since this is Spielbergs next official project, it needs its own thread.
Stanley Tucci Enters Spielberg's Terminal
Source: The Hollywood Reporter Thursday, July 17, 2003
Stanley Tucci will star in Steven Spielberg's Terminal at DreamWorks Pictures. Tucci joins Tom Hanks, Catherine Zeta-Jones and Chi McBride in the film, due to begin lensing in September in Los Angeles.
Hanks stars as a Balkan immigrant who makes an airport transit lounge his home after he learns that the borders of his war-torn nation have been blurred, voiding his passport and leaving him without a country. Making friends among the airport employees in the United States, including a baggage handler (McBride), he falls in love with a flight attendant (Zeta-Jones), which prompts his escape a year later.
Tucci will play a representative from the Immigration and Naturalization Service. The script was penned by Sacha Gervasi and Jeff Nathanson.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the thought of hanks playing a foriegner, is somewhat scary.
Indeed. The story sounds fairly interesting, however.
I think there's more to that title than the reference to an airport...
It's an interesting idea, but there's gotta be a real hook to it. They've been preparing this one for a while. SS often shoots films back to back, but there's always one that he preapares for a longer period. He did that with Saving Private Ryan after The Lost World and Amistad. He also did that with Minority Report sandwiched between A.I. and Catch Me if You Can. It's gotta be something they really believe in.
'Terminal' will be a great flick to look forward to. A new 'Castaway' all lined up.
Saldana & Luna Enter Spielberg's Terminal
Source: The Hollywood Reporter
Zoe Saldana (Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl) and Diego Luna (Open Range) are joining stars Tom Hanks and Catherine Zeta-Jones in the cast of Steven Spielberg's Terminal, which begins shooting at the end of next month in Los Angeles.
Hanks plays a Balkan immigrant who makes an airport transit lounge his home after he learns that the borders of his war-torn nation have been blurred, voiding his passport and leaving him without a country.
Making friends among the airport employees in the United States, including a baggage handler (Chi McBride), he falls in love with a flight attendant (Zeta-Jones), which prompts his escape a year later.
Saldana joins Stanley Tucci in playing representatives of the Immigration and Naturalization Service. Luna will play an airport employee. The project is set up at DreamWorks.
Hmmm. This looks just way, way too cutesy. Especially knowing we'll get a Spielberg ending. Blech.
This could be the end of the Hanks streak (at least in terms of movie quality). First clunker since Bonfire of the Vanities. (I'm even willing -- just barely -- to give a passing grade to "You've Got Mail")
Quote from: Find Your MagaliHmmm. This looks just way, way too cutesy. Especially knowing we'll get a Spielberg ending. Blech.
This could be the end of the Hanks streak (at least in terms of movie quality). First clunker since Bonfire of the Vanities. (I'm even willing -- just barely -- to give a passing grade to "You've Got Mail")
wow. and he hasn't even started shooting yet. my my my.......
That's a pretty stupid assessment Magali.
Waiting for Spielberg
By MATTHEW ROSE
Unlike most urban legends, the one about the Iranian exile stuck at the Paris airport for 15 years is true. Surrounded by a mountain of his possessions near the Paris Bye Bye lounge at Terminal 1 in Charles de Gaulle International Airport, Merhan Karimi Nasseri is still there after all these years -- a celebrity homeless person.
Planted on the 1970's red plastic bench he calls home, and surrounded by stacks of newspapers and magazines, Nasseri, also known as Alfred or ''Sir, Alfred'' (title and comma appropriated from a mistake in a letter from British immigration), has organized his life's belongings into a half-dozen Lufthansa cargo boxes, various suitcases and unused carry-on luggage. On a nearby coffee table spotted with aluminum ashtrays, Nasseri's universe includes a pair of alarm clocks, an electric shaver, a hand mirror and a collection of press clippings and photographs to establish his present and his recent past. He seems both settled -- and ready to go.
To the pilots, airport staff, fast-food merchants and millions who have passed through the terminal on their way to somewhere else, the 58-year-old Nasseri has become a postmodern icon -- a traveler whom no one will claim. Little do they know that he is on his way to becoming a Hollywood icon, too. Inspired by Nasseri's intriguing tale of lost identity, bureaucratic limbo and persistence, Steven Spielberg has bought the rights to his life story as the basis for the new Tom Hanks vehicle, ''The Terminal.''
''I realize I am famous,'' Nasseri says in his soft, almost giggly voice, a gravelly mix of his native Persian, the airport French he's picked up from the loudspeakers and the cigarettes he's always smoking. As if to prove his fame, he pats a briefcase stuffed with his press clippings. ''I wasn't interesting until I came here.''
Nasseri's story is difficult to piece together. Over the years, he has claimed many things about his origins. At one time his mother was Swedish, another time English. Nasseri's effectively reinvented himself in the Charles de Gaulle airport and denies these days that he's Iranian, deflecting any conversation about his childhood in Tehran. (''He pretends he doesn't speak Persian,'' his longtime lawyer, Christian Bourguet, says. ''He was interviewed by Iranian journalists and made believe he didn't understand.'') When we first met two years ago, he insisted that the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees was attempting to locate his parents in order to establish his identity. But a spokeswoman for the agency dismissed the assertion as ''pure folly.''
Early on in his saga, Nasseri maintained that he was expelled from his homeland for antigovernment activity in 1977. According to a number of reports, Nasseri protested against the regime of Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlevi while a student in England, and when he returned to Iran, found himself imprisoned, and shortly thereafter exiled.
He bounced around Europe for a few years with temporary refugee papers, alighting finally in Belgium, where he was awarded official refugee status in 1981. He traveled to Britain and France without difficulty until 1988, when he landed at Charles de Gaulle airport after being denied entry into Britain, because, he contends, his passport and refugee certificate were stolen in a mugging on a Paris subway. Nasseri could not prove who he was, nor offer proof of his refugee status. So he moved into the Zone d'attente, a holding area for travelers without papers.
He stayed for days, then weeks -- then months, then years. As his bizarre odyssey stretched on, Bourguet, the noted French human rights lawyer, took on the case, and the news media piled on. Articles appeared around the world, and Nasseri became the subject of three documentary films. (Oddly, apparently none of his friends or relatives have attempted to contact him.)
Like any number of Samuel Beckett characters, Nasseri has redefined the concept of waiting. But he remains busy, and during office hours when he's not meeting filmmakers or members of the press, he collects McDonald's soda tops and endlessly considers his situation in a sprawling, 1,000-plus-page diary that chronicles his journey to nowhere. These rambling handwritten notes recount his encounters with just about everyone he's met, reporting faithfully everything from the details of his paper chase to some of the witty things he's said (''I'm not Henry Kissinger''). Nasseri also asks most visitors to sign his journal.
