Spielberg never heard about the statelessness status, which is a very protective status, which doesn't allow situations
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — The Terminal
Guildion — 9 years ago(August 31, 2016 07:31 AM)
Spielberg never heard about the statelessness status, which is a very protective status, which doesn't allow situations like in this film, and regroups millions of people around the world.
This film is stupid, and could easily be taken as a pro mass immigration propaganda by an european. -
-
Pseudo-geordie boy — 9 years ago(December 23, 2016 11:14 AM)
-
nimstic — 9 years ago(December 27, 2016 04:56 PM)
That's what I was thinking. This was no documentary, but there was also no need of suspension of disbelief and see it as a purely entertaining film.
There is a real case of an Iranian refugee that inspired Speilberg to make this film. It was dramatised, and rightly so. It was made into a thoroughly enjoyable movie experience. The critic (OP & Gang) also ignore the stunning performance of Tom Hanks. How did this guy transform himself into this central Asian man with such flawlessness!?
Not a Speilberg fan, but enjoyed this one -
Trax-3 — 9 years ago(December 26, 2016 09:45 PM)
This film doesn't even try to be realistic so how can you possibly hold something against it doesn't even try to achieve? You have to accept the rules of that particular Universe, so to say. This is a comedy, a feel good movie, in the tradition of Frank Capra (with a touch of Kafka) about the struggles of the little man against the system/society. Jimmy Stewart punching reporters in Mr. Smith or Gary Cooper giving away all his money in Mr. Deeds is also absurd unrealistic fantasy.
I thought this film was a very successful emulation of that style even though it kind of lost its way in the second half a bit. But what we have is still a beautiful and amazingly directed film.