Badly hurt by negative reactions, Robert Zemeckis’ “Here,” which opened in 2500+ screens in November, ended up only making $12M during its run. The budget was $60M. Mainstream critics absolutely hated this movie — 40 on Metacritic, 37% on RT.
However, a reappraisal is already happening on Zemeckis’ “experimental” film which covers the events of a single room and its inhabitants spanning from the past (paleolithic) to well into the future as Tom Hanks and Robin Wright get de-aged in a film that sees them meet as teenagers and grow old well into their octogenarian years.
“Here” is #14 on The Film Stage’s Top 50 Films of 2024. The outlet calls it the “biggest-budget experimental film ever made.” The Ringer also has it at #10 for 2024. Meanwhile, Slant Magazine’s critics also named it one of the year’s best, yet again mentioning how it’s basically a “bona fide experimental film funded and distributed by a major studio.”
Filmmaker Vera Drew (“The People’s Joker”) also believes it to be a great film:
I cried through the whole movie. From dinosaurs to Ben Franklin. Movies are supposed to be this on the nose, you fucking hipsters. 30 years ago, this would have made a billion dollars and would win best picture.
The film has been compared to Michael Snow’s 1967 landmark “Wavelength” which was also shot from a fixed camera angle, depicting a loft space with an extended zoom over the duration of the film.
In “Here,” Zemeckis used deepfake VFX to de-age actors with the help of effects studio Metaphysic. The technology used high-resolution photorealistic face swaps and de-aging effects on top of actors’ performances live and in real-time without the need for further compositing or VFX work.
Not everyone’s a fan of the film. You’ve had many criticizing “Here” for its usage of AI. Just yesterday, Lisa Kudrow slammed it as an “endorsement for AI.”
And all I got from that was, this is an endorsement for AI and oh, my God. It’s not like, ‘Oh, it’s going to ruin everything,’ but what will be left? Forget actors, what about up-and-coming actors? They’ll just be licensing and recycling.
Since it’s now readily available on VOD, maybe now’s a good time to ask our readers what they thought about Zemeckis’ risky experiment. Does “Here” deserve a critical reappraisal?
Remember when, back in August, we learned “The Further Mis-Adventures of Cliff Booth” would be playing in only around 350 U.S. theaters, "maybe fewer"? Well, it's fewer. A lot fewer.