Review: ‘Hedda’ (2025), starring Tessa Thompson, Imogen Poots, Tom Bateman, Nicholas Pinnock and Nina Hoss

October 20, 2025

by Carla Hay

Tom Bateman and Tessa Thompson in “Hedda” (Photo by Parisa Taghizadeh/Amazon Content Services)

“Hedda” (2025)

Directed by Nia DaCosta

Culture Representation: Taking place in 1950s England, the dramatic film “Hedda” (based on the play “Hedda Gabler”) features a predominantly white cast of characters (with a few black people) representing the working-class, middle-class and wealthy.

Culture Clash: Newlywed socialite Hedda Tesman, formerly known as Hedda Gabler, hosts a dinner party, where various manipulations and love triangles culminate in someone getting shot.

Culture Audience: “Hedda” will appeal primarily to people who are fans of the movie’s headliners, the play on which the movie is based, and well-acted dramas that creatively re-imagine well-known classic stories.

Tessa Thompson, Nina Hoss and Imogen Poots in “Hedda” (Photo by Parisa Taghizadeh/Amazon Content Services)

Writer/director Nia DaCosta’s “Hedda” not only creatively re-imagines Henrik Ibsen’s “Hedda Gabler” play by changing the ending and some racial and gender dynamics, but this drama also skillfully captures how glamour can be a mask for ugly manipulation. The acting is above-average, although some of the performances look a little too self-conscious when they should’ve looked more natural. The movie takes some bold swings that don’t always hit their mark, but “Hedda” is worth watching, regardless if viewers know about the original “Hedda Gabler” story.

“Hedda” is one of several movie adaptations of Ibsen’s 1891 play “Hedda Gabler,” which has been made into countless stage productions. DaCosta’s “Hedda” (which had its world premiere at the 2025 Toronto International Film Festival) changes the story location from 1890s Norway to 1950s England. The basic premise of the story remains the same (a greedy socialite manipulates her husband and other people around her), but the tone of the movie is much more of a dark comedy and less tragic than the original “Hedda Gabler.”

DaCosta’s “Hedda” takes place over the course of 24 hours at a mansion in an unnamed city in England. “Hedda” was actually filmed at Flintham Hall, a stately manor built in the 10th century and located near a wooded bank of the River Trent in Nottinghamshire, England. This river plays a key role in certain parts of the story, particularly a “full circle” moment that is not in the “Hedda Gabler” play.

In the beginning of the movie, newlywed Hedda Tesman, formerly known as Hedda Gabler (played by Tessa Thompson), is being questioned by police investigators about someone getting shot at the mansion in the early-morning hours. The shooting took place after an all-night dinner party hosted at the mansion by Hedda and her ambitious academic husband George Tesman (played by Tom Bateman), who is currently an unemployed professor. George in this version of “Hedda” is madly in love with Hedda and is needy about her reciprocating that love.

The mansion used to be owned by aristocrat General Gabler, Hedda’s widower father, who was heavily in debt when he died. The mansion was put up for sale, but George borrowed money to buy the mansion and to grant Hedda’s wish to keep the mansion in the family. (Hedda is General Gabler’s only child.) George borrowed the money from predatory Judge Roland Brack (played by Nicholas Pinnock), who is a longtime bachelor friend of the Gabler family. Judge Brack is expecting George to pay back this debt after George finds a job.

Hedda is smirking and trying to look calm during this police interview. However, it’s obvious she has a lot to hide. The investigators want her to tell them everything that happened at the party, from the beginning. The rest of the movie is a flashback to the previous 24 hours. It’s eventually revealed in the movie if the person who was shot either died or survived.

The flashback part of the movie begins by showing Hedda standing stoically in the lake and submerged up to her head. She quickly gets out of the lake and goes back to the mansion when someone shouts that Eileen Lövborg (played by Nina Hoss) is on the telephone and wants to speak to Hedda, who seems elated that she’s gotten this phone call. Observant viewers will notice that when Hedda gets out of the lake, she drops several stones that she had put in her clothes. It’s an indication that she had intended to drown herself in the lake before getting this phone call.

Whatever suicidal thoughts Hedda might have been having are pushed aside as she almost breathlessly takes Eileen’s call. Hedda candidly tells Eileen, “I thought you never wanted to speak to me again.” Eileen has called to tell Hedda that Eileen has accepted Hedda’s invitation to a dinner party that Hedda and George will be hosting that evening. It’s an invitation that Hedