Life is a tragedy for those who feel, and a comedy for those who think.
The terminal is listed in the list of the best film search for the first year. And even though it is far from the first place, it is definitely worth watching. Incredibly soulful film that touches with its immediacy and simple-minded plot.
Steven Spielberg is one of the key figures of the New Hollywood era. A director who clearly shows how thin the line between comedy and tragedy can be. He is not only a science fiction writer who creates stunning phantasmagoric worlds for the viewer, but also not a bad playwright who makes a movie that combines minor and comic mood.
The terminal is a very well-noticed film with a subtle philosophical meaning. This is a story about a man who is faced with a bureaucratic system. Trying to adapt to new conditions and overcome the already established mechanisms, the viewer opens the inner world of the hero, his character comes to life and establishes a strong contact with the viewer. Each person, when viewing this picture, recognized himself in one or another situation faced by Victor. The tape very clearly shows how often our life is grinded by society, establishing its own laws and orders, and how a person who faces natural circumstances suffers.
Tom Hanks’ performance was very impressive. Victor is a socially vulnerable person with a sensitive and kind heart. He is moderately naive and simple, smart, but the most important thing that distinguishes him from the crowd is sincerity. Using the example of our hero’s interaction with the people around him, we are shown that there are actually many good people, but we need to learn to see these aspects of the personality.
The external and internal transformation of Hanks can be called a real high art. Presenting on the screen in the image of a simple and real person, he proved to the audience that heroism is, first of all, the observance of vital moral values.
It is also worth noting the merit of Spielberg, who revealed and showed the story of minor characters, making them bright and characteristic. That's one of the reasons I respect Stephen. It shows the importance of each character, turning him into a supporting character who is able to pull attention to themselves and deserve their own storyline.
The terminal refers to those groups of films that stand the test of time and remain relevant even to this day. Such a movie will always be remembered and respected, set as an example and of course reviewed many times. It’s a movie about the power of the human soul, its beauty and, of course, the importance of being human.
I remember a long time ago I didn’t want to watch this movie. I heard about the drug business and all sorts of dubious personalities. Then it turned out that I confused it with Traffic, and the Terminal, however, filmed the director-legend Steven Spielberg, and in the title role – without exaggeration, America’s favorite Tom Hanks. I started watching and from the first minute I was absolutely delighted!
Victor Navorski, a resident of the European country of Krakogia, without any knowledge of English, arrives in America as a tourist. It was only during his flight that a coup d’etat took place in his homeland, as a result of which all diplomatic agreements with the country were broken. Therefore, Victor’s visa is cancelled on arrival, he can not apply to the embassy or any other organization, and the head of the airport Dixon sees no other way but to leave Victor to live in the transit zone of the airport. And soon this situation begins to get on the boss's nerves. Meanwhile, Victor adapts at the airport, learns the language, finds friends, a high-paying job, even starts relationships!
The plot is inspired by real events, in particular the story of the refugee Mehran Karimi Nasseri, who lived at the Charles de Gaulle airport for 18 years after losing his documents. It would seem that the situation is extremely complicated, not only in general terms, but also psychologically – when a person is forced to literally live at the airport, because he can not return home (and precedents such have happened many times). You can look at it from different angles, but Steven Spielberg chooses the optimistic. The hero's forced relocation to the airport is presented as a comedy (with some dramatic angle). You can argue with such an interpretation, but eventually you understand the main message of such a situation - if you get into such a bind, it is important not to despair, not to lose your head and try to find positive moments in the current situation. And there's no denying that Victor Navorski does it brilliantly and with humor. The musical theme of Spielberg's permanent collaborator - composer John WilliamsThe Tale of Viktor Navorski perfectly reflects the comedic, easy and positive attitude of the protagonist and has become one of the most famous motifs in cinema!
The central character Victor Navorski is one of the best roles of Tom Hanks - the most ordinary person whose features we can see in ourselves. Stuck indefinitely in the transit zone of Kennedy Airport, Victor gradually adapts to unusual conditions, being an example of someone who does not give in to difficulties and always fulfills these promises. Yes, at first it is not easy, especially when he is faced with rude and nervous passengers and, at first glance, indifferent airport workers, but Victor, with his good nature, openness, readiness to help, gradually wins even the most irreconcilable, becomes a friend for each of them (the scene in the finale proves this).
The company he consists of: the head of the airport Dixon (Stanley Tucci), who knows his job and does it well, is too proud of it, and who is nervous about the presence of Victor, but how much not to try to escort him out of the airport and make him someone else's problem, all useless, and Victor Navorski stays at the airport, who eventually become friends of Victor - a cheerful food deliverer Enrique Cruz ( Diego Luna), who is in love with immigration officer Dolores Tores ( Zoe Saldana), who is very fond of this passenger ( and doesn's not trust Victor's personal life in a very nicely).
The terminal is unexpectedly kind, incredibly funny, very human, in something dramatic, in something funny, and infinitely touching. One of those movies that you don’t want to switch if you stumble upon it on TV.
10 out of 10
I think anyone who's seen a movie has come across Steven Spielberg in one way or another. Spielberg became famous for his variety of genres and the ability to create cinematic masterpieces in drama, fiction, adventure, and especially in historical films. A man who is fully devoted to his work and his films are proof of that.
Now a little bit about the movie "Terminal." The main storyline of the film is that Victor, a citizen of the country of Krakogia, arrives in the United States, but soon his native country finds itself in a political storm. As a result of this situation, his passport becomes invalid and he is not allowed to leave the airport. The whole film takes place in a terminal where Victor is forced to live, work and overcome various difficulties in anticipation of the resolution of his situation.
In the terminal, Victor makes acquaintances with airport staff, as well as with passengers, and he develops the “threads” of friendship.
What’s good about this movie is the actors. Tom Hanks (head actor, Victor) – I really liked his performance, managed to convey emotions through the screen, also to give the viewer the warmth and depth of his character. Katherine Zeta-Jones (Amelia Warren), who played an airport employee, also liked it. Yes, she is a famous actress, but for some reason I did not pay attention to her before, although I met her more than once. Stanley Tucci (Frank Dixon), the airport’s chief employee, played well. Judging from the point of view of the actor, I liked his performance, but if we talk about his role – at first he did not attract me as much as possible, and already in the course of the film, the opinion changed.
Steven Spielberg makes powerful movies that you really enjoy. So, to sum up, the film “Terminal” addresses the themes of survival, friendship, bureaucracy and the search for meaning in life, warning against inhuman relations and calling for understanding and tolerance.
The Terminal is a 2004 film directed by Steven Spielberg starring Tom Hanks. The film tells the story of Victor Navorski, who is blocked at the JFK airport in New York due to political events in his home country.
One of the main advantages of the film is the acting of Tom Hanks. He performs his role perfectly and creates a convincing image of Victor Navorski. His character is charismatic and attractive to the viewer, which makes his experiences and difficulties even more tangible.
