MadsenOMC]

I agree with everything you said 100%. And I still liked it. It won me over despite its numerous flaws.

[Lazy Boy]

7/10

Good effort, but, like all Spielberg's films, falters in its last act. He always feels it necessary to shove a fairy tale ending down everyone's throat, and it sort of backfired (what was up with the Indian janitor and the plane?). Stanley Tucci starts out as a normal, understandable guy, but the photocopier scene was out of the blue, and what was with his transformation into Inspector Javert?

However, I accepted the film as a flight of fancy, and was involved in its story mainly due to the strength of Hanks' performance, which left me grinning. A minor blip on the radar of Spielberg's filmography; he seemed to eliminate the potentially darker aspects of the story with a more sitcom feel, but I admit to enjoying it a hell of a lot more than I originally intended.

[chinton]

While there nothing wrong with light movies Im wondering when hell get back to more meatier films though

[bskutle]

"The Terminal"- A-
**#7 on Brian's "Must-See" List for Summer 2004**
I had a lot of worries about this latest collaboration between director Steven Spielberg and star Tom Hanks (after "Saving Private Ryan" and "Catch Me if You Can"). Chief among them- would Spielberg take the well-worn path towards an inevitable conclusion that finds Hanks' immigrant without a home- unable to leave JFK airport after a coup in his fictional home country makes his passport and visa void- able to enter America and in love with a beautiful stewardess (Catherine Zeta-Jones)? Some will tell you yes; I say no. Granted, "The Terminal" still rates as a minor Spielberg effort compared to his recent masterpieces ("Schindler's List," "Saving Private Ryan," "A.I. Artificial Intelligence," "Minority Report"), and still has flaws that I'll illuminate. But there's no denying that Spielberg- with this and "Catch Me if You Can"- is cutting loose after a decade of dark and provocative dramas. His touch is lighter than usual as he explores essential and emotional themes of living in the world as it is now. He can still be a bit heavy-handed at times, and the film doesn't work as a comedy as much as some critics have implied. But there's a breezy feel of light entertainment that comes through in every frame of Janusz Kaminski's rich cinematography and in every note of John Williams' score, which is a step below the thrilling jazzy style of "Catch Me if You Can" but still a rich and worthy effort in this increasingly-inspired collaboration (celebrating its' 30th year this year). It's an enjoyable summer lark, with a sweet story and delightful characters. And it all starts with Tom Hanks, who follows the bizarre broad comedy of his turn in "The Ladykillers" and preceeds his upcoming CG-animated experiment with his "Forrest Gump" and "Cast Away" director Robert Zemeckis (this Winter's "The Polar Express") with a funny and touching performance as Viktor Navorski, the foreigner cut off from America by his home country's political troubles and a Homeland Security Officer (Stanley Tucci, fine as always until his character takes an unfortunate turn towards the absurd near the end) who must follow protocol, and yet endure the headaches that follow. Hanks- in a credible and rarely jokey accent- is the beating heart of the
picture, be it following a series of televisions around the Terminal as he learns what is happening in his country (a sequence of emotional gravity to rival Spielberg's finest), relaying his touching, unexpected reason for being in America, or finding friendly ears from airport personel like Diego Luna's food service worker and Catherine Zeta-Jones' bubbly stewardess Amelia, who may have finally found a decent guy in Viktor. Zeta-Jones leads me to my second problem with the film following Tucci's mishandled character (he's more engaging as the ethically-sound administrator at the beginning that as the forced-upon "villain" at the end)- the underdevelopment and predictable nature of the supporting characters (however well played), and Zeta-Jones' character in particular. Like so many female leads before her, it's a botched writing job; not as botched as with Tucci's character, but Amelia's not developed enough to give Zeta-Jones (who does fine under the circumstances) room to work with to be an interesting counterpoint to Hanks. Zeta-Jones and Hanks do have a chemistry together though, as their characters- travelling different life paths- strike a bond more interesting than the obvious romantic rout the trailers- and film- threaten to take the story. That things are unresolved romantically- though pretty clear emotionally- is just one of the welcome surprises Spielberg and his writers have in store. It's not vintage Spielberg, and its' not the year's best film, but it is a nice surprise from a filmmaker who's managed to keep fans on their toes, even if he doesn't always resemble the same young prodigy whose films became Hollywood classics ("E.T.," "Jaws," "Raiders of the Lost Ark," "Close Encounters of the Third Kind").

[Moviefan1234]

Originally posted by chinton
While there nothing wrong with light movies Im wondering when hell get back to more meatier films though

His next is about the 1972 Munich Olympic conflict, so the answer to your question is very soon.