An effete, balding man, Nasseri is well groomed (he washes daily in the men's room and sends his donated Marks & Spencer clothes to the dry cleaners) with finely manicured fingernails. He smokes compulsively and is forever reaching for his pouch of Pall Mall rolling tobacco. At one point during our interview he coughs, adding with his characteristic sly humor, ''Maybe I caught SARS here in the airport.''
In an eerily Warholian relationship, Nasseri's closest neighbors at the airport are a photo booth and a photocopy machine. Unlike most movie types, Nasseri does not have a cell phone, and he eats regularly at the McDonald's in the food court 100 feet away. (''I like the fish,'' he says.) The only green in his immediate environment is, ironically, the Sortie (Exit) sign.
In the Spielberg film, which begins shooting this month, Hanks is transformed into a refugee whose country disappears in a diplomatic wink of an eye. As chaos ravages his homeland, Hanks is rendered stateless, his passport turned into an eBay collectible. He's grounded: a stranger in a strange New York airport. But Hanks is cured of his airport disease and soars to new heights (and, who knows, perhaps another Oscar), thanks to the Hollywood bombshell Catherine Zeta-Jones, who plays Hanks's love interest, a flight attendant. Nasseri has had no such luck with the ladies and complains that there are no nightclubs in his airport. ''There's no pleasure,'' he says.
While Bourguet confirms that Spielberg's company, DreamWorks, has in fact bought the rights to his client's life story, Spielberg himself would not discuss ''The Terminal,'' its plot nor Nasseri's contract. Marvin Levy, a DreamWorks spokesman, confirms that a financial agreement was signed. However, he cautions, ''Mr. Nasseri's story was an inspiration for the original treatment for 'The Terminal.' The film is not his story.''
Rumors of a $275,000 fee for the rights to Nasseri's life story and certain consulting duties have circulated. ''It's less than $1 million,'' Bourguet says, adding that the money hasn't changed the predicament of his client. ''While he became a bit richer, Alfred is extremely paranoid and confused.''
Certainly, Nasseri may well be one of the only people on the planet not to have seen a Spielberg production. Asked what he thinks of Hanks, Nasseri replies straight-faced, ''Is he Japanese?''
Regardless of whether Hanks manages to capture the refugee's deadpan delivery, the Hollywood retelling of Nasseri's odyssey will undoubtedly include a first-class ticket to the American dream.
Nasseri's real-life ending, however, is still up in the air.
''Alfred himself will have trouble leaving the airport,'' says Glen Luchford, a fashion photographer cum director whose 2001 mockumentary, ''Here to Where,'' attempted just such a scenario, with the director, played by Paul Berczeller, failing to tempt Nasseri beyond the concrete gardens of Charles de Gaulle.
''Alfred has to accept that he's free,'' Luchford says sadly. ''But with freedom comes responsibility. He represents people's worst fears -- the idea they might be procrastinating all their lives and end up being rooted to the spot.''
Nasseri cannot be forcibly moved or repatriated. He is protected by a number of international refugee statutes. According to Bourguet, he is legally free to leave the airport. All Nasseri has to do is sign the identity papers the French provided him in 1999. But the papers identify him as Iranian and don't recognize his adopted name of Sir, Alfred. And so he can't -- or won't- sign them: a testament to either patience, or madness.
Nasseri is doubtful about attending the premiere of ''The Terminal,'' although his face lights up at the prospect. ''I would probably have technical problems with my papers in Los Angeles,'' he says, before adding that he'll likely leave the airport ''in September or October.''
If he does decide to finally exit the departure lounge, Nasseri could go to any number of places in the world. He says Florida has invited him, and, yes, why not New York, when ''I take over DreamWorks''? (The company is based in California.) And what of the plastic red bench, which has served as his de facto home for the last 15 years and must by now be a collector's item?
''I'll take it to DreamWorks,'' he says with a smile. ''And send it by FedEx.''
How ironic: The compassionate French are letting this poor Nasseri fellow live for 15 years in their airport, something you would NEVER see in an American airport. ... So what does the American filmmaker do? Use the tale as the inspiration for a story relocated to an American airport with (according to the casting call) a snooty French official as one of the bad guys.
I think the movie has potential, maybe, but why cast Tom Hanks? There are a great number of wonderful middle eastern actors who would make the film boundlessly more interesting and who would save us from Hanks putting on an accent (maybe he'll do a good job, but he'll still seem silly). Furthermore, it would be a lot cooler to see one of these actors oppposite someone like Zeta Jones.
Quote from: GhostboyI think the movie has potential, maybe, but why cast Tom Hanks? There are a great number of wonderful middle eastern actors who would make the film boundlessly more interesting and who would save us from Hanks putting on an accent (maybe he'll do a good job, but he'll still seem silly). Furthermore, it would be a lot cooler to see one of these actors oppposite someone like Zeta Jones.
Because I bet they're going to make him a Serb or Croat, rather someone of Middle Eastern descent. ... I think they're just going to make up the country he comes from, too, from what I've read.
Maybe he'll be from Hanksylvania.
Yeah, he's supposed to be from the Balkans. The movie is going to be a movie. It was just inspired by this guy's situation. But he certainly has enough money now to bribe his way out of France...
DreamWorks' The Terminal is Ready for Boarding
Source: DreamWorks Pictures
Principal photography is underway on DreamWorks Pictures' The Terminal, under the direction of Steven Spielberg. The film stars Tom Hanks, Catherine Zeta-Jones and Stanley Tucci.
The film is being produced by Spielberg, Walter F. Parkes and Laurie MacDonald from a screenplay by Sacha Gervasi and Jeff Nathanson from a story by Andrew Niccol. Patricia Whitcher, Jason Hoffs and Niccol are serving as executive producers.
Filming began on The Terminal on October 1 in Los Angeles. The majority of the movie's interiors will be shot on a two-and-a-half story recreation of a full-size operating terminal, which has been constructed in an enormous hanger located at Palmdale's famed "aerospace alley," north of Los Angeles. Filming will be completed on location in Montreal.
The Terminal tells the story of Viktor Navorski (Hanks), a visitor to New York from Eastern Europe, whose homeland erupts in a fiery coup while he is in the air en route to America. Stranded at Kennedy Airport with a passport from nowhere, he is unauthorized to actually enter the United States and must improvise his days and nights in the terminal's international transit lounge until the war at home is over.