In addition, “Terminal” has a wonderful script and unpredictable plot. The story of Victor Navorski is unique and unusual, which makes the film interesting and memorable for the viewer. Director Steven Spielberg skillfully combines comedic and dramatic elements, creating an emotional atmosphere and keeping the viewer’s attention throughout the film.
In addition, the film has excellent camera work and visual design. The frames of the film are beautiful and aesthetic, which makes it pleasant for the audience. Visual effects and editing also deserve a special mention, as they help create a unique atmosphere of the film.
Despite all its advantages, the "Terminal" still has its drawbacks. Some moments of the film may seem protracted, which can cause the viewer to feel bored. Also, some characters may seem flat and underdeveloped.
In general, “Terminal” is a beautiful film that will be interesting to both fans of Tom Hanks and fans of drama and comedy. The film has a unique plot, excellent acting, visual design and a skillful combination of comedic and dramatic elements. If you are looking for an interesting and memorable film, then Terminal is a great choice for you.
The Terminal is a moving tale based on real events.
Sometimes a person is forced to live for a long time in the airport terminal of a foreign country. One day, Steven Spielberg learned about a guy who has been living in a French airport terminal for the second decade. Thus, the fantasy “on the theme...” called “Terminal” was born.
Victor arrives in New York from some fictional Russian-Bulgarian-Serbian-Hungarian-speaking country. But he can not cross passport control, because he is detained by terminal staff. Some unforeseen circumstances prevent the hero from returning to his homeland. His country no longer exists and his passport is not valid. He's not allowed in New York, either. Victor remains to live in the airport terminal until demand.
For me, ‘Terminal’ is a movie that you watch and don’t think about anything. Just resting and rejoicing. It begins smoothly, there is a clear set-up, conflict, then smooth development, passions and ending. The infusion of the film is positive, blows New Year holidays. Cinema can be called funny, cute and moderately tragic. Spielberg perfectly manipulates the mood of the viewer, creating new challenges for the main character. Classic. This is a great movie to watch in the circle of family, on dates, in companies and alone. If you like lamp movies of the 90s and 00s, then this is the movie you need.
- I'm talking about bombs, loss of dignity, violation of human rights. Don’t be afraid to admit that you are afraid to return to Krakozhia. There is a house, I am not afraid of my house.
Steven Spielberg has repeatedly shown his skill to adapt to any genre images of cinema. This time he presented us with a tragicomedy called "The Terminal."
Throughout the film, we see Hanks’ hero trying to live in a harsh world, despite all the adversity of such a fussy and indifferent environment, which is most emphasized by the constantly whirling camera and chaotic movements of people in the distant plan. Along the way, he encounters hypocrisy, distrust, indifference, but reverses it all with his sincerity and honesty. He revives humanism and compassion in people, doing the simplest, but extremely good deeds.
The director’s picture is permeated with the most naive and “vanilla” feelings, which do not cause rejection, but by no means cause a real life-affirming mood inherent in these fairy tales. Much of this is served through visual images, colorfully colorful with their warm tones; the sloppy movements and beautiful play of Tom Hanks; the organic compositional work of John Williams; the spectacular camera work of Janusz Kaminski; and, of course, the general extraordinary story of our hapless Dmitry Navorsky. All this interacts at the highest level and merges together, leaving no space for thinking about which particular aspect of the film is the best here. There are not a few dramatic moments in the picture, but most of them are presented with a filigree sense of humor and faith in the best, but those moments that remain in their original stage of the genre touch the heart to the very depths, creating a feeling of melancholy. Each event of the film is subjected to a mass of emotional infusions into its structure: in the composition of the picture you do not see the forgery of what is happening - you believe in the film passionately and enthusiastically.
The general concept of the film involves the struggle of the strong hand of the bureaucracy with a weak and inconspicuous citizen of an unrecognized country. "Unwanted element" is the nickname of our protagonist. The very existence of such an element is being tried in every possible way to eliminate, throwing misfortunes at it from time to time. But this does not prevent the hero from breaking out of the general mechanism and scheme of the soulless machine. With his extraordinary actions, the hero repeatedly confirms that his will is not bent under the pressure exerted. In its uniqueness lies its power. A paradoxical moment will be the speech of Narowski: a sloppy syllable with a broken accent becomes more understandable to our heart than the perfect pronunciation of the chief of security (Stanley Tucci), which feels empty and callous.
Spielberg, in his work, conducts a dialogue on the topic: “What is the homeland and is it worth loving it, even if it hurts you?” The terminal itself, as the scene, answers this question. It presents the very world that Stanley Tucci’s character spoke arrogantly about: I’m talking about bombs, about lost dignity, about the violation of human rights. Victor, do not be afraid to admit that you are afraid to return to Krakozhia. Yes, of course, a lot of sadness brought this place to Navorski's life, but, mind you, he found a lot of happiness here. No matter how horrible his days in the building were, they were so beautiful the moment he met his new friends and love. Homeland is an abstract concept, rather even sensual - for each it is its own. It consists of many events and stages of life, to which we pay little attention initially, but straighten our eyes when the presence of the elusive feeling of the Motherland is lost further and further. That’s why Navorski replies to Tucci’s character: ‘There’s a house, I’m not afraid of my house.’ In a far-flung corner of the world, it is this belief in a better home that keeps him from giving up. It is unknown whether he will see his homeland in the terminal, but for me it is now his cherished small hinterland, to which I can always return with open arms for two hours after a long parting.
A work that will melt your hearts.
Steven Spielberg is a true master at creating humanistic stories. His "Terminal" is just such an example of a kind-hearted film that illuminates the best spiritual qualities of an individual simple person.
The hero of Tom Hanks got into an unprecedented trouble. The fictitious Russo-like country where he comes from has been seized by separatists, which means that the new government in it has no international recognition due to the illegality of its actions. The United States, where the main character arrived, does not allow entry to citizens like him, whose status is not confirmed by national law. That is why the poor guy has to live in the halls of the international terminal of one of the New York airports for a long period of time. The situation, to put it mildly, is extraordinary. However, the good nature and purposefulness of the main character allow him to find real friends and gradually adapt to very unusual living conditions.
In addition to excellent directing, this picture has a stunning selection of artists. Tom Hanks, Stanley Tucci, Catherine Zeta-Jones and many other actors have worked together simply magnificently, creating an amazing atmosphere of a truly good movie, for which it is undoubtedly worth thanking them all.
The Terminal is thus a life-affirming film that offers hope that people can still believe and help each other purely for noble and pure motives, which seems to be rare now. We can become better if we respect our neighbor as ourselves. If, despite the storm of prejudices, we honor in another person his internal characteristics and distinctive qualities instead of external, historical or national characteristics. After all, each of us has much more similar elements than different ones, which speaks to the importance of the process of our universal unification. We're all human. That's the point!