[Darth Dzikowski]

I was not really expecting much from the film, like many of the reviewers felt. And like many here, I was pleased to be surprised by how much I really did enjoy the film, much more than his other "Light" movies. I preface this all by saying that I am a big fan of the myth of Spielberg (early wunderkind efforts like Duel, Jaws, Encounters, Raiders, 1941 and ET) than the man (everything starting with Empire of the Sun & Color Purple)

Growing up Spielberg leaves alot to be desired with all efforts post 1941. I know I'm in the minority(report) on this one but we all have our opinions. And I enjoyed this little ditty alot, not to say it would have been a hard sell without the Spielberg/Hanks combo.

[gyro_44]

While Spielberg is never going be on another hot streak like the one he had in the Raiders-E.T. era, his work today continues to show what a great filmmaker he is, in my opinion.

He has directed a lot of movies in the past decade that are either stellar entertainments (Jurassic Park, Catch Me if You Can) or great films (Schindler's List), or both.

I will be seeing this soon, but I'm also a little disappointed that it isn't a return to Spielberg's "meatier" side. This one sounds like a light dramedy. So maybe next time.

[chinton]

To me I dont mind light moviers but Catch me for me at least was far more entertaining

[Wildbilld]

Classic 4 Star Rating:
http://wildbilld.brinkster.net/pics/star.bmphttp://wildbilld.brinkster.net/pics/star.bmphttp://wildbilld.brinkster.net/pics/star.bmphttp://wildbilld.brinkster.net/pics/emptystar.bmp

Letter Grade:
B

1-10 Scale Rating:
http://wildbilld.brinkster.net/pics/7.5stars.bmp

:cool: :D

[Shockwave]

I hope Speilberg helms War of the Worlds next, im ready for another epic sized movie from the master of all things.:cool:

Im glad hes gettign to finally make the movies hes always wanted to make, but i want to be blown away like i was when i first saw Jaws or Jurriasic Park!

[darkface]

http://us.ent4.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/dreamworks_skg/the_terminal/_group_photos/catherine_zeta_jones1.jpg

7/10

It lived up to my expectations. I didn't think it would be great, and it wasn't, but I also didn't think it would suck, and it didn't. I think it's a good story, good idea, and Speilberg worked his lil' tricky magic and made something nice out of it. The characters were great. Including the indian man. "do you have an appointment?" lmao. The directing was definitely Steven's. The cinematography was excellent. It was a sweet little movie nothing special. Hanks' did a great job i thought, and so did Stanley Tucci. Loved the bag of chips reference :)

If you're into movies, and enjoyed Catch me if you Can, then you'll like this as well!

[Lynn7]

I saw this movie yesterday and was very disappointed. I didn't hate it but it could've been so much better. There is no subtelty in the character development-the characters are all stereotypes from earlier movies. Some of the stuff was way over the top- Hank's character's fountain construction for example. I liked the way they resloved the Zeta Jones character though- that was a very true portrayal, IMO.
Hanks did a good job but I was never really engaged with his character.It wasn't his fault or maybe someone else should have been cast???? Hanks is so well known that it might've been hard for me to put aside my knowledge of him to submerge myself in the story. Anyway if I had to sum up this movie in a word I would say "contrived".

[ANavissi500]

This is by far the "cutest" movie I have seen in a long, long time. Tom Hanks give an Oscar-worthy performance as Viktor Navorsky, a guy who is trying to get into NYC to finish his father's jazz collection. His airport pals are fantastically cast. Diego Luna is great and the guy from Royal Tenenbaums is hilarious - especially at the dinner scene with all of the juggling. I haven't laughed that hard in ages. I can't believe he is 85 years old!!! Stanley Tucci plays a good bad guy, a "successful" man who is jealous of Viktor's likability. Catherine Zeta-Jones is probably the weak link in the film, but in the end it isn't really about her, rather through her Viktor shows that he is perhaps the nicest guy ever. The look of the film worked for me and Spielberg did some nice stuff with lighting. I wish maybe since jazz was a part of the story that it could have been infused in the soundtrack a little more than it was but that is a small quibble in this fantastic movie that kept me smiling throughout. See it!

[The Other]

I agree with Madsen. It's flawed, but enjoyable enough to overlook most of them.

Grade: 7/10

[DareDevil]

gotta agree with ANavissi500, I'd give it a high 8 atleast, very moving and very memorable

[The Engraved]

8/10 :D

Tom Hanks and Steven Speilberg... you better believe I was gonna see this flick. Even though this was hyped as a romantic comedy, I still had enough confidence to believe that these two men would not disappoint me. Tom Hanks was great as Viktor, a man without a country. His performance really moved me and had me cheering for him to get out of that damn airport. Catherine Zeta Jones was also good as the stewardess who takes a liking to him. The other supporting cast members were all great (I loved the Indian janitor - and that last scene with him, brilliant). The ending was also moving, and that surprised me because I didn't expect them to end it that way. Overall, A great movie, period.

[robk]

Although The Terminal isn't quite as sharp as Catch Me If You Can, it's still a delightful film, thanks to its great cast.
If anything else, it's a nice break from the CGI-overkill summer films are known for.
I give the film *** out of ****.