As the weeks and months stretch on, Viktor finds the compressed universe of the terminal to be a richly complex world of absurdity, generosity, ambition, amusement, status, serendipity and even romance with a beautiful flight attendant named Amelia (Zeta-Jones). But Viktor has long worn out his welcome with airport official Frank Dixon (Tucci), who considers him a bureaucratic glitch, a problem he cannot control but wants desperately to erase.
During his accidental exile, Viktor encounters and befriends an array of airport employees, some of whom aren't very far removed from their own assimilation to America.
The supporting cast includes Chi McBride, Diego Luna, Barry "Shabaka" Henley, Kumar Pallana, Zoe Saldana, Eddie Jones and Jude Ciccolella.
I still say it's really conceptually relevant to today. It's just a question of what tone they choose. If it's all feel-good I'll be turned off. I'm also not thrilled by the cliche bureaucrat bad guy played by Tucci. So it's wait and see. But the idea of the entire film taking place in one location offers lots of possibilities (and limitations), so I think once again Spielberg is still taking chances, as he has of late.
On set pictures here. (http://www.lifepress.com/archivio/2003/Movies%202003/Terminal/)
did anyone else realize that in 2004 tom hanks has movies coming out by Spielberg, Zemeckis, and the Coen Bros.? its going to be a good f'ing year for Hanks!
tom hanks is dressed like he's gonna be in jurassic park IV in the first few pictures
He's also going to be shooting A Cold Case with Romanek.
I'm seeing it's now called The Terminal, not plain Terminal. Plus the additions of Alex MacDowell and Mary Zophres are interesting.
Anyone have any more info on this? Shouldn't a trailer be coming soon? those on set pictures are no more :o(
Quote from: Stefenthose on set pictures are no more :o(
Check again.
Quote from: MacGuffinQuote from: Stefenthose on set pictures are no more :o(
Check again.
Awesome, thanks Mac.
New stills (sorry about the size):
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dreamworksfansite.com%2Fterminal%2Fimages%2Fimage_one.jpg&hash=5858bb043f5586f869c585fa10fe8a17c88dc3b1)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dreamworksfansite.com%2Fterminal%2Fimages%2Fimage_four.jpg&hash=a04647dfe4105f68a428d73b81c71b0963c009a2)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dreamworksfansite.com%2Fterminal%2Fimages%2Fimage_five.jpg&hash=77defbae734a627b26939653120257bbab5d8378)
kumar?!?!
you can add this to your list Mac...
Catherine is really hot.
Quote from: El Duderinoyou can add this to your list Mac...
Catherine is really hot.
yeah we get it, ur horny.
anyway, those pics remind me of the failed potential of The John Larroquette Show.
Thanks for the pics, Mac. My dislike of Spielberg aside, I can't help but admire them. Especially the third one. Here's hoping the quality of the set design is an indicator of the quality of the movie.
I love how the colours of the flowers in the third picture match Kumar's rings.
Oh and that second picture... Tom Hanks is HOT.
...
hooray for gels...the lighting in that third picture is fucking perfect.
Mac, why not post the trailer... :shock:
Quote from: mutinycoMac, why not post the trailer... :shock:
Are you fucking or is it up?? :shock:
Quote from: WithnailQuote from: mutinycoMac, why not post the trailer... :shock:
Are you fucking or is it up?? :shock:
It's not up. Mutinyco is just an idiot. :shock:
wait.. are u freaks complaining that Mac didn't give u a precious trailer, like it's his job? like ur paying him?
I never mentioned Mac.
It does exist. At least according to The Hot Button.
Remember June 18...
The Terminal looks like the first great dark horse smash hit of 2004... not to mention being the first serious Oscar contender to be released. (Kate Winslet and Charlie Kaufman will be the only nominees from Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.)
I had the good fortune of getting a glimpse at the trailer for the film on Monday and found myself watching it over and over and over again, unable to quite believe how it hit me right on the sweet spot. DreamWorks didn't make the trip to ShoWest or you would have heard about this trailer as the next one in the tradition of Forrest Gump, which went from 0 to 100 for Paramount (and Tom Hanks) way back when.
One hates to lay it all out over a trailer. But every once in a while, a brief glimpse can unassailably mark a movie as a disaster... or a smash. Hanks has not had a role that fits this well since Cast Away and hasn't had the physical, dramatic and comedic combo opportunity that this offers since Gump. But that's not all. Catherine Zeta-Jones, who manages to be toned down (no noticeable eye make-up and a semi-blunt cut) and still be gorgeous, brings more humanity to her acting portfolio in just a few lines here than I have seen in other performances. Stanley Tucci, Barry Henley, Diego Luna, Chi McBride, Kumar Pallana, and Zoe Saldana all show glimpses of making a tight, likeable ensemble in support.
But perhaps best of all, Steven Spielberg seems to have found a project that just relaxes into his wheelhouse. I really liked Minority Report and think it is underrated. Catch Me If You Can had wonderful stuff in it, but had a lot of style to get past. Here, Spielberg seems to be letting the actors do the work, but also, in just a couple of minutes, you can see some real magic with the camera by Spielberg and his D.P., Janusz Kaminski (who should have been nominated and probably should have won and Oscar for Minority Report). They built the airport concourse for the film and the use of both handheld cameras and major crane shots, plus the bounce of the light on lots and lots of shiny floors... and all that glass! What I saw was virtually in black & white (for internal security purposes), but you can still see how rich the lighting of such a familiar setting is.
The trailer itself is just right and deserves a lot of praise for its inventiveness. The device used to set up the story, which I won't give away because you'll enjoy discovering it for yourself, is so obvious... in that way that something is so obvious and perfect that it had to have been done before. But it hasn't. Not this way. There is a classic trailer tone change with a song - again seemingly obvious - but just so right. And the out gag... just a beautiful piece of comic editing. Best of all... you get a good sense of the movie, but you don't feel like you've already seen the whole thing.
I spent some time on Sunday night and Monday with various people discussing the summer to come (my summer preview column at MCN arrives this Thursday) and expressing concern that things were not quite catching yet. There will be lots of popular movies, make no mistake. But in a summer loaded with $150 million-plus product (and no fewer than three $200 million films), a bunch of $150 million grosses is not going to leave anyone grinning in the privacy of their offices. The Terminal trailer, completely unexpected, was just what the doctor ordered. A real treat
I for one am giddy, giddy, giddy.
The Terminal. With extreme prejudice.
So who just saw the commercial for The Terminal during the finale of The Apprentice?
Quote from: mutinycoSo who just saw the commercial for The Terminal during the finale of The Apprentice?
not me.