The hero of the film Terminal is locked in New York's John F. Kennedy airport: while he was flying, there was a civil war in his Soviet republic of Krakosia, and he can now neither go to America nor back to the USSR. The picture was shot by Steven Spielberg, her hero Victor Navorski is played by Tom Hanks.
The film was inspired by the story of Merhan Nasseri, an Iranian refugee. In 1988, he landed at Charles de Gaulle Airport near Paris after being denied entry to England because his passport and United Nations refugee certificate had been stolen. French authorities prevented him from leaving the airport. He stayed in Terminal One, a stateless man with nowhere else to go. He has since been granted permission to enter France or return to Iran.
Tom Hanks, in my opinion, brilliantly coped with his role, also in the film took part Catherine Zeta - Jones, Stanley Tucci, Zoe Soldana, Chi McBride, Diego Luna, Kumar Pallana, and in a small role played, Russian actor - Valery Nikolaev. All these characters are very bright and each had its own influence on Victor.
A film about a man in a very difficult situation, he doesn't know the language, he doesn't have money, he loses his food stamps, he doesn't understand why he's not allowed into the U.S. and he doesn't know what happened in his country and when it's going to end. But at the same time, he does not lose his temper and finds a way out of the situation.
The moment in which the real kindness of the protagonist is manifested is when he absolutely gratuitously helped the Bulgarian, played by Valery Nikolaev.
In the film, the main character is faced with a very difficult choice, to fulfill a promise, but at the same time his friends will suffer or to save the work and well-being of his friends, but not to fulfill the promise.
All of his positive qualities throughout the film helped him make real friends and get to where he needed to fulfill his promise.
This film is about not always following legal or personal rules. You need to pay attention to the situation, get into the position of another person and deal with live people.
“Brothers, be not children of the mind; be infants in evil, but in the mind be adults.”
1 Corinthians 14:20 – 1 Corinthians 14:20
Throughout the film, this thought is traced. If we look at how Victor Navorski, the main character of the film, behaves with representatives of the airport, we see that neither the spilled chips nor threats touch him much.
Victor honors the memory of his father, worries about his homeland, but now he is just stuck at the airport in New York, so it happened. It happened. So what's Victor doing? He settles down, tries to earn money, learns the language, finds friends among those who, by the will of the service or due to circumstances, treats him wary or even negatively. For example, airport security officer Joe Mulroy or cleaner Gupta Rajan continue to provide Victor with crucial support.
The world is not perfect, and even such an inspiring film is not quite a fairy tale. Victor's love story for a flight attendant is an example. But in general, the film is about the fact that circumstances happen, and the choice of how to react to them – let there be any.
The film is worth watching and, perhaps, rarely, so as not to "blind your eye", to revise the usual views on life.
Widely known cases like those described in the film will be more than a dozen, at least. Iranian Zahra Kamalfar spent 10 months in Sheremetyevo, Sanjay Shah spent more than 13 months at Nairobi Airport, Kenya. In 1988, Iranian citizen Mehran Karimi Nasseri got stuck in the departure hall of Terminal 1 at Charles de Gaulle Airport and spent almost 18 years there from August 26, 1988 to July 2006. In 2003, journalist Matthew Rose interviewed him, which was published in the New York Times on September 21, 2003. In 2004, Mehran Karimi Nasseri co-authored The Terminal Man with British writer Andrew Donkin.
Sometimes the rules are better to ignore and deal with live people.
Tragicomedy, drama and comedy in one bottle - so I can call the genre of the brilliant film "Terminal". Yes, many fans of realism will say that this is not the case. But this work of art, so that there is a share of fiction in it. In fact, I think it happens. Maybe not all at once, but individually or in groups of several situations, it quite happens every day.
His country is gone, his visa is cancelled. Victor Navorski is not allowed to enter the United States or return home. The promised land was the airport terminal, a buffer zone between war and freedom. All he has to do is literally survive. The building of the terminal became his home, at least, he pretends that it really is: walks around in a robe, now and then, catching surprised glances; washes in a washbasin; makes an abandoned waiting room look like an apartment. Victor learned to earn money to buy food and learn the language. He spent many months in this “prison”, a prisoner of which he became because of the arbitrariness of the people sitting upstairs. And he came only to finish his father’s work: to get the last, 57th autograph of the jazz musician present in the famous Harlem 1958 photo. But I have found much more: true friends, love and recognition.
The film clearly traces and reveals at least four themes: bureaucracy; love; friendship; family.
The subject of bureaucracy. From the very beginning to the end of the viewing, the viewer is shown the struggle of a small person with a system that will swallow a person and will not choke on a bone. They do not care about us, they are guided only by the law and instructions, not dealing with the case. They only have 60 seconds to decide whether to let or not, let or not, help or put in jail. For them, there is no personality of a person, his uniqueness, but only a body, document and history. Victor was confused in the endless palette of forms, carried in his pocket the passport of a non-existent state, which had only to, excuse me for rudeness, wipe. He was not hired because he did not have the necessary documents. Everything is tied up on paper, and only the builders take it for skills, paying past the cash register. How ironic that such an unwanted element earns more than its sworn enemy, the most desirable element, with the purest background and all the cards on hand.
Love theme. Among the thousands of women he meets every day, Victor found one. She works as a flight attendant, she's not okay with her head, and they only see each other a couple of times a month. What is not ideal for a lost person? Both of them are waiting for something, each their own and no one knows how long they will have to wait. That brought them closer together, ignited that spark. Besides, he's not like everyone else: he's humble and doesn't try to grab her ass. What will their novel lead to?
The subject of friendship. Victor found real friends in the face of the staff of the terminal: a cleaner, an esophagus driver and a luggage deliverer. At first, suspicious of each other, they found a link. It was a prison or a house for all of them. Friends help each other, live one life, engage in common business and are ready to sacrifice themselves for the happiness of others. Navorski became a living legend of the terminal due to his humanity, which is deprived of the dogs of the system, which he managed to deceive and save the life of a stranger. He is known and admired by all employees.
Family. Victor Navorski, as already mentioned, visited New York only for one purpose - to fulfill the promise made to his father. He does this because he would do the same for him. This whole journey was made for my father.
Steven Spielberg showed us the maturation of a new man. Navorski comes from a socialist society that is like a child floundering in the capitalist ocean. He had to go through a lot to learn to adapt, but he still does not accept all this dirt and fights for his happiness. When the war is over, Victor can go home. But who knows what happened to his country? In any case, he will be ready, America has tempered him, despite the fact that most of the time he spent only in its prequel.
10 out of 10
Steven Spielberg’s film The Terminal sets the bar for unrealism from the start. A man named Victor Navorski flies to New York, where he discovers that a military coup has taken place in his home country. Now such a state does not exist, and, accordingly, the main character is stateless: his visa is canceled, he can not return and even become a refugee is impossible. All he has to do is wait for the situation to be resolved and hope for the best.
