First released on Oct. 25, 2024, “Here,” directed by Robert Zemickis and starring Tom Hanks, largely fell flat. How is that possible? It’s Tom Hanks and Robert Zemickis. They’ve combined for the likes of “Cast Away” and ”Forrest Gump.“ But, the 2024 edition of the duo is an exercise in aimless sentimentality. Despite this, the uniqueness of the film is worth taking a look at.

Throughout the movie, the camera never moves and only focuses on one location, but shows different time periods of that location. These include an early Native American tribe, the estate of the illegitimate son of Benjamin Franklin, a man and his wife who are the first to move into the actual constructed house in the early 1900s, a couple in the early 1940s in which the husband eventually goes on to invent the La-Z-Boy recliner, the Young family, and finally a modern couple who lived there during the COVID-19 pandemic. The film alternates early on between the different stories in no particular order. Eventually, the film starts to mostly focus on the Young family, who initially bought the house just after World War II. It tells the story of the husband and wife who raised three children, one of whom is the main character, played by Tom Hanks. We see him grow up, have kids of his own, and experience the tragedy of losing his parents. 

It’s intended as a portrayal of life, and the film ends with Tom Hanks’ character and his wife sitting next to each other in their now empty house with the camera finally moving in on them. To look at all of these time periods in just one location is a good idea. But it could have been better.

This film does nothing to make the viewer connect with the characters in the other time periods that don’t involve the Young family. Not enough time is spent with these stories in order to see any real character development. For example, the father of the modern family, who is African American, begins lecturing his son on the dangers of police brutality. At this point in the film, the viewer has yet to get to know the characters of this family, and the inclusion of this scene seems random and forced. It goes along with the rest of the scenes that don’t involve the Young family. They are pointless. 

Even the scene where the archaeologists find the Native artifacts has no effect on the story. None of the other time periods have an effect on the story, including the man who invented the La-Z-boy and his wife, as well as the scenes with Ben Franklin’s son. They may be a little interesting, but they don’t contribute to or change the Youngs’ story at all. And, after watching the film, I could hardly recall any details from the scenes of the first residents of the actual house in the early 1900s. 

Because the film would be a little disorienting if each story was spread out equally, I believe it would make more sense for the story of the Youngs to be the focal point and have the other stories brought in at the end of the film briefly. This would make it easier for the viewer to connect to and witness the development of the main Young characters. It would also give a historical context on the story and a more interesting conclusion with all the time periods portrayed at the end.

The film lacks some realism when it comes to the way the characters act. The conversations don’t seem sincere and are usually blanket statements about the Youngs’ current situation. Every emotional moment throughout the film, whether it’s the death of a character or the ending doesn’t resonate as much as it should. However, this is difficult to do in the context of the film. It’s only an hour and 45 minutes, and the film’s dialogue has to state the obvious as it goes through the lives of the Young film, so it’s hard to get deep with conversation. At the same time, a larger focus on the Youngs’ story could help with this.

“Here” was by no means horrible, but along with its little character development and poor plot construction, I think we can take something else from it: it’s important to consider what the critics have to say before watching a film. With a 34% on Rotten Tomatoes, I can see why critics would dislike and be critical of the movie. But, it brought forth a very unique idea of including different time periods in only one location. However, this was done in a cluttered and befuddling way, making it hard to connect with any of the characters as a viewer.