I saw it. Another weird accent from Hanks...wasn't really sure what to think.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fffmedia.ign.com%2Ffilmforce%2Fimage%2Fthe-terminal-poster-lg_1082081864.jpg&hash=78885505d08de960b119208fb2826bf9acd070d3)
Teaser Trailer here. (http://www.dreamworks.com/trailers/terminal/terminal_t60_qt_640.mov)
Quote from: TictacbkAnother weird accent from Hanks...wasn't really sure what to think.
How about: "Oh, I get it. He's an immigrant just like the premise explained."
the TermTnal?
The poster is a bit Gumpy and Catch me if you can-ish, but I loved the trailer. Beautifully shot, never overplayed comedy...here's to hoping it's just as good as Catch me. I must say I really love this new direction Spielberg's taking (although War of the Worlds will surely put him back on familiar grounds).
Quote from: WithnailThe poster is a bit Gumpy and Catch me if you can-ish,
Concept is very Moscow on the Hudson-ish.
Here ya'll go: http://www.theterminal-themovie.com/teaser.html
After getting on me for not posting it, guess you didn't bother to look at the previous page. I even included the poster.
Hehe, coming from that eastern european background myself, I think Hanks had it right on. Fun trailer. I also like where Spielberg's going. You can see this is a logical step from Catch Me like Minority was from A.I.
looks interesting. am not jumping up and down with excitement over the concept but i LOVE spielberg and with hanks in it, it could very easily be very good. neat simple graphic design for the logo looks like catchmeifyoucan.
Saw the poster. Didn't see the link at the bottom. 8)
I cant wait! I love Steven Spielberg.
Walking into glass doors like Barry Egan.
Quote from: ®edlum
Walking into glass doors like Barry Egan.
astute observation
i prefer it when spielberg does science fiction. he's better at that.
Quote from: bonanzatazi prefer it when spielberg does science fiction. he's better at that.
i agree.......i'm not that excited about this one either.looks like a drawn out situation that could be in a cheesy sitcom..like the king of queens or something....
This sure as hell looks like science fiction to me. Tom Hanks with an accent? Catherine Zeta-Jones playing a normal person? Beats spider robots any day.
zeta jones is looking forward to ruin yet another movie.
Quote from: mutinycoKatherine Zeta-Jones
Catherine...spelled with a K. Now
that's the spielberg i like.
You must be faking quotes... :shock:
Quote from: mutinycoYou must be faking quotes... :shock:
dick
New Trailer (http://www.themoviebox.net/movies/2004/STUVWXYZ/Terminal,The/trailer-page.html)
spielberg looks alot older than he should, he's only like 57
Quote from: ewardspielberg looks alot older than he should, he's only like 57
Same with Kumar and he's only 23.
early bloomer
Looks corny.
I heard that the opening scene of The Terminal is an homage to Tati's Playtime. That excites me.
I would have liked it more if they'd not turned what is, really, quite a melancholy and sad true story into, you know...a "Rom Com".
trailers are quite often misleading, save the judgements for the day you see the film
I'm basing my pre-screening opinion on the fact that it stars Tom Hanks and Catherine Zeta-Jones, was directed by Steven Spielberg, written by the guy who wrote the light [but wonderful] Catch Me If You Can...and yet somehow, is "based" on the terribly sad story of a refugee immigrant to France who's been living at the airport for twenty years 'cause no-one'll give him a Visa.
They've Hollywood-ised the story to the "N"-th degree!
That said, I await this picture with an otherwise unmitigated zeal.
yeah, i'm not sure if there's really a need for a love interest (but if it means catherine zeta jones, then what the hell)........still, i look forward to it
it looks like an Old-Hollywood romantic comedy. (did i already say that?)
The real guy's story isn't sad. The guy is pathological. He could've left years ago, but chose not to use the appropriate chanels. He's more interested in his strange celebrity.
Do you have a link to the real story? I don't know what to search for.
Does Tom Hanks only take roles these days for which he has to gain weight?
Quote from: RaviDo you have a link to the real story? I don't know what to search for.
http://www.snopes.com/travel/airline/airport.htm
Mac, at 6664, you're 2 posts from giving Satan a run for his money.
Quote from: MacGuffinQuote from: RaviDo you have a link to the real story? I don't know what to search for.
http://www.snopes.com/travel/airline/airport.htm
Thanks for the link. I hope The Terminal retains some of the sadness of the real story.
QuoteOn 17 September 1999, an international travel card and a French residency permit were put into Nasseri's hands. With them, he's now free to leave the airport, either to take up residency in France or to fly to another country that will allow him entry. He refuses to sign them, however, because they list his nationality as Iranian, and he wants it listed as British. He remains at Charles de Gaulle airport, determined to stick to this point rather than face life outside the terminal.
So he's going to stay in the airport forever because he doesn't want his nationality listed as Iranian?
Quote from: SHAFTRI heard that the opening scene of The Terminal is an homage to Tati's Playtime. That excites me.
that sounds cool........if this isn't the title sequence, i hope he gets the same guy that did the Catch Me If You Can sequence
Quote from: bigideasQuote from: SHAFTRI heard that the opening scene of The Terminal is an homage to Tati's Playtime. That excites me.
that sounds cool........if this isn't the title sequence, i hope he gets the same guy that did the Catch Me If You Can sequence
From Entertainment Weekly:
Filmbuffs may also notice passing visual echoes of French director Jacques Tati's 1967 comedy "Playtime," the opening of which is set in a blandly homogenized airport and to which Spielberg says he's paying "very slight homage" here.
Quote from: bigideasthat sounds cool........if this isn't the title sequence, i hope he gets the same guy that did the Catch Me If You Can sequence
the guys who did that opening title sequence were Hammer & Tongs, who are working on a film right now, so i doubt they will have time to do the titles for Terminal
Then he could always use Imaginary Forces, who did Minority Report...
Quote from: meatwadQuote from: bigideasthat sounds cool........if this isn't the title sequence, i hope he gets the same guy that did the Catch Me If You Can sequence
the guys who did that opening title sequence were Hammer & Tongs, who are working on a film right now, so i doubt they will have time to do the titles for Terminal
is it some kind of animated film in the vein of that sequence?
personally, i think that is one of the best title sequences in a long, long time......it makes me think of the great stuff that Saul Bass did
Quote from: mutinycoThen he could always use Imaginary Forces, who did Minority Report...
thaT SH*T WAS PHUCKING KILLER..... :yabbse-thumbup:
Quote from: bigideasis it some kind of animated film in the vein of that sequence?personally, i think that is one of the best title sequences in a long, long time......it makes me think of the great stuff that Saul Bass did
It's Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy. It's not animated, although it may have some animation, i'm not sure. They have done lots of cool music videos, you should check them out
Quote from: bigideasis it some kind of animated film in the vein of that sequence?
personally, i think that is one of the best title sequences in a long, long time......it makes me think of the great stuff that Saul Bass did
that's cos it was an homage to saul bass. i don't expect they will be milking that technique again. if they do then they're really out of ideas.
they can and hav done better.
did they specifically mention Bass in refernce to?
where can i check out more of their stuff online?