The first thing that catches the eye is the implausible performance of Tom Hanks (with all due respect to the actor) and a poorly designed character in itself. You do not believe that this person is a native speaker of Russian, because he speaks it out of hand. It is not entirely clear why it was necessary to insert a scene with a “real” Russian-speaking character into the film, if the main character looks only as his dull imitation. But if it can also be attributed to the difficult to learn Russian language, then the absolute absence of a written character in Victor is inexplicable. One gets the impression that he was simply stamped: a kind, naive and ingenious person who absolutely does not understand the laws of this world. He absolutely does not understand that they want to help him, does not understand the hints and actions of others, he does not try to do anything to get out of here or contact someone. It feels like Tom Hanks is continuing to play Forrest Gump from the film of the same name, well, the characters are very similar. But if in Forrest Gump you empathize with the hero because of the disclosure of his personality, childhood, all his life, then here we do not know anything about Victor. It is unclear what the filmmakers wanted to say, loading the work with contradictory actions. The main character is afraid to leave the airport, then he without any fear commits any actions that came to his mind. What prevented him from going to the city? Did his purpose of arriving in New York really deserve to live at the airport for so long? Yes, the plot is based on a true story where a man lived at the airport for 18 years because of stolen documents. But in the film as if everything screams that Victor can come out at any minute, no one will stop him, which the main character prefers to stay literally one step away from his goal.
Secondly, everything that happens in the film resembles a fairy tale, because you can not imagine such a thing in life. Starting from a military coup and the instant disappearance of the country and ending with universal love for the main character, it is unclear why. Why did the food delivery man turn to him for help? How can you learn a language in this way? How was he not arrested for some of his 'gifts'? And a lot of other questions that come up during the movie.
And third, the love line. It is very weakly expressed in this film. So weak that it is not clear, but was it at all?
Definitely in the movie and a lot of good. The story itself is touching, camera work, editing and sound do not cause any questions. Films shot mainly in one location create a special entourage. The movie is worth watching, but there is not much to expect.
Krakojna... Krakojna? Krakozhya!!! – a hack from Spielberg on the wave of popularity of Tom Hanks
And it could have been good... It was very difficult to watch such a trick, especially in the original voiceover. In the dubbing, many of the speech defects of Hollywood actors were hidden, so this is another reason to look in the original to understand the scale of the disaster.
The story is based on the years-long imprisonment of an Iranian refugee at an airport due to paperwork issues. It is a tragedy when a person becomes useless in the world because of the lack of some papers. And this is not about a year, but about almost dozens of years. Tens of years in the airport terminal. Moreover, there are still cases when people actually live at such transshipment points. And they say civilization... XXI century.
And now the movie. With all due respect to Tom Hanks, he's not attracted to a European, and not so far away. Apparently, he has not yet departed from the role of Forrest Gump or thought that it is for this image that the audience loves him. But the role needs to be worked out!! Especially if you’re from a completely different culture. Tom Hanks is a typical American, but not a European. It was especially funny to find out about Krakozhya. That's terrible. And from that moment on, the film became a fairy tale about idiots, and then about fabulous idiots. The inability of Americans to reproduce the Russian language has become a parable in the pagans, but again the same rake. In the dubbing for the character even made Bulgarian. But they tried to make the original in broken Russian!
It is the bureaucratic problems of the international transport system that are very poorly portrayed in the film. And the plot itself is built only on the relationships of people who run around this central prison without a country. If at the beginning of the film and may be interested in the beginning, then then begins generally some absurdity. Therefore, the film is only for one time and only to be interested in real cases of imprisonment in airport terminals. In the original, it is better not to watch the film at all, because Hanks’ efforts in terms of speaking in Russian are traumatic. The replay of Nikolaev in the spirit of Kramarov from “Moscow on the Hudson” causes bewilderment. Apparently, the actors think that they were in the theater and need to replay in the spirit of theatrical performers. It's all sad. But it could have been realistic with a more appropriate attitude to the original story of an Iranian refugee. It is a shame that the Eastern Europeans look like some kind of savages to Americans because of the misunderstanding of the cultural characteristics of the representatives of old Europe by these same burger Americans.
Even because of Tom Hanks, I don’t want to recommend this mediocre and lying picture, because Hanks is also a slob here... and there is no one else to look at.
This at least strange phrase could well become the motto of the main character of the film "Terminal". Steven Spielberg for some reason suddenly decided that you can not give a damn about all the factors that make a good movie, and just build a sandbox for an adult child. Given the number of praise reviews, the cunning man succeeded. But I will not allow myself to be deceived.
Plot. Victor Navorski arrives at John F. Kennedy Airport from Krakogia (a fictional country in Eastern Europe). While the man was in the air, a military-political coup took place in his country. For this reason, his passport becomes invalid. He is unable to enter the United States or return home anytime soon. . .
The film begins quite well and intriguing: the viewer expects a serious drama about the difficult fate of a person in unusual conditions. In the end, it does not get what you would like. The intriguing beginning is quickly replaced by despondency and thrust, and the hope for common sense creators suddenly collapses like a house of cards. Just imagine: almost every scene contains controversial decisions about the development of the story. The list of idiotic moments can go on indefinitely:
1) Why is Victor so unfit for international communication? Did he live in the woods before?
2) At the very beginning of the unpleasant situation, the main character was promised to find an interpreter (this could easily be done at least through the embassy). But in the end, he was not properly explained, and he did not understand anything. A wonderful way out: just pretend that there is no problem.
(3) The victim of difficult circumstances is allowed to do anything at the airport: sleep where he wants, tear down walls, work illegally ... have you seen something like this in any airport in the world?
(4) Several times in the hands of Navorski, we are shown documents designed in the names of complete strangers.
(5) The prescriptions of medicines are not checked. I haven't heard of any forensics here.
(6) For the sake of the modest dream of the protagonist here, some are ready to sacrifice their lives and careers, and many may suddenly quit all business (including work) to just escort a foreigner.
(7) Security may not be subject to direct orders from the airport security chief, do you think? Do you think the rebels have any responsibility for what they did?
Note that with each new frame, the degree of absurdity will increase, the amount of idiocy on the screen will increase like a snowball, but it will flow smoothly into a simple and inconspicuous ending.
The atmosphere. Of the positives, I can only mention the impressive scenery (still, a great copy of the real airport terminal was built) and a few funny episodes with the participation of Victor. Now let me turn to the list of disadvantages:
(1) The tape contains a huge number of templates and clichés that will be unpleasant to many Slavic viewers: it mentions the Gulag and the KGB, shows military coups and excessive patriotism ... and in the news in full seriousness show a man dancing a Lezginka. Do they really still see us as such?
2) Genre is stuck somewhere in the middle. What a tragicomedy, I beg you. Neither normal intense drama, nor normal funny comedy you will never see.
(3) Play actors frankly disappointing: some behave too emotionally and excited, while others look imperceptible cardboard. Even Tom Hanks (Victor Navorski) didn't show anything special.
