Forrest Gump

There’s something pretty unique about how the 1994 film, Forrest Gump, managed to grab people. Despite being a heavy Oscar contender (winning six in total), that usually isn’t the reason people still remember it all these years later. Unlike what would be expected from a movie with its tone, subject matter and presentation, there aren’t too many people that have ill-things to say about this movie based on a book written by Winston Groom in 1986. The lines are still quoted, the scenes are still memorized, the effects are still marveled at, and despite there being some push-back with a certain aspect of the world back-lashing against its popularity, its not an overwhelming hate, so what its secret? Spread out throughout the latter half of the 20^th century, the movie details the entire life of Forrest Gump (played by Tom Hanks), a slow-witted but overall pleasant man who finds himself in larger-than-life circumstances as his life progresses forward from being a simple boy living in Alabama. These incidents involve joining the army to fight in the Vietnam War, excelling at football in his college years, being an expert at ping pong and even meeting several famous presidents and politicians. These events in his life tie back to others involving his childhood sweetheart, Jenny (played by Robin Wright) who constantly sinks low in life due to her abusive upbringing, Lieutenant Dan (played by Gary Sinise), who has to learn to love life again after surviving the war and becoming a cripple, and his mother (played by Sally Field), who gave him the knowledge and know-how to keep going in life. Through accidental means, he somehow manages to leave an impression on the world and bring some joy to those that desperately needed it. As a movie, the film is honestly a mixed bag in what it has to offer; some parts are wholesome, charming, nicely directed and acted, and do stand the test of time, while other parts are dated, poorly handled and not so interesting.

In comparing it to its original source, the movie does differentiate quite heavily from the book as it cuts out a literal last chunk of the book and replaces it with a something a little more streamlined, hopeful, and honestly less ridiculous (it involves going to space with an orangutan, being a chess champion and working in Hollywood as a stunt man with Raquel Welch). Despite this change, it doesn’t alter the fact that this movie still doesn’t feel like it exists in a normal reality, but rather a warped ‘’sunshine and rainbows’’ universe where everything feels ‘’just so darn swell’’. This most likely comes from the director, Robert Zemeckis, who has been known to integrate this corny overly cheery environment that can very easily come across as shallow and condescending. While the movie never quite reaches that level (as it felt like it could have done given the opening act), it does still feel like this is more of a fantasy universe like one in a comic strip or a fairy tale as opposed to real life (despite how many real-life events and people are connected with this story). The movie is also pretty dated; not just in its material and ‘celebrity’ cameos, but also that this mood and tone of film was very popular in the 90s when the positive harmless energy was very high, so what was normal back then now looks silly by comparison. With that said, it doesn’t always completely fail with this cheesy atmosphere and tone as occasionally there are moments that are effective and work on the level the movie is intended through the screenplay by Eric Roth, and even though Zemeckis is a cheesy director, he is still a good one that knows when to do things one way and when to do things another. It is mostly paced well, the movie knows when to let a quiet scene play out, the actors are all directed well, the visuals and cinematography are nice and cinematic, and while it can be sappy and overly cutesy in places, it feels more naively innocent than actively demeanor and pompously arrogant in nature.

The choice of who would play the lead character in this film was a bigger struggle than would be expected. Though Tom is pretty infamous in the role, he was actually one of the last options when picking who to cast for Forrest, as the character is far different from his book counterpart to his movie counterpart. Even ignoring the obvious physical difference (looking more like Paul Bunyan than Tom Hanks), his character was a lot less ‘angelic’ and had examples of profanity and sexual desires that were mitigated from the film. This comes to one of the key failures of this film, the character of Forrest Gump. As a whole, he doesn’t work as a lead despite there being a manner in which this could work with this set-up. He’s a flat-arc character; where they don’t change throughout the movie, but others do because of him, and for a story that feels like small vignettes with other characters popping up, that framework feels correct, but he’s a reactive character, not a proactive character. He has no desires, no wants, no goals, not even any personality trait that are his own, only what others put on him. Therefore, his actions mean very little, and his screen presence feels incredibly bland; he doesn’t stand out as a character, rather a mold for others to put inspiration quotes into and to spread a message about. It’s a boring character even with the framework being perfect for this kind of role. Hank’s acting is thankfully pretty good and doesn’t feel like he’s trying to ‘’Oscar-contention’’ like, but it’s a role that any actor could really do, so its not that striking. Most of the other cast members like Robin Wright, Gary Sinise and Sally Field are all really good, most of their scenes are some of the more interesting because they are characters with actual wants and desires (which the lead doesn’t have), and honestly both Sinise and Wright would have made far superior lead characters as their stories are filled with tragedy and weight, but also character and hope.

The movie does feature a lot of great lively environments that are shown off very well due to the very nice and clear cinematography by Don Burgess. While nothing drastically stand-outish, it does a great job presenting a lot of simple locations and areas in a very cinematically pleasing manner that arguably adds to the movie’s tone and feel. It has the bright lighting, the swooping motion and the often-massive angles that give the movie a larger feel and does help it stand out more thanks to it. The soundtrack is also full of a lot of popular songs that would have been relevant at the time the movie is portraying and while it doesn’t feel like a major factor, it isn’t painfully obvious either. The score by Alan Silvestri can come across as overly whimsical and airy (especially during the opening act), but as the movie keeps going, it gets less noticeable and has some softer moments where its choice of instrumentation isn’t as annoyingly in-your-face, and it can be decently pleasant. One of the big elements of the movie that was played up was its implementation of CG and how it ‘’revived’’ several dead personas and had Tom Hanks literally interact with them through archival footage. Some of them don’t look too bad nowadays, but some don’t stand the test of time either, it’s a option that wasn’t really needed (like the scenes themselves), so it can be a little off-putting, but the effects that are good are still very good (Gary Sinise legitimately looks like he has no legs throughout this movie).

Forrest Gump is a movie that you will need to be in the right mindset to watch. It is a very corny film with a corny atmosphere that can be overly cheery, and a hint dated, it isn’t going to work for everybody and stuff mentioned before like the bad handling of Forrest’s character might be distracting to some, but considering the love for the film still to this day, that doesn’t seem to be that big a factor. A lot of people enjoy the cast, the story-line, the visuals and even the cheesy tone and mood, it doesn’t distract them but rather engrossing them and for what it’s worth, the movie is good at managing to pull that off. It’s a well-made movie with good directing, a nice pace despite the length, talented actors, pleasant visuals, mixed but mostly good effects, and a tone that while can be annoying, does have a simplicity that can be likeable in the right moments. Not quite the trailblazer that many parade it as, but still a good film all these years later. Check it out and see what this simple movie will give you.