Quote from: bigideaswhere can i check out more of their stuff online?
http://www.tongsville.com/
If you're curious to read an early review go to: http://www.moviecitynews.com/reviews/terminal.html
Neato. Thanks.
thats a hell of a good review....hope the film lives up to it
Well, I think I'll have to admit that I was wrong many moons ago when I criticized the concept for this film as unviable. I made the incorrect assumption that, because of the plot, Spielberg would be making a drama. But it appears he's gone the sugar-coated comedy route, instead, and hit paydirt with Hanks. And I guess that works just fine, because there's no need to have heavy-handed messages in your movie if you have Hanks walking into windows and Zeta-Jones slipping on wet floors.
oh dont be like that, at least wait until you've seen the movie
I'm not "being like that." ... I'm saying that I had legitimate concerns about this movie as a realistic drama. But it seems, from trailer, that the film has taken a lighter, comedic approach, and if that's the case, I'm SURE that Spielberg and Hanks have put together a very entertaining film that will have plenty of laughs and just the right amount of tear-jerking moments. It was a compliment. I was worried about the tone, and it looks like they found the most viable tone for the picture.
ahh, well good then :-D
Quote from: ewardthats a hell of a good review....hope the film lives up to it
it doesnt. so i advise everyone whose hopes were raised by that glowing review to reign them back down to earth. from the initial word of the film i wasnt very excited about the premise, but being as it was spielberg i was interested nonetheless. i thought the trailer was pretty good and then with that review on top i thought he could still pull something incredible out of it.
i saw the terminal tonite and it was very enjoyable. it was good to see a film that didnt rely on jokes as much like so many stale comedies but more on finding the humor out of the characters quirks, which while they were exaggerated, were somewhat true to life. i found myself laughing though most of the film and occasionally touched. i thought it would be pretty hard to buy into tom hanks as a foreigner, but i think i got lost in the character as much as one can when a megastar is taking on a role of that kind. (sort of like watching sean penn in I am Sam as a retard, going 'man he can act', but you cant stop thinking about how its sean penn. even when occasionally you will be touched by the events. oh well, it didnt end up being as distracting or potentially disasterous as i had thought/feared).
however, even with its premise, there were definite flaws in the film that i hoped it would be without. so, it probably was one of my favorite films of this year so far, but not anywhere near one of my favorite spielbergs. atleast he's working like a motherfucker, so as long as he keeps making movies i dont mind him trying something different as long as we dont have to wait 5 or 6 years between films.
BIG OL' SPOILERS it seemed like sort of a waste to spend all this time on the romance, to have it resolved so shabbily. i mean, what was the point?
END SPOILERSso it was a fine bit of enjoyable fluff, WAAAY better than most movies that would attempt to be 'this kind' of movie, but defnitely far from perfect. spielberg is an A student and i feel like he sort of handed in a C paper. and even though his C paper is way better than most C students work will ever be, it just feels to fall short of his potential.
just saw it. i thought it was alright. i honestly enjoyed every minute that catherine zeta jones was not in it. not that she was bad, but that subplot was just terrible. some of the writing there...i cringe just thinking about those scenes. otherwise this was pretty good overall. but, and there's no surprise here, it goes on a bit longer than it should.
This is another case of the themodernage and I agreeing on something. In addition to everything he said:
The whimsy is just a little too forced...or, to be more exact, a little too lazy, as if they took all the elements (Hanks, Spielberg,) and figured that that was enough to make magic happen. Almost, but not quite.
We all know that Spielberg dug PDL quite a bit, and while he's been pushing his nice penchant for lens flare and blown out windows since The Lost World, I think this one shows more than a little bit of Mr. Anderson's visual influence (particularly in the -- admittedly beautiful -- kiss). The only thing is, in PDL, all the lens flares and such felt like marvelous little accidents, whereas here they feel very planned.
I'd heard so many bad things about Zeta Jones and the romance that I was actually pleasantly surprised. Their Napoleon dialogue was godawful, but aside from that, I enjoyed her performance, and I liked their romance for the same reason I liked the romance in '8 Mile.'
I wonder what the last-minute reshoot was....
I like the movie, but felt it was too long. Kumar was misused I think (his repeated line about an appointment makes no sense at all). And I agree that the Napoleon stuff was bad.
But OTHER than that, I really enjoyed the movie. I love the way it looked. There were a few shots in the movie that really wowed me. And I agree that they felt "controlled," but I like that. I like the sense of control that a filmmaker at the top of his game has (yes I think Spielberg is in his prime right now, even though this isn't necessarily a prime movie). Spielberg is having FUN now, and that makes me have FUN at the movies.
I thought this was really good. It's a little too long and contrived at times. It had a lot of unoriginal ideas and not all of them worked. But it's fun, sometimes funny and enjoyable. Tom Hanks is really good as well.
so basically it was great. just not a great movie.
so was the opening sequence/Tati - Playtime reference anything special?
Quote from: GhostboyI liked their romance for the same reason I liked the romance in '8 Mile.'
Only KZ-J didn't lick her fingers first...
I think I need to see it again. It definitely had its share of references to the Anderson sisters. The thing is...it really ISN'T a typical movie by any standards. It was as if Spielberg was trying to take certain devices used by the Coens and the Andersons, but trying to make them work in a mainstream tableau. While I think there were uneven elements, I'm kind of convinced time will render it a classic. I think it just missed everybody at this moment for varying reasons. Mostly because, like The Ladykillers, it wasn't what anybody expected it to be. That said, it was definitely a ballsy undertaking for Spielberg. To a certain extent, complete with its sets, it also reminded me, in its total lack of respect for reality, of One From the Heart. It's weird, cause this was like a mainstream art film -- it tried to bridge that gap and I think that's why people have had some difficulty with it. It was trying to have it both ways. It was dealing with social issues not undertaken by anybody else in major movies right now, but stylized in a way that made some accuse it of being light on those ideas. But the point remains: they WERE there. And those ideas have yet to permeate into ANYTHING the Andersons have done. In that sense, it was like SS had taken their styles and said: This is what's WRONG with your pictures, this is what they're missing.