(4) Both love lines are introduced for whom it is unclear. In the first version, the viewer is forced to listen to imbecile ridiculous dialogues, and in the second case, beautiful feelings between people appear out of nowhere. How? Why? The characters never even said a word to each other!
Music. Good overall musical accompaniment sometimes offers to "enjoy" completely idiotic melodies. This usually happens during scenes with awkward situations, in which Victor often finds himself.
Over. For me, the film became a serious contender for the title of the worst movie with Tom Hanks in the title role. I will not tolerate any slack even from a genius like Spielberg.
2 out of 10
Victor Navorski (Tom Hanks) flew to New York from the Eastern European country of Krakogia. During his flight, a civil war broke out in his homeland, so the United States terminated all diplomatic relations with Krakozhia, air traffic was stopped, and his visa was canceled, and he was forced to remain locked in the international zone of John F. Kennedy Airport for many months. Despite the language barrier, showing resourcefulness and ingenuity, Victor managed, taking into account the circumstances, to settle down quite well. He delicately avoids open confrontation with the customs chief (Stanley Tucci), forges warm and friendly relations with the staff and employees of the passenger terminal, and even begins an affair with a charming flight attendant (Katherine Zeta-Jones).
While the seemingly prosperous start of the two thousandth is developing outside the walls of the airport, Spielberg emphasizes the vulnerability of an individual, contrasting him with something big or giant, whether it is the bureaucratic power of the US Customs Service, huge crowds of passengers or the entire passenger terminal of John F. Kennedy Airport.
Towards the end of the film, the viewer will discover the purpose of Victor Navorski’s trip to New York – to get an autograph for his father from the famous American jazz saxophonist Benny Golson (playing himself). And like many of Spielberg's films, "The Terminal" is very musical, thanks to the director's many years of collaboration with John Williams.
It is worth noting that when "Terminal" was released, the opinions of viewers and critics diverged - some especially discontent called it "the worst director's project." Too sweet, sentimental, friendly and toothless was the story. The film is really made very professionally, there is nothing to complain about from this point of view, it seems that it is just perfect, like the main character, and each secondary character pushes his line very quickly, maintaining a smooth and clear pace of the whole story.
In Spielberg’s work, vanilla sentimentality is often confronted and counterbalanced by mild irony. The director regularly emphasizes the humanistic orientation of his works, filling them with impeccable filming techniques and techniques, so it is extremely difficult to break away from his cinema. Spielberg would not have been Spielberg if he had not built a huge replica of the passenger terminal for the filming, on the territory of which he masterfully managed to get the viewer to follow the man who is day by day in search of a way out of the impasse in which he found himself.
Tom Hanks is matchless as Victor Navarski, who came from the mythical Krakogia and was stuck for a long time in the airport terminal in New York. Victor must fulfill his late father’s promise to get an autograph from a famous jazzman. How do you do that when you're unwanted by the U.S. and they won't let you out of the terminal? But it all works out at the last minute - although it wasn't known if it would. Sometimes there is only one step to the goal, but this step is the most difficult.
There is something in Spielberg's films that evokes nostalgia for the cinema of the nineties and the beginning of the zeros. I don’t know if it’s just him as a director, or if it’s a combination of a lot of things like theme, actors, and plot, but I notice that I’ve had some specific emotions for most of his work. Emotions of something kind, soulful, touching the theme of justice, unity. Something I used to imagine when I saw the phrase 'family film'.
The structure of the film, like its plot, is simple. No hidden meanings, double interpretations, riddles, subtle references, nothing to which I am accustomed from watching films of the last decade. Tom Hanks once again finds himself in a hostile environment and survives in it as best as he can, just like in 'The Outcast' but this time the scheme is built not as 'an ordinary person in an unusual place' but vice versa - as 'an unusual person in an ordinary place'. Recreated theme ' on the face of the terrible, but good inside' hero, that is, alien to the conditions of the character first encounters difficulties of adaptation and puzzles others, and then revealed from the other side and everyone understands how cool he is still. Nothing new, in which year do not look, I believe: not in 2004, when ' Terminal & #39; came out, nor in 2020, when I watched it. But why is it so beautiful and beautiful?
In fact, if you look closely, with the banal main plot canvas, the film consists of a large number of clear, clearly noticeable, pleasant to the viewer and correctly related details. The main storyline evokes sympathy for a simple man who through no fault of his own got into a hopeless situation, following a noble motive. All the bad things that happen to him are not because of his mistakes, they are unmanageable circumstances, which he fights honestly, bravely and resourcefully, with his wit and foresight. The evil in the film is unpleasant to any of the people: it is a ruthless and soulless bureaucratic machine in the person of the head of the airport Dixon, who just wants to get rid of the main character by any means necessary. Remarkable supporting characters who appear as service personnel, small people who are so easily removed by force from above, attract with their unity and support, their humanity, simplicity and small joys. A solid bright line running through the whole picture motive about the expectation, concerning all more or less significant characters, is close to every viewer. And for Eastern Europeans, the fear of being left helplessly alone in an unfamiliar country where everyone speaks an unfamiliar language is understandable. In this regard, the situation was beaten no worse than the main character Valery Nikolaev, especially since it was very pleasant to hear pure Russian speech.
' Terminal' touches on the most familiar topics and emotions to each person, carefully treats them and leads to a finale that evokes the viewer’s desired sense of justice and sympathy. I think there is only good in it, even if nothing is new or a revelation, because it seems that all people just need it as love and support. Therefore, such a film can be called family, because nothing will create a sense of unity and mutual help, which in many ways this film says, as close and dear to us people.
8 out of 10
Steven Spielberg has accustomed us to large-scale paintings, which are full of drama, special effects and complex semantic reasoning. But sometimes even a master like Spielberg wants to relax a little and put a more intimate, modest and just calm ribbon, in the work on which you could not only relax, but also have fun. Such a project for Spielberg was 'Terminal', the plot of which gave life itself.
The hero of the film becomes a charming citizen of a certain Eastern European country Victor Navorski, who had to go to America on one important case. But right when passing customs control at the US airport, it turns out that Viktor’s country has undergone drastic political changes and his passport essentially means nothing.
Unable to enter the city or return home, Victor becomes a hostage of the airport and learns to live in conditions unsuitable for a civilized person. Gradually, the hero becomes a very good friend for local workers, but the fate of a person is not an easy thing and something must be done with Mr. Navorski.
Spielberg shot the film at a leisurely but not boring pace. Day by day we learn more about Victor, are amazed by his ingenuity when it is necessary to get extra money and watch with tenderness as he flirts with a charming flight attendant, who appears at the airport only occasionally. ' Terminal' consists of many cute little things that create an incredible lyrical ensemble.
Not only did I like the film, but it was an unexpected gift that I wanted to return to. This may not be Steven Spielberg’s brightest project, but believe me, it will leave only sincere warm feelings.
