Skip to main content

Spielberg Sundays: The Terminal (2004)


       Another movie that’s probably often forgotten in Steven Spielberg’s repertoire is his 2004 feel-good character dramedy The Terminal. And like Always, I can understand why. It is certainly unremarkable, regurgitating a story structure and themes that have been conveyed and perfected in many other movies from as diverse filmmakers as Frank Capra, Yasujiro Ozu, and Jacques Tati. But on the other hand, there is something genuinely nice and even a little bit heartwarming to this story of a man confined to an airport and the ways he changes peoples’ lives that I think warrants a little more recognition than it gets.
       The Terminal is actually loosely inspired by the real case of Mehran Karimi Nasseri who spent eighteen years in the Paris-Charles de Gaulle Airport after ending up stateless as an individual who couldn’t legally enter France or return home to Iran. However the movie really just borrows the concept of such a bizarre bureaucratic conundrum and goes in its own direction with regards to its character. Because by all accounts Nasseri was much less personable and likeable than Viktor Navorski, which is good, because had he been translated accurately the movie wouldn’t work at all.
       Navorski (Tom Hanks) arrives at JFK International Airport only for his passport to be denied due to a coup in his home country Krakozhia, a fictional former Soviet Republic in Eastern Europe, leading to a Civil War and the United States no longer recognizing its sovereignty. Unable to legally enter the country, Navorski is forced to take up residence in the airport terminal. Over the course of nine months he goes from comical nuisance to staple of the airport, as he picks up more English and befriends many of the regular staff and travellers passing through.
       There are many reasons why this movie shouldn’t work, starting with Tom Hanks and his character. With that fake, vaguely Bulgarian accent and the common mannerisms and lost in translation jokes that come with it, it’s a step or two away from being a character in a Saturday Night Live sketch. The absurd nature of the premise doesn’t help this a lot. But while there are moments where Navorsky veers into caricature, Hanks is nothing if not a serious performer, and somehow manages to walk the fine line between laughable exaggeration and believable heart incredibly well. The performance takes time to adapt to, but Hanks nonetheless conveys a real charming innocence and garners sympathy for his ridiculous circumstance. The character himself is written as very naïve, well-intentioned, cooperative, and stubbornly obedient, even when given an opportunity to “sneak” out of the airport. He has no real priorities it seems, not much of a work or family life, and apart from some great sadness upon finding out what’s happening in his home country, doesn’t seem terribly bothered at being stuck in an airport terminal. He would prefer New York of course, but has no problems waiting until he can get there the legal way. Obviously this more or less has to be his response to the situation as otherwise the story would be too tragic, and it does actually make for some okay comedy as the people running the airport, particularly Stanley Tucci’s hard-hearted customs director Frank Dixon, are consistently perplexed by his behaviour and patience.
       That’s the kind of sense of humour The Terminal has; it’s very tame, whimsical in nature, but occasionally charming and eliciting a chuckle now and then. The film isn’t trying to be a comedy though, so this light approach works fairly well. It’s going for a simple middle-of-the-road tone similar to another Tom Hanks movie about a confounded, blissfully ignorant but optimistic man, Forrest Gump. On a whole The Terminal feels way more like a Robert Zemeckis movie than something from Spielberg, his distinct touch by this point starting to become less apparent.
       But it doesn’t hinder his directing capabilities, nor his creativity and eagerness to go the extra mile for a movie. This film was shot on a complete, functioning airport set within an unused hangar of the Palmdale Airport. This extended to even including genuine outlets sponsored by companies like Brookstone and Burger King. And then there’s Krakozhia, the fictional nation of Navorski’s origin. Spielberg and screenwriters Sacha Gervasi and Jeff Nathanson don’t go so far as to try defining a whole culture, language, and geography, instead borrowing from a mish-mash of other Eastern European tenets, touchstones, and stereotypes. But while there’s no distinct national identity for Krakozhia, it doesn’t stop John Williams from creating a Krakozhian national anthem, or Tom Hanks improvising a bit of the language, or an in-film T.V. briefly displaying a map and footage of the country. The filmmakers do really try to make Krakozhia feel like a real place and it’s a solid enough effort, even if it lacks some originality.
       One thing that’s really important when talking about The Terminal is context and intent. This was a post-9/11 movie about a foreigner entirely set in an airport. Yet in a way, it’s not too dissimilar to the movie Spielberg made preceding it, Catch Me If You Can, which shared The Terminal’s light-hearted atmosphere with garnishes of seriousness. It’s hard to ignore the state America was in when both these movies went into production, and Spielberg himself said with regards to this one: “I wanted to do another movie that could make us laugh and cry and feel good about the world. …This is a time when we need to smile more and Hollywood movies are supposed to do that for people in difficult times.” Consciously, Spielberg didn’t want to make a typical grand big Spielberg movie; he wasn’t interested necessarily in challenging himself, relying on his usual styles, or doing something all that different. He just wanted to make a feel-good film for the sake of his country, and perhaps himself as well. The Terminal doesn’t have any flourish to it, it’s not something you’d see from the great auteurs, who directors like Spielberg tend to idolize and replicate. Instead it’s reminiscent of a classic Hollywood movie. More than anything, it’s reminiscent of a Frank Capra movie.
       The idealism of Capra certainly seems to be on display in this movie, if not the themes and motifs of the likes of It’s a Wonderful Life and Mr. Deeds Goes to Town. Navorsky definitely embodies the Capra hero, who with his selflessness, kindness, and good deeds makes the lives of the people around him better. As in It’s a Wonderful Life, the movie does a good job establishing its periphery characters just enough for the audience to feel a warm sense of familiarity to them; from Gupta (Kumar Pallana), the Indian immigrant custodian, to baggage handler Joe (Chi McBride), Enrique the smitten cook played by a wonderful Diego Luna, and Dolores, his customs agent sweetheart and Trekkie, played coincidentally by a pre-Star Trek Zoe Saldana. Navorsky’s reason for coming to New York is also inherently virtuous, a gift to his dead father who loved Jazz. Dixon is a vaguely Capra villain too, bearing a passive-aggressive animosity towards Navorsky and by the end, a general cruelty to his character.
       The romance subplot between Navorsky and flight attendant Amelia Warren (Catherine Zeta-Jones) has some problems, including a liar cliché and the attraction on Amelia’s part not quite coming across believably. But I’m not going to deny moments between them, like in Navorsky’s revelation scene, aren’t really nice. The talent and likability of both actors contributes to this no doubt, Hanks and Zeta-Jones each giving great performances. But I also appreciate how their relationship doesn’t really go anywhere in the end. It feels more real that way, which may in fact be the exact opposite of the Capra brand of optimism.
       But realism is of course overrated and there is an argument to be made for idealism. The Terminal is very simple in its appeal; it’s very plain in its message and virtues. But sometimes that’s just what is needed. It was needed in 2004, and it’s needed in 2018, where this movies’ sympathy towards foreigners stuck in American bureaucracy and its condemnation of xenophobia is something a lot of people need to listen to. The Terminal is by no means a great movie, but I think it achieves exactly what Spielberg wanted it to, which in itself is pretty great.

Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Jordan_D_Bosch

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Disney's Mulan, Cultural Appropriation, and Exploitation

I’m late on this one I know. I wasn’t willing to spend thirty bucks back in September for a movie experience I knew was going to be far poorer than if I had paid half that at a theatre. So I waited for it to hit streaming for free to give it a shot. In the meantime I heard that it wasn’t very good, but I remained determined not to skip it entirely, partly out of sympathy for director Niki Caro and partly out of morbid curiosity. Disney’s live-action Mulan  I was actually mildly looking forward to early in the year in spite of my well-documented distaste for this series of creative dead zones by the most powerful media conglomerate on earth. Mulan  was never one of Disney’s classics, a movie extremely of its time in its “girl power” gender politics and with a decidedly American take on ancient Chinese mythology. It got by on a couple good songs and a strong lead, but it was a movie that could be improved upon, and this new version looked like it had the potential to do that, emphasizing

The Hays Code was Bad, Sex in Movies is Good

Don't Look Now (1973) Will Hays, Who Knows About Sex In 1930, former Republican politician and chair of the Motion Picture Association of America Will Hayes introduced a series of self-censorship guidelines for the movie industry in response to a mixture of celebrity scandals and lobbying from the Catholic Church against various ‘immoralities’ creating a perception of Hollywood as corrupt and indecent. The Hays Code, or the Motion Picture Production Code, was formally adopted in 1930, though not stringently enforced until 1934 under the auspices of Joseph Breen. It laid out a careful list of what was and wasn’t acceptable for a film expecting major distribution. It stipulated rules against profanity, the depiction of miscegenation, and offensive portrayals of the clergy, but a lot of it was based around sexual content: “sexual perversion” of any kind was disallowed, as were any opaquely textual or visual allusions to reproduction, and right near the top “No licentious or suggestiv

Pixar Sundays: The Incredibles (2004)

          Brad Bird was already a master by the time he came to Pixar. Not only did he hone his craft as an early director on The Simpsons , but he directed a little animated film for Warner Bros. in 1999, that though not a box office success was loved by critics and quickly grew a cult following. The Iron Giant is now among many people’s favourite animated movies. Likewise, Bird’s feature debut at Pixar, The Incredibles , his own variation of a superhero movie, is often considered one of the studio’s best. And for very good reason, as the most talented director at Pixar shows.            Superheroes were once the world’s greatest crime-fighting force until several lawsuits for collateral damage (and in the case of Mr. Incredible, a hilarious suicide prevention), outlawed their vigilantism. Fifteen years later Mr. Incredible, now living as Bob Parr, has a family with his wife Helen, the former Elastigirl. But Bob, in a combination of mid-life crisis and nostalgia for the old day