The thing that's nagging me, though, is that I kind of feel like in its use of style, reference and ideas it IS the movie of the moment. Whereas 9/11 is declaring itself the center of the zeitgeist, I think this film offers a more conceptually accurate rendering of the American multicultural consumer dream world we now live in. With Stanley Tucci's character the direct result of Republican legislation, he represents the conservatives, while Viktor represents the liberals learning to stand up for their ideals. It also touches on the issue of prescription drugs and the varying prices that differ from country to country. It deals with surveillance vs. freedom. And I really liked that Viktor and KZ-J DIDN'T wind up together. I also liked the Dvorak playing throughout.
And I liked the self-reference Spielberg made to Schindler's List by starting it the same way -- foreigners arriving to have their papers checked. Only this is America, not Nazi Germany. Or so it's supposed to be.
I think it needs time to settle. Time will tell.
It seemed pretty typical to me, in almost every aspect. Aside from the romance, it WAS everything I expected from having seen the trailer, note for note. Well, actually, I guess I wasn't expecting Spielberg to ruin that beautiful shot in the trailer, the one with the suit and the reflection, by using it three times in a row and thus robbing it of its subtlety. I think Catch Me If You Can has more potential classic-status, as far as recent Spielberg films go.
I think this one's gonna have a reputation. It's gonna take a little while, but I expect a core of people who wind up supporting it.
As for recents in the "classic" arena, it'll be Minority Report.
I hope so. I still think that's one of his best.
This is kind of what I was talking about. Although it came in second at the box office, it actually GAINED 23% in revenue from Friday to Saturday, while Dodgeball lost 8%. It's early to come to conclusions, but I would read that as Friday's box office being supressed by mixed reviews, only for it to pick up on Saturday because of word-of-mouth. I think it's a low simmer.
i took my dad to it today. we both thought it was pretty good, i thought the camera work was really great. i also really liked the closing credits sequence too, with all the signatures. the score was good too, sounded very Jon Brion.
Tom Hanks not able to speak English was distracting. Good premise, good cinematography. Exaggerated character with Catherine Zeta Jones.
Quote from: El Duderinothe score was good too, sounded very Jon Brion.
The score was the worst thing about the movie... it was sentimentalist crap. Especially when he's
SPOILER riding away from the bar in the taxi. But I guess it wouldn't be as annoying without Speilberg's sentimental false endings.
As if PT Anderson and Wes Anderson weren't guilty of the same artificially happy endings...
Quote from: mutinycoAs if PT Anderson and Wes Anderson weren't guilty of the same artificially happy endings...
I can see what you mean with PTA's films (not that I agree with it), but I don't think Wes Anderson films have any reall happy endings...
Quote from: mutinycoAs if PT Anderson and Wes Anderson weren't guilty of the same artificially happy endings...
At least their music doesn't arrogantly twinkle at you.
The difference is that their happy endings are surprising, but you can see it coming from the first frame of a Speilberg movie (with the possible exception of Minority Report). And he makes you feel like the whole point of the movie is the artificially happy ending.
And Speilberg's "the world is perfect now" happy endings have none of the essential ambiguity of a PTA or Wes Anderson happy ending.
Quote from: El Duderinothe score was good too, sounded very Jon Brion.
The score was the worst thing about the movie... it was sentimentalist crap. Especially when he's
SPOILER riding away from the bar in the taxi. But I guess it wouldn't be as annoying without Speilberg's sentimental false endings.[/quote]
maybe not that whole big orcestral crap, but i was talking about the music during the end credits
The ending of Bottle Rocket is tragic. Okay, slight exageration but 'bittersweet' doesn't encapsualte the sadness of that closing shot.
I wish people would be Happy with Spielberg's Happy Endings. I would hope that the Terminal's ending is truthful within the context of the film. Not where the context is that it's a 'Spielberg movie' but judging from the trailer the whole film seems like some magical tale. The premise of someone living in an airport terminal, offering obvious potential so simple that it could be some kind of talking mouse in Hanks' place, in a children's book.
Don't forget that Spielberg is capable of an ending with more than just 'ambiguity'. 'E.T' was really sad (that was at heart a childrens movie). 'Close Encounters of the Third Kind' - Roy runs from his wife and children to chase spacecraft and ultimately abandons them in favour of some aliens. And maybe here's the change...in the documentary on the DVD for 'Close Encounters' Spielberg mentions how if he were making the film today he would never consider having Roy's character choose that path. He's a family man, now.
While the shot of John Anderton and pregant wife in Minority Report was kind of jarring, Spielberg really delivered on a great closing shot; pulling out of the log cabin passed the twins and then the helicopter shot across marshes. Kinda like the pull-out in A.I.
But don't forget that -- and this has been discussed and run into the ground before, but what the heck -- he did remove the brilliant last line of the MR screenplay.
which was? (for those of us who don't know)
I keep telling you guys. His happy endings aren't always happy endings. A.I. and M.N. were NOT happy endings. I'm not going into this again.
As for PTA and WA, they're totally neat and happy. Dirk returning to Jack for their hug...Frogs raining and saving all those miserable people...Barry running through a maze of hallways and winding up in Lena's arms...Max fixing everything and getting everybody back together while staging his play...The Tenenbaums reconciling...
They're happy endings. Quirky films with happy endings.
Quote from: matt35mmwhich was? (for those of us who don't know)
"i'm just so tired of all these minority reports."
Quote from: mutinycoI keep telling you guys. His happy endings aren't always happy endings. A.I. and M.N. were NOT happy endings. I'm not going into this again.
As for PTA and WA, they're totally neat and happy. Dirk returning to Jack for their hug...Frogs raining and saving all those miserable people...Barry running through a maze of hallways and winding up in Lena's arms...Max fixing everything and getting everybody back together while staging his play...The Tenenbaums reconciling...
They're happy endings. Quirky films with happy endings.
boogie nights does not have a happy ending dude. "I'm not going into this again."
the ending of sugarland express. not very happy.
The ending of Lost World made me very happy :-D
Considering what REALLY happened to the porn industry and John Holmes in particular, by ending Boogie Nights with Dirk reconciling with Jack, Rollergirl going back to school, and Buck having a baby and opening his store with a commercial directed by Amber -- IT IS very much a "happy ending".
hmm, so by that logic.. every movie has a happy ending because reality is always worse.
Yes. Exactly. Even Dr. Strangelove.
1941 as i recall didnt have a happy ending. their house fell off a cliff and robert stack said "it's gonna be a long war..."
empire of the sun didnt have a happy ending at all
schindler didnt have a happy ending, just a hopeful one
Yeah, there's a difference between a happy ending and a resolved ending.