8 out of 10
In our dull daily lives, it often happens that we forget who we are and what we should strive for, getting bogged down in our daily routine, and if something goes wrong, we fall into panic, anger, or depression. It’s not what we want, but sometimes it’s exactly what we need to start living life to the fullest again. That's what's happening. Not with the main character, but with the people around him. He has given them his life, and he is grateful for it. And I, as a spectator, couldn't help but appreciate this Spielberg idea that came to me at this very moment in my life. Yes, the filmmaker is a bit sentimental, but if the person hasn't yet baked into his cynical shell, he'll probably appreciate the content hidden behind a slightly clumsy, like Victor Navorski, form, in contrast to the Lawfull Evil villain performed by Stanley Tucci. A good, truly kind lyrical comedy that raises themes of love, human relationships, and cultures in this complex, bustling world. I recommend it especially to those who suffer from love.
9 cookies with mustard and ketchup out of 10
This is probably one of the best films I’ve ever seen.
Victor Navorski is a resident of the small country of Krakogia (located somewhere in Europe), who flies to New York with one important thing for himself. But here’s the problem: while he was flying, there was a coup in Krakozhia, it ceased to exist, and Viktor’s visa was canceled. Landing in the “Big Apple” and getting into the airport terminal, he was a hostage of this giant building: without a visa, you can not enter the city, you can not fly home, because all flights to Krakozha have been canceled. The situation is hopeless and Victor has to stay at the airport, where he will face a lot of quite everyday situations (banal dressing up in a public toilet, finding money for food), get a lot of friends and even an enemy in the person of the head of the security service.
The amazing situation that Tom Hanks’ character is in is not a fantastic idea of Spielberg or anyone else. If you read the facts about the “Terminal”, or just fill out a search query on the relevant topic, you can find a lot of stories about how people are forced to live for days, weeks, months and even years at the airport, finding themselves in the largest prison on the planet (taking into account how many people fly in and out every day). Of course, the story of Victor Navorski with the coup in his country is a fantasy, but there are more realistic stories – the loss of documents, bureaucratic delays, an expired visa or some other problems lead to the fact that people become analogues of Victor.
Tom Hanks, who played the main role in this film - it's like the character of the famous Soviet poem by Samuel Yakovlevich Marshak about "Scattered from Basseinaya Street" - he is clumsy, sometimes ridiculous, in places resembles an outright loser and loser, but. But Victor Navorski is a very kind person. He treats people with reverence, believes with naivety in the best that can be in them and treats many things with a philosophical view, striving to find positive moments in everything. Looking at such dreary and shiny eyes as if from tears (at such moments Victor resembles a cat in boots from Shrek), it is impossible not to disinhibit your soul and not begin to empathize with this person who found himself in a foreign country completely alone and without the opportunity to return back.
The main female role in the “Terminal” was performed by Catherine Zeta-Jones, who here, as in “Ocean’s Twelve Friends” (both films came out in the same time interval), appeared incredibly beautiful and charming. Dark hair to the shoulders, amazing eyes, pleasant outlines of the face and an incredible smile - the actress was stunning. And her role as a flight attendant in The Terminal added to her desires and passions. Along with the talented play of Tom Hanks, Zeta-Jones herself is one of the main decorations of the film.
Taking into account the fact that the events in the “Terminal” affect a rather long time interval – the heroine of Catherine in one of the conversations talks about Independence Day, and the ending shows us the pre-Christmas days, Steven Spielberg’s film is suitable to watch it just in time for the New Year holidays, because “Terminal” is a movie when watching which you want to believe in miracles and hope that there is much more good in our world than evil.
If you go back to the facts about the film, there is a desire to see the “Terminal” in the original, without translation. After all, there Tom Hanks speaks broken Russian, passing him off as Krakozhian. And in the Russian version, he speaks Bulgarian, as does Valery Nikolaev, who played Victor here. Given the fact that Hanks had to play a foreigner, and even a native of an Eastern European country, one can note his approach to the role, because our language is quite difficult for foreigners to understand, and Tom had to learn a lot of phrases so that his character was not narrow-minded and did not get away with common phrases.
“Terminal” is woven from human destinies and life situations, it describes not only the story of the main character, but also a large number of secondary ones that somehow affect the development of the situation and Navorski himself. And in this case, it is very convenient to talk about the truth: as you treat people, so they treat you.
But look at you. I do not impose my opinion on anyone.
Too sweet, in some ways fake, but you can catch a good smile.
I just want to say that I love all sorts of fairy tales and life-affirming films. I appreciate a movie full of kindness, some magic (not always literal), soulful, maybe a little naive. It is worth a lot, because it is able to fill the day (and in some quantities – life) with light, and the face – with a smile and just pleasant emotions. That’s why I decided to watch The Terminal, expecting to see a sweet and touching story about how, due to an unfortunate coincidence, the airport became home to the protagonist. Perhaps a little more... Why did this review turn dull and faded gray? What's wrong?
First, the presence of the so-called "cranberries" - I do not need it in a film of this kind. But if you think about it, you should expect it. Even if she did not come to the fore, but she misled from the right mood. The image of Victor seemed to me caricature.
Second, the characters are too flat and fake. Victor is kind and clumsy to the brain and bones, like a human likeness of Winnie the Pooh (from Disney). Destined to be perfect and good, trying to seem nice, so that the viewer will necessarily want to pity him in this truly stupid (bureaucracy, etc.) situation. I don't believe. The chief of security is a stereotypical Glavgad, whose motivation to put sticks in the wheels and put the main character behind bars, and not only, is extremely weak. The rest, for the most part, are sympathetic extras, which can be seen once again in the final.
And thirdly, does not feel the development of the plot. All heroes remain exactly the same as they were in the beginning: they do not learn, do not change, do not acquire. What do the events give, both to the participants and the viewer? Field for jokes and comic situations, in addition to a sweet fairy tale without magic (except that, script). Nothing I want to remember or take away from this story. If you dig deeper, you can highlight a few more negative points, but they are not so significant.
What did you like? "Terminal" works well as a comedy. No wonder a massive foundation was laid for this. I also enjoyed the nice soundtrack. I guess that's it.
To summarize . "Terminal" is by no means a bad movie. But, because of the cardboard characters and sluggish plot, I was bored while watching. Those two hours were longer than usual. I can advise him only as a comedy, or if you just need an overdose of "mercy" - anything happens.
6 out of 10
I decided to watch the film after reading a brief description of it somewhere in the Internet, and because Tom Hanks in the title role. I could not even imagine that such an actor could act in such shit.
From the very first minutes of the film, I had bewilderment and cognitive dissonance. The outright stupidity of the airport employees, who, it seems, do not sulk at all, that the passenger simply does not understand them. The very idea that because of some revolution the country disappeared, and then suddenly appeared again, and during this time a person can not fly anywhere - frank nonsense, some nonsense. Krakosia is a blizzard. Only an idiot wouldn't know what country that means.
