Big...

[fajrdrako]

I have often seen a movie because I love the actor in the lead, but this may be the first time I've seen a movie explicitly because I dislike the actor in the lead. Sheila brought over a copy of Big for me to see specifically because I don't like Tom Hanks. And we watched it.

Most people do like Tom Hanks. He obviously has box office appeal. Only I am immune. Now, I don't dislike him enough to refuse to see one of his movies - I've seen a bunch of them, like Sleepless in Seattle and The Da Vinci Code, and while I've never thought one of his movies was brilliant, they were entertaining enough despite him - I just wish there'd been another actor in his place. Often when I say I don't like Tom Hanks, people say to me, "Have you seen Big? You'd like him in that."

So now I've seen Big. And yes, Tom Hanks put in a good performance in a role that played to his strengths, and the script was funny, and I enjoyed it. It certainly didn't make me a Tom Hanks fan, but I enjoyed seeing it.

It did strike me as strange that in this world where people are paranoid about sexuality and the young, that we have a mainstream comedy featuring sex between a thirteen-year-old boy and an adult woman.

I think the appeal of the movie was that it recaptured the thoughts and feelings of childhood - anyone who has ever been a child would relate to it.

It also reminded me of Tim.

Comments

[sollersuk.livejournal.com]

The only picture I've seen that I even remotely enjoyed with Tom Hanks in it was Apollo 13. And even then what I went overboard for was Ed Harris as Gene Kranz.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

My goodnes yes - wasn't Ed Harris good? I hadn't even remembered that Tom Hanks was in that movie. Which is part of my problem with Tom Hanks - I find him totally unmemorable. So when he has the lead part in a movie, generally, it's as if there's no one there....