Quote from: mutinycoYeah, there's a difference between a happy ending and a resolved ending.
Which is the difference between Boogie Nights and The Terminal?
this endings debate is really stupid.
there are degrees of happy and bad. Happiness, is that a good ending? everyone went through the traumatic experience and it SPOILER ends on the kid cumming? this is rhetorical.
all the best directors hav their trademark endings, it's one of the things u can always count on. Spielberg endings, like Scorsese endings, like Kubrick endings can only be defined as that. the qualities which define the ending are the same as hav shaped the movie. scorsese's is redemption, pta's are too. there's no reason to narrow it down into an either/or situation unless ur talking to a baby.
so this whole hang-up of either happy or sad is really headed nowhere.
It's headed up a grazing pig's ass in Hertfordshire.
u think dirty thoughts
A little tidbit to backup my theory it will be a low simmer hit... it had only a 29% drop from its opening week, which is VERY good. Compared to its $18 million opening, it did $13.5 million in its second. I expect it to hover, never doing huge numbers, but enough to make it comparable to both Road to Perdition and Seabiscuit as mid-summer Dreamworks successes.
i finally saw this. i thought Kumar was quite funny. you can tell SS had the Royal Tenenbaums DVD.....he used one of the DVD extras in the film in the nice little dinner scene............i've already forgotten the ending and the Hanks/Z-Jones resolution......hmmmmm..........i don't really remember any of the score either.......i'm not sure if this is DVD purchase worthy or wait for used copy worthy
this reminds me......i need to get the Entrapment DVD and watch the black suit training sequence
we all need to watch that sequence
Sneaking Into The Limelight
As he proves again with "the Terminal," Kumar Pallana has a way of making the most of his character roles.
Source: Los Angeles Times
Possessing perhaps the greatest deadpan expression since Buster Keaton, Indian-born Kumr Pallana stole every scene in which he appeared in the 2001 comedy "The Royal Tenenbaums" as Gene Hackman's loyal, albeit eccentric, valet. As he even manages to upstage Oscar winner Tom Hanks in Steven Spielberg's comedy "The Terminal" as Gupta, an airport janitor with a deep, dark secret and a mistrust of everyone.
Though Pallana's movie career spans only the past decade, the energetic 85-year-old has been performing most of his life, making money for his family by traveling to India, Kenya and South Africa to perform feats of balance and yoga.
Pallana brought his skills to New York in 1946, where he developed a one-man show, juggling rings, spinning plates, doing rope tricks and magic. As Kumar of India, he toured Paris, London, Madrid, Casablanca and Las Vegas in the 1950s and '60s and even performed on "The Mickey Mouse Club" and "The Ed Sullivan Show."
He and his family eventually settled in Dallas, where he and his son operated a yoga studio/cafe called "The Cosmic Cup," where regulars included University of Texas students Wes Anderson and Owen Wilson. When it came time to make their first film, "Bottle Rocket," they gave Pallana a part. He's also appeared in Anderson's "Rushmore" and "Tenenbaums."
Though he's a man of few words on screen, the self-educated Pallana talks a blue streak in person.
Your family was involved in fighting for freedom from British rule in the 1930s.
When I was 12, my brother was into politics. He was a freedom fighter, so he was captured. In those days, they could beat you up and take your house [f you were arrested]. My father lost his business. My father was car dealer. We had servants and cars. So when he was captured, our house was locked up and we had to leave.
Did you start to perform after your brother was arrested?
In 1935-36 I left my home and traveled in India. I had to do some shows to help my family. When I left the home, I don't have any education that I can work in the office or anything. I had an interest - if only I can become a singer or an artist to help family. I wanted to become an actor, but it was very hard. When you don't have the education you don't [know] that you had to train to act, dance or go on the stage. So when I left home and went to Bombay [movie] studio, I couldn't get into the gate. I started traveling, and I started doing shows in the schools - not in the streets. I think family pride had something to do with that. I started balancing one plate and doing handstands.
You get to do your juggling and plate-spinning in "The Terminal." Was that scene written in the script for you?
Tom said, "Let's put it in."
You couldn't get into a movie studio in Bombay in the 1930s, and here you are working with Hanks and Spielberg.
They have energy. I worked with other people [in the film industry], but some people have the ego - they chant "me, me, me." But [they are] the other side of the coin...so humble and so kind. It's like working with a family.
How did you end up in Dallas?
I moved because my wife didn't like the show business. She said I don't like our children to be gypsies. We ended up in Dallas. I don't know. It was just destiny.
Did you get any work in Dallas?
The Dallas agent used to call me. They had what they called a stag party with strippers. So they used to call me in, in case the police come. I would then juggle and do my act [if the police showed up]....I used to work with a lot of burlesque shows.
Burlesque shows?
It is job, dear.
You got your second career due to Owen Wilson and Wes Anderson.
They would come in [the cafe] and talk to me. They said they were shooting a movie and are you interested in being in it. I said yes. They were nice kids.
there was also a line about stabbing someone in the chest in the Terminal, too.......perhaps also inspired by TRT?
For the most part, I'm with mod-age's review (on Page 7), although I would give it more than a C. Great scenes of humor. I really got lost in Hanks's performance and just saw the character. The Zeta-Jones storyline, well, I just didn't feel her character was fleshed out well enough. And when Hanks's char. started persuing her, the film seemed to lose all the mystery and charm that was Viktor before it. Certain scenes felt like 'only in the movies' moments (being hired as a construction worker, for example). But I really liked Spielberg's use, as he does so well, of no dialogue and letting visuals do the storytelling.
My grade for this movie: Snore +
actually i think i gave the movie a B or a B-. i just feel like its a C effort from an A student.
The worst part about Speilberg is that he can coast his way through movies and still be enjoyable. The Terminal isn't very good. Its Spielberg almost on auto drive. What is new here is that Speilberg is exploring humor by way of Jacques Tati, but instead of fully wrapping himself in that world, it feels like he just watched Punch-Drunk Love a lot of times and didn't even know Jacques Tati existed. It's a piling of little moments in the middle of an average film that hardly give the film identity. Then there is the average film aspect of it, the tender story of an odd ball romance that could only feel so charming in the hands of Speilberg. E.T. was believable. The Terminal is not. I just never believed in the romance of Hanks and Zeta jones for one second and when the plot swung to the grandoise at the end, I felt it was reaching for too much, trying too hard to extend itself past what was believable or even intriguing in the premise. At least with Catch Me if You Can, the story felt like it was down to earth, just telling its genre story and I enjoyed myself for what that movie was. Its dissapointing I couldn't do the same here and its continually dissapointing that Speilberg refuses to challenge himself with anything bigger than Schindler's List, especially considering the poor sales all his recent entertainment films have been.
what do you mean 'bigger' than schindlers list?