To be honest, until the very end, I did not leave the feeling that this film was shot in the late 80s or early 90s, because such an idiotic plot and performance just corresponds to the period when Hollywood shot such a vomiting about Russia, but this is not 2004.
What struck me most was that the director was Spielber! I can’t think of how the man who shot 'Schindler’s List', 'Catch Me If You Can', Two Parts 'Back to the Future', managed to remove such frank shit?
After viewing, he was not lazy and looked at the scores on Kinopoisk, at the same time compared them with the rating ' Outcast' (since Hanks is in the lead role there). It's a stupor. They have almost the same ratings, despite the fact that 'Terminal' you can not even put near.
But that’s not all that Spielberg disappointed me about. What a cake cherry. At the end of the film, when reports show that the war in Krakosia has ended and people are celebrating its end, Chechen terrorists are shown dancing on TV screens. Steven, you're an asshole, though. . .
The whole world - Airport, a & nbsp; you are in the name of Victor from Krakogia
A simple, light comedy with omnipresent irony. Everything looks something like this: a simple goal for the main character, a unique situation in which he fell; a simple person, a love triangle; a simple environment (various junior staff), difficult things for which they are ready to fight to the end. And this formula works throughout the film and is flavored with a lot of irony. The hero acts absurdly in an absurd situation.
A good film for a warm family evening with a cup of hot tea and home comfort (this will play in contrast to the uncomfortable cold airport), nothing more.
The film is full of funny collisions, mean but kind people. He's kind of chambered, domestic. And stupid.
Stupidity is expressed both in the initiation and in the incorrect placement of moral priorities. If the coup/junta/revolution occurred while the poor lad was flying from conditional Russia (he was reading a book while learning the local language in Russian), and the visa suddenly became invalid, he would simply be deported at 24 hours. Since he was at the airport, it was faster. Or give him refugee status. And he would have already written, practicing the mercy of the authorities of the new homeland, incriminating articles against the homeland of the old. On the Internet, yellow newspapers and even on the fences of Hyde Park. Spielberg either didn't know or didn't want to know. Because he desperately needed a collision with a stuck passenger and mean (and there are no other) officials.
If you think about it, the man was actually in a terrible mess. No money, no passport, no right to exist. Okay, we accept the collision by turning a blind eye to its convention. We are ready to see a terrible human tragedy amid millions of indifferent faces. What do we get? It's just Airport. A cunning Russian walks, pretending to be a fool, clean and neat. Okay, he washes his head under the tap. But where does he wash under, where does he take a shower? Where's his confusion? Where is his fear and despair?
Spielberg might as well have done something like this about, say, a Nazi concentration camp. The main character, let him be mmm... Jews are fed up, Communists are banned in the states. Let him be gay! A gay foreigner, a Pole, ends up in a concentration camp for Germans (a bureaucratic mistake). Therefore, he is not allowed even rations and bunks. But it can not be released - gays are outlawed, Poles especially. So he hangs around the camp like a stray dog. A terrible story, at the end of which is still a gas chamber and a crematorium? And no, everything is simple and fun, around kind people, life is beautiful and amazing. Achinea? No, it's just stupid. So is the Terminal.
General impression: Just imagine, you are flying to another country - tourism, business. Suddenly, your country no longer exists. You are a citizen without a state, your passport is invalid, your visa has no term. You are not allowed to enter the country of destination, and you cannot fly back! What's up? It was in this position that the hero of the film Viktor Navorski (Tom Hanks) , a citizen of the country of Krakozhia, in which the coup d’etat took place, appeared. What attracts the plot? Interesting smooth narrative, the main character is not just sitting at the airport and thinking. Nope! With him there are adventures, love, he finds friends, work. A lifetime of a big man trapped in a small room. I was amazed that this was not uncommon. There are people who have been living in airports for years under unforeseen circumstances. It's wild to me! The film was shot by Steven Spielberg based on the autobiography of Iranian refugee Mehran Karemi Nasseri. He lived at the Paris airport for 18 years! 18! It's terrible.
Emotions cling to the film, there are so many of them here! The main ones are compassion and kindness. Tom Hanks gives us a half-word to understand everything with his actions, backed by a great acting. How I was worried about the hero at the beginning of the picture when he found out that his country no longer exists. Tears were coming. Oh! Tom is a great actor! I was intrigued by his performance and how it all turned out for the hero at the end. I really enjoyed the tape!
Digging deeper and learning the plot on the other hand, I was confused by the actions of the hero, he went to another state for a reason, but to fulfill some promise. Always carrying a can of peanuts with you, what is it? Should we look for logic? When you find out what's inside, someone will say, And for that? And the other one will see something more. This is the difference between Victor Navorski and Frank Dixon.
The funny thing is that the main character was watched as a guinea pig, what he would do, how he would behave, how he would react to circumstances. Again, a hint that not everything is so simple in life and for everyone there are obstacles that need to be removed in your path, otherwise why live and strive for a goal!
Recommended to watch, received a huge range of emotions! This is a funny, funny and beautiful movie that everyone should watch!
10 out of 10
Tandem Spielberg-Hanks has repeatedly proved that he knows how to shoot a first-class movie! "Catch me if you can" and "Save Private Ryan" - direct confirmation of this.
Like many of Spielberg's previous films, this film is partly based on real events.
Architect Victor Navorsky, upon arrival in New York for one small businessman suddenly faced a problem - he was refused to let into the United States, because his country entered the civil war and his visa was canceled. He cannot fly back (planes no longer fly there), get out of the airport too, he has no money, he does not know the language.
What should I do here?
Go shopping.
Left without a stake, without a yard, freedom, money and a way home, Victor, of course, not jokingly scared. However, he did not get angry at the whole world in such a situation and began to live and do good where he had to live - because the airport is a reduced model of our world in the film. Helps to marry a modest dining room worker with a charming customs officer, saved a compatriot from a difficult situation with medicines, makes repairs to everything in the new terminal. Having met the flight attendant Amelia ("Katherine Zeta Jones"), Victor begins to learn English in all available ways and impresses her (even if not immediately!). Honest, decent and hardworking Victor has not even lost love and loyalty to his homeland! When he was offered political asylum, he refused. But so far, no one knows why Victor actually flew to New York.
As a result, Steven Spielber once again showed his genius - he managed to shoot a magnificent dramatic comedy without a drop of vulgarity. All the actors played their roles so well that there is no point in talking about them - it is necessary to see!
This movie tells us two things: first of all, if you have a dream, and it's strong enough as our hero, then you'll endure anything to make it happen.
And secondly, the example of Victor shows that in any situation it is necessary to remain a person. It deserves to be seen more than once or twice.
