Rating: 
Summary: What about the other actors?
Review: Most would agree that the movie is well-scripted and directed. From this point they launch into their tirades on discrimination against those with AIDS and/or homosexuals. As a social issues movie, it is peerless, no doubt, but for different reasons than most people think. Lost the applause for Hanks, deserved applause though it is, is that Denzel is sublime. While Hanks takes on all the emotional scenes, the physical transformation, etc. Washington has a far more detailed character. The first time you watch the movie, you remember Hanks but repeated watching reveals Washington's work. More than just the, at first I'm wrong, now I'm right character, Washington instead shows a far more complex view of the dreaded buzz word tolerance. Late into the movie he still is belligerent to gays and there is no suggestion that he ever becomes pro-gay. Instead, he displays a far more moving, complex, and interesting transformation that is worth watching. The defense attorney and Antonio Banderas are also commonly ignored but still skilled. Also, buy the score. Beside the two Oscar nominated songs, it contains the moving Rossini aria that is highlighted in the movie which is, possibly, the greatest song ever written, even if you don't like opera.
Rating:
Summary: Not Just About AIDS.
Review: The thing I liked about Philadelphia is that not only did it deal with discrimination against people with AIDS, but let's face it, it dealt with discrimination against gays. It's too bad that this is the only film that even touched upon discrimination against gays in an honest way. I still think there should be a film that really exposes the hatred in America. For now, Philadelphia will do. Great performances and directing. If you haven't seen Boys Don't Cry, check out the extreme prejudice there. Philadelphia is a must have for any film collector.
Rating:
Summary: Tom Hanks... Outstanding
Review: Some say that this movie is a bit too one-sided. Perhaps it was, but I think that was necessary to convey the movie's messages of discrimination and prejudice. But this review is not to speak of the political implications of the movie. I would like to congratulate Tom Hanks for such a brilliant performance.There was one particular scene that moved me. When he seems to be without hope. He is standing alone on the street wearing his baseball cap, looking around and on the verge of tears, but there are no tears - just an image of hopelessness. It was at that moment when I realized the pain of Hanks' character Andrew Beckett, and I felt it with him. 5 stars, Tom Hanks.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent,however...
Review: Excellent movie, successful production, plus stars are super. This movie deserves more than five stars. Except that it is a bit too one-sided, too critic on the employers who fired the guy who was AIDS patient. Certainly the rights of the sick should not be ignored, however most of those who sympathizes with the AIDS patient would not act very different from the callous-looking employers at all. Nevertheless, its aim is justice - glad it was the sick man who won and he knew that he won in his deathbed. More films like that please.
Rating:
Summary: I am modifying my earlier review
Review: I wish to admit the word "wrongful" in lieu of "unlawful" to my earlier review.
Rating: 
Summary: Politically correct and not gay-friendly
Review: I was like almost everybody around me at that time and loved this movie. Performances and the soundtrack were flawless. I cried a lot, was totally enchanted. So were all the others. And THAT was eventually my problem. Hollywood made it: there's a guy, this lawyer who once sinned, he slept around and caught AIDS. Shocking, isn't it ? You get what you deserve... That's what most people would still think until the end of the movie if there wasn't this "correct" ending that changes it all: he DOES die at the end, and what a suffering death ! he sinned and now he expiates. So, children, no danger. "These people" do bad things you don't want to know anything about (see how embarrassed the hearing feels when Hanks relates his encounter in the porn theatre - he hasn't killed anybody, has he ?), and no matter how bright or good they are, they have to be punished by death, won't bring anymore trouble in our respectable society -embodied by Denzel Washington-, so eventually, let's forgive them. And here it is, the Aids-infected gay guy dies in front of the whole world! The financial details of the verdict are just too fallacious to offset such a tragic event. A relevant scene: during the trial, a testifying woman has AIDS too. She is depicted as friendly as Hanks' character. But she's not gay, so the movie takes care not to mention at any time her suffering moments, her dying condition, if there is. In her case, it is just made unbearable to think that an innocent woman could die from such a gay disease - she has done nothing "wrong". All in all, a moving story, but a regressive morality.
Rating: 
Summary: VERY VERY GOOD
Review: Jonathan Demme is a director who manages to infuse his movies with wonderful subtle touches, like the all-important opening sequence in this movie, a montage of the City of Brotherly Love -- spiraling faces, painted murals, bombed out sections of old town -- to the haunting Springsteen song. As a mainstream movie about AIDS this is top-notch. Hanks is heartbreaking, as is Joanne Woodward in her usual no-nonsense form. The opera scene seems a bit over the top, and I miss a real connection between Hanks and his hot Latin lover Antonio Banderas, but this movie went a long way in bringing the disease and its presence among us real and acceptable to many more people. Responsible and poignant.
Rating:
Summary: Secured acting fame for Tom Hanks
Review: Well-made film about a gay lawyer with AIDS who sues his former firm for a wrongful discharge. This movie represents a landmark for Tom Hanks. This fine actor who was previously cast in comedy roles almost exclusively showed the world his versatility in a serious role in this picture. This is also one of the first film roles for Denzel Washington after the cancellation of the TV show "St. Elsewhere".
Rating:
Summary: Secured acting fame for Tom Hanks
Review: Well-made film about a gay lawyer with AIDS who sues his former firm for an unlawful discharge. This movie represents a landmark for Tom Hanks. This fine actor who was previously cast in comedy roles almost exclusively showed the world his versatility in a serious role in this picture. This is also one of the first film roles for Denzel Washington after the cancellation of the TV show "St. Elsewhere".
Rating:
Summary: Great performances but a little too controversial
Review: I think Hollywood went a little off the deep end with this film. It's a good movie but it preaches way too much. My views are very conservative and I just found the subject matter to be a little too off color. But on screen you will see Hanks and Washington give excellent performances. I pondered at the end of the film who gave the best performance. And no matter what your views are you can't deny Tom Hanks the oscar for this film.
|