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetWhat is new here is that Speilberg is exploring humor by way of Jacques Tati, but instead of fully wrapping himself in that world, it feels like he just watched Punch-Drunk Love a lot of times and didn't even know Jacques Tati existed.
GT, that one sentence is brilliant.........thats why i read your reviews...
...... :yabbse-thumbup: .
Quote from: themodernage02what do you mean 'bigger' than schindlers list?
Well, if that word didn't float your boat, I'll also add his films could
try to be as mature, daring and honest as that film. He's a master director in my eyes, but he continues to float through fluff subjects mostly.
okay, i'll agree with that (atleast in regards to The Terminal or Catch Me If You Can.) i do have much love for his dark sci-fi.
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetWell, if that word didn't float your boat, I'll also add his films could try to be as mature, daring and honest as that film. He's a master director in my eyes, but he continues to float through fluff subjects mostly.
AI and minority report were easily as mature as that. in my HUMBLE OMG opinion, really, apart from the extended endings, which Schindlers (aka Saving Private Ryan) had too, (hav always had) it's all been good with spielberg since the 2000s.. he's ageing pretty well. not kubrick well, but well enuff.
AI and Minority Report were both more mature than they are given credit for. Minority Report just for the vomiting alone.
Quote from: StefenMinority Report just for the vomiting alone.
But I only vomit when I'm a kid :?:
Thanks
DVD Release
Source: www.davisdvd.com
Release Date: November 23
Universal has announced The Terminal which stars the likes of Tom Hanks, Catherine Zeta Jones and Stanley Tucci. This new Steven Spielberg directed film, will be available to own from the 23rd November this year in both single and double-disc limited edition giftset form. Each will carry a 1.85:1 anamorphic widescreen presentation along with English Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround, DTS 5.1 Surround and Dolby Digital 2.0 Stereo tracks. English, French and Spanish subtitles will also be included. Extras on the limited edition set will include The Take Off: Making The Terminal featurette, a feature that gives you an exclusive tour of the incredible sets of the film, Boarding: The People of The Terminal which includes interviews with Hanks, Spielberg etc and an In-Flight Service: Music of The Terminal featurette. Rounding off the limited edition set will be an exclusive The Terminal gift, although we don't know what it will be yet!
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedigitalbits.com%2Farticles%2Fmiscgfx%2Fcovers4%2Fterminaldvd.jpg&hash=9780ecad9bdb7457da7597f1d37b4cc16b67a1a7)
So I just watched this. I have a love/hate relationship with this very good debacle. First of all, it's pretty much the closest to art-house Spielberg you are going to get. It only uses one location really, a cast of enseble actors who WE recognize, it was cute, and Zeta Jones was a slut who always wanted it so that was cool. But....What is up with Spielberg stereotyping minorities. It was like it was in real life, all the minorities worked in the shadows and had fun out of public view with things like playng cards and stuff, as oppose to hitting up clubs and what not. And most of them were doing something wrong, and had to flee the country or something, it was pitiful. And the product placement, holy shit, Spielberg you corporate whore. There was blatant placement for Burger King, Starbucks, Barnes & Noble and many more, but it was awful cause it was all up in your face. Spielberg really needs to get a new DP cause Kaminski isn't cutting it any more, same shit, different film. Overall, it was quite enjoyable.
Quote from: StefenAnd the product placement, holy shit, Spielberg you corporate whore. There was blatant placement for Burger King, Starbucks, Barnes & Noble and many more, but it was awful cause it was all up in your face.
Wasn't it worse in Minority Report? Of course, in that film, he used it as a horror among the horizons, but i'll be damned if he didn't get paid for it.
umm i think the product placement was kinda necessary though...how at home would you have felt in that airport if it was filled with a bunch of fictional brandnames? that said, i didn't really like the terminal very much..
can someone link me to a review of the 2 disc edition?
the ones i find only have reviews of the bareboned edition.
thanks.
I watched it again last night. Liked it more the second time around. The only scene that bugged me, and really seems like it was written and shot late, was the Russian goat scene. It was an admirable attempt at an important issue, but poorly handled.
One other thing, a lot of people have trouble understanding why Viktor seems so dumb or goofy in the opening scenes, then suddenly he can speak some English after that. Well, he's from a country that was previously Communist. And now he's being questioned here by authorities. So he's just playing dumb in those scenes. He grew up in a police state.
Quote from: bigideascan someone link me to a review of the 2 disc edition?
the ones i find only have reviews of the bareboned edition.
thanks.
Haven't been able to find a review, but I can give you some idea of what's included.
Disc 1 is the film only. Disc 2 has all the special features. Disc 3 is the soundtrack.
On disc 2, the featurettes broken up into six different aspects of the production:
Booking The Flight: The script, the story (8 minutes)
Waiting For The Flight: Building the terminal (12 minutes)
Boarding: The people of the terminal (31 minutes)
Take Off: Making The Terminal (17 minutes)
In Flight Sevice: The music of The Terminal (6 minutes)
Landing: Airport stories (5 minutes)
If you've seen Spielberg's other DVD featurettes, then you can get an idea of what's included here. No commentary, but he does gives interviews and tells his thoughts about why he wanted to do the film, the technical aspects, why he hired these actors, and so on. It's really a wonder why this wasn't just released like the two disc Minority Report instead of the barebones and three disc sets. The best of extras are the ones about the construction of the impresive set (in a hangar that could hold six airplanes) and about the shooting of the film discussing the logistics of lighting the huge set to make it look like a real terminal with sunlight pouring in.
Let me know if you have anymore questions. Hope that helps.
thanks.
that blows my mind that a Spielberg release wouldn't get reviewed.
i guess they only sent out the bareboned version.
how is the soundtrack?
delightful little film. I fell under its spell and loved it.
you didnt think the zetajones character/subplot was underwritten?
Quote from: themodernage02you didnt think the zetajones character/subplot was underwritten?
Spoiler
I would have thought that if he would have ended up with her at the end. The fact that he didn't allows me to let that character be undeveloped. I would have been more upset had we left the realm of Victor's world and saw what she did outside the terminal.
Quote from: themodernage02you didnt think the zetajones character/subplot was underwritten?
Underwritten or just unbelievable. Take your pick. The film has charm for Hank's character and his situation, but why does it feel the need to throw in a romance as well? And especially for this off center foreigner and this stunning woman. It feels like a bad cliche being carried through.