9 out of 10
In the words of the classic, cinema is the most important of the arts. Like any kind of creativity, it allows us to see the world through other people’s eyes, and to make a film about life at the airport of a Pole from Eastern Europe is a dubious idea in itself. But as Mao Tse Dong said, a master’s hands can move mountains. It’s not that I doubt the abilities of the people who gave birth to this creation, but obviously, in deciding to risk choosing the theme of the film, no one risked directly filling it. It's a default comedrama. A little bit of jokes at the level of “haha, watch how he slipped on the wet floor”, more sweetness and kindness, glue everything with standard dialogue, and characters whose types we all know well. I’m sure after this film, all the colleagues in the workshop came to Spielberg, shook hands and said, “Beautiful man, took a chance,” but he did not take a chance.
But going back to the film, I would like to outline its main drawback - he is super dull, there is absolutely nothing interesting in it, it shows how the main character eats, sleeps, washes, and, believe me, he does it as an ordinary average person, it is not interesting. The plot is familiar to everyone - there is a villain here, because he is evil, and good friends, and a beautiful single girl. Only the main character is really original, but he also has problems: first, it is impossible for him to empathize, because (second) he is infinitely stupid and his image ends there.
Summing up, based on the above, this is some kind of remake of Neznaika on the Moon, if you are wondering how an idiot gets into the bright Wonderland (USA), then you will love this film. But on the scale of countries I would give him an assessment of Krakozhia.
Steven Spielberg's film tells the story of Tom Hanks as Victor Navorski, speaking broken English, who got into a difficult situation. During the flight, war broke out in his country and his passport became a piece of paper. Now he has to stay in the terminal until the situation at home returns to normal.
The plot is excellent, although at first it seems that it is slightly attracted by the ears. Why can’t the main character get financial help? Nor do they explain why Victor can't leave the airport to settle in New York City during the coup d'état when there are two security guards on the way out who don't check passports? Why can't he get a hotel room at the terminals so he doesn't have to sleep in a chair in a godforsaken waiting room when Stanley Tucci gives him food coupons and free calls? But the whole situation is played out in such a way that all the problems go to the second background, and attention is paid exclusively to the main character and the inhabitants of the small town - the terminal.
The humor and play of the actors are excellent, there can be no complaints about it. Let most of the jokes are based on the difficulties of translation, they do not have time to get bored and diluted with comic situations that happened with the main character. Tom Hanks played the role of Victor very well and the whole film is on top. The acting skills of secondary characters are also quite worthy. Everyone promotes their storyline at the right time and the link of all these stories is the main character.
The soundtrack is incredibly beautiful, so much so that after watching it you can listen to it many times. Operating work is also not bad, and the picture itself with a terminal created specifically for the tape is simply incredible, especially for 2004.
Even after watching, the question arises: is Victor Navorski so naive that he never tried to escape from the terminal on his own? And how in such a short time he was able to recognize almost all employees of the airport.
Despite all the questions for the film, the film still deserves its high praise and place in the top 250 best films, it is cute, simple, but at the same time touches on complex human problems throughout life. This movie is really worth watching.
I didn’t expect anything amazing, exciting, and supernical from this movie. I just wanted to see a man survive in the airport terminal. Also bribed the famous names of Steven Spielberg as a director and Tom Hanks, who played the main role.
From the first minute of the film, we are made clear who is in charge at the airport, and that is U.S. Customs and Border Protection. The central character is Victor Navorski, a citizen of the fictional Republic of Krakogia, where a military coup took place. The revolution crept up unnoticed and the passport with the visa of Krakozhia became invalid. And Victor really wants to get to New York. However, Uncle Sam's loyal dogs can't let Navorski into the country, the law doesn't allow. It is this tangle of central conflict that we are offered to unravel during the film. And since the revolution has a beginning, but has no end, the time of the Glavhero’s stay at the airport terminal becomes uncertain.
There is no point in retelling the whole plot of the film, it is quite simple and understandable. Nothing supernatural and that can help in real life, in the survival of Navorski, I saw. He washed by the sink in the toilet, slept in the unfinished exit of the airport building and ate fast food, which was able to buy the money he earned at the airport. I laughed almost incessantly for the first half of the film, because the situation was funny and Tom Hanks didn’t play well. He always managed to play strange characters, the same Forrest Gump was simply magnificent.
Then all this acting turned into outright nonsense of a madman, which could be watched only by inertia and in order to find out how it would end. Suddenly, out of nowhere, a saving female flight attendant appears and very well helps our poor fellow to carry out his plans. As often happens, we were shown a happy ending. Yay! Good conquers evil again. And even the chain dogs of the democratic regime could not (though they tried very hard) prevent Viktor Navorski from realizing his good intentions.
In general, what does the fable called “Terminal” teach us? And it teaches that no Homo sapiens, no matter who they work, is alien to anything human. It teaches humanism. So be more human, friends, love people and then they will love you. Amen.
The film was not impressive, but thanks for one hour of healthy laughter.
6 out of 10
The 2004 film "Terminal" starring Tom Hanks struck me with its kind of "playfulness" and naivety, but this is the main highlight of this film. Tom Hanks plays a slightly silly Eastern European who wants to move to New York to fulfill his father’s dream. Only here is the trouble - in his country, the "Cracozhia" begins a coup d'etat, the Bolsheviks came to power and his visa and passport are invalid due to the fact that his country is no longer "no", an empty place on the globe. P.S. (he doesn't know English, so he doesn't understand anyone and speaks with a strange accent)
The film is a combination of drama and comedy, and sometimes it is not clear whether it is a comedy or a drama. We will look at the survivor of AEROPORT Victor Navorski, how he will meet his "love" and so on, so on, so on.
One element of the film, I am very laughing, if Victor says the name of his country, he immediately turns and begins to say "Cracozhia!!, hurrah, Krakozhia!!!". Well, we will also be shown how he will adapt to the conditions of the “modern airport”, learn English, try to get food on coupons, which he often dropped, accidentally threw away, which causes both laughter and pity for him.
The film is recommended to all people who love light films for repeated viewing, with elements of comedy, drama, and thriller.
8 out of 10
I decided to watch because of Tom Hanks, because I never would have thought that such an eminent actor could star in a worthless film. I didn’t like the movie and didn’t leave any aftertaste. Even the fact that this tape was shot by Spielberg, it absolutely does not save anything.
The beginning of the picture was not bad, it is funny to watch the main character, but the further development of further events, suddenly there is a feeling that the film is empty and worthless.
The plot of the movie. At the airport in New York, a man is trapped in a terminal. His passport and all documents become unusable after the war wiped out his people and state. Therefore, he is forced to live within the airport, where he finds friends and love.
The topic of emigrants, this is where it looks ridiculous and implausible. I understand that people are often forced to adapt to difficult circumstances. But all these decisions made by Victor and the circle of people who are trying to help him — all this, just can not believe.
"Terminal" - mediocre melodrama, performed at a low level, which is absolutely not interesting to watch. The film does not carry a comedic character, because there is nothing to laugh at here. Why this tape was shot is unclear. To cause regret for the main character? It's not working. It's not my type, it's an amateur tape.