A Risky Narrative Leaves Viewers Divided

Controversy never seems to cease for a recently released movie called Here directed by the renowned director Robert Zemeckis. Critics and audiences can’t agree on the film as some consider its narrative to be confusing and others even “brilliant” since it is an ambitious storyline that unfolds in a single location but has multiple timelines.

Experimental cinema fans appreciate the boldness of it all, but a great many viewers have been confused, leaving theaters in search of the connection they missed between the lines.
Mixing the glowing reviews and the harsh criticism, Here is fast becoming one of the most polarizing films of the year.
Work of art or exercise in frustration? The debate rages on.

An Experimental Plot Raises Questions

Based on the graphic novel by Richard McGuire, Here is shot entirely in a single room, with the action playing out over several centuries-from prehistoric times to a dystopian future. The storyline of the film is all over the place, leaping from one era to another, so that you have to figure out for yourself what the story might be.

While the concept has been acclaimed for its creativity that went beyond the boundaries of filmmaking, viewers expecting an easy narrative would be disoriented.
“It’s a beautiful visual work, but I was running after a story that never gelled,” a viewer commented after watching a screening in New York.
“It’s both gorgeous and exhausting,” said Variety critic.
Stars in this movie include Tom Hanks and Robin Wright as actors playing different roles as people who overlap between lives. Some were positive towards how they had delivered on acting since their skills have the capability to be displayed smoothly through changing between a lot of characters while, others could not fathom what to make out of them, mainly the film not flowing cohesively well which would give an idea on their performing as some may fail to be sensitive about what their actors had done.

Many bright moments centered around cinematographer Don Burgess, which stitched fantastic sight and numerous timelines all together but often left people wanting to see more on the character front due to the film’s over dependence on images at the cost of words. “Well, without a doubt it is lovely, but I felt it emotionally like they were listening to visual priorities before emotional involvement,” said an attendee with some disappointment at the movie.

A Divisive Film

Some have compared Here to films such as Tree of Life or Cloud Atlas, praising the ambition in its philosophical nature. However, it is not a film for all. General audiences used to more traditional narratives may be alienated by its structure.

“Zemeckis has created something that’s as daring as it is divisive,” film critic Ann Taylor wrote. “Some will call it a masterpiece, while others will dismiss it as pretentious.”

This is a divide in the audience that mirrors a growing trend in Hollywood, where bold cinematic experiments often receive both praise and backlash.

“Art or excess?” seems to be the question on everyone’s lips.

A Film That Challenges More Than It Entertains

This is undoubtedly an ambitious experiment in film, but it is up to the viewer who can control their readiness for its non-linear storytelling. The debates that are currently roaming about on various film forums and social networking sites reveal the impact that this film has-for good or ill.

“A movie meant to be talked more than enjoyed.”

Only time will tell if Here will be remembered as a misunderstood masterpiece or a confusing misstep. For now, it stands as a testament to the fact that pushing creative boundaries comes with praise and risk.

The long-term legacy of the film will depend on whether audiences appreciate the complicated narrative in retrospect, or whether they move on, wanting something more accessible. In either case, Here makes sure that Zemeckis’s reputation as a daring filmmaker is kept in place, for better or worse.

image credit