I pride myself on knowing something about comics-based media projects, but I admit I forgot about it Richard McGuire’s graphic novel here is shaping up to be a Forrest Gump cast reunion movie. here Released this weekend, it grossed a disappointing $5 million, so even the talented director Robert Zemeckisand stars tom hanks and Robin Wright Unable to save this.
But then, here is a comic that is highly unlikely to be adapted into a movie. The comic was originally published as a six-page story in edgy comics magazine RAW, which featured Rats and charles burns (and many others) for the discerning reader. McGuire’s idea was to tell the story of how life and history intersect through a fixed location—a corner of a house. A location witnesses many emotions and events over time, and this short comic is a mind-bending journey that utilizes the static nature of the comic page itself as its primary storytelling device. (Its influence is also huge, including on Criswell.)
In 2014, McGuire expanded the short film into a 304-page graphic novel that spans a longer time period, showing both prehistory and the lives of people who briefly moved around this fixed point. Using panels to show different times on the same page, the book is a window into time and space that only Dr. Manhattan can fully experience.
It was like an idea in a comic, and McGuire did it elegantly and beautifully—and the book generated huge acclaim and Formalist explanation. (McGuire was also a Renaissance man: in addition to being a great illustrator, he also portrayed one of the greatest bass lines ever Liquid Liquid sampled Grandmaster Flash’s “White Lines”.
Although this concept is inherent to the comic narrative process, here According to Wikipedia, it has attracted other filmmakers over the years: a student film at Rochester Institute of Technology and a VR version screened at the 2014 Venice Film Festival, as well as an e-book version of Action Comics. You can see some of these versions (and read the original six-page comic Hush) at this link .
Enter Robert Zemeckis, a director in what I call the “three-movie pantheon”—a club that a director can join if he makes three undeniable classics . The trio even has a few candidates: Who framed Roger Rabbit? is my favorite (a movie that has only gotten greater and greater over the years), but others will choose back to the future. Then you might admit Forrest GumpDespite the film’s flawed message, it spawned memorable characters and lines that are still quoted today, and even a restaurant that serves shrimp. throw in used cars, contact details, drifters, The rest of the BttF trilogy and more for you: Zemeckis is a great filmmaker.
But then came polar expressThe film teaches us the meaning of the “uncanny valley,” seems to kick off Zemeckis’s decades-long journey of experimenting with computer-generated imagery (Beowulf?), not entirely successful, and equally enthusiastic Running towards sentimentality. (I did enjoy it flight although.
With all of this in mind, it’s understandable that Zemeckis would be interested in making a full-length Here movie. let us Go to an agent and hear some quotes from the man himself:
“When I first read Richard Maguire’s graphic novel, I was immediately struck by it and saw how closely it matched the film I was making. I could clearly see how that translated,” hereLegendary director Robert Zemeckis explains. “However, I didn’t know if it would work until we did it, and then, of course, it was clear to me that it was a minefield. I tried my best to avoid those pitfalls, but from that moment on I could treat it as a minefield. A compelling film.
In another quote, he talks about how this approach affects the audience:
“This dominant point of view is the ultimate bizarre story, and that’s what this movie is about,” Zemeckis said. “What’s interesting is that once the audience realizes they’re only going to see what’s happening in this view, It becomes very intimate in a weird way. The audience understands, ‘Oh, we’re not going to know what they’re talking about in the bedroom or the kitchen until they see one room in the house. We don’t learn anything about these people until they’re in the living room. This is a very powerful intimacy for the audience because they pay attention and tend to understand what the characters are doing and saying.
Another technical aspect of this film that’s fascinating Zemeckis is using an AI-assisted approach to anti-aging Showing Hanks and Wright’s progression from teenagers to old age.
As part of the process, Zemeckis had two monitors behind the camera during production—one for the director to see what was actually being shot, and another that allowed him to see the basics of up to two actors in real time. “Change faces”. “It’s all very crude, but you’ve seen enough,” the director explains. “It’s a great tool for me and the actors. … Seeing it in real time helps a lot with the performance. It’s their performance that makes the illusion work.
I haven’t seen it hereconsidering the theatrical release window is likely to be short, I’d probably wait a few months until it hits theaters. But as mentioned earlier, the film debuted less than expected at the box office of $5 million, and reviews were… dismal. this Rotten Tomatoes movie review score The ratings were 35% and the ratings were 57%.
Some examples from reviewers: Peter Sobchinsky In Robert Ebert Kahn:
As for formal concepts and visual conceit seem to be Zemeckis’s main interests, neither works particularly well. While the concept of looking at an entire history from a specific perspective might have potentially interesting results in the pages of a graphic novel, where the images are static to begin with, it doesn’t translate well into cinematic terms – important scenes end with Clumsily presented – the footage is staged, and after a while you have to wonder just how many births, deaths, sexual encounters and dramatic epiphanies are going to take place in the same spot where the Youngs set out the extended table for Thanksgiving dinner.
Vulture’s Alison Wilmore calls it This is the biggest Schmalz you’ll see this year
here There is an obvious intention to provide a prismatic view of human experience. Its best touches often involve using a stylistic device from McGuire’s comics, where a window opens to other times, something as simple as different women cleaning the house or different couples arguing about the price of a house over the years. But the film doesn’t believe that the organic things of everyday life are interesting enough.
Amy Nickerson is at The New York Times is kind:
Don’t force the plot. Experience “here” better, like meditating with your eyes open, nodding to fragile connections and thoughts that would fall apart if spoken out loud. The roof leaked and Margaret’s water broke. One man died from the flu epidemic and a woman died from the coronavirus. I wonder why people in the past were more creative—more Zemeckis-esque—than people today? Is there a 21st century equivalent to the well-worn footage of The Beatles on the Ed Sullivan show? When a regular movie reaches a dramatic climax, a mirror appears on the screen to reflect what’s behind the camera. look! A stove! Then I reflected on my settings. What existed before this cinema? How many deer stand on tiptoe? here?
Given that adapting comics into movies and TV series is now a staple of the comics publishing industry, it’s no surprise that some unexpected choices are made along the way. If you had told me ten years ago that Robert Zemeckis would make a movie here I would be surprised. If you’d told me this movie would come and go quietly, I might have been more surprised. In an interview with The New York Times, McGuire discussed his involvement in the film (and more importantly, his involvement in Olivier Schwalen):
“Here” is a film that reunites many of the key players from “Forrest Gump,” including the director, screenwriter and star. Do you remember the first time you saw this movie?
I don’t really have any clear memories of it, other than that I loved it. When I heard that Eric Roth was adapting my book, I went back and watched the movie again and read the book. In fact, this is too much. I admire the work Roth did to make it a movie. Both funny and touching.
What role did you play in helping shape the film?
There isn’t any. I was asked if I wanted to be a consultant on this, and I declined the offer. I think they know what they’re doing. I want to enjoy the experience of this movie as a viewer.
The story comes and goes like this…just like that corner of the living room, here It is also a portal for various creators to reflect their own views on time and space. This comic is a really great piece of work that makes us see the world in a different way. A mediocre movie won’t change McGuire’s lasting legacy. After all, I still…have this graphic novel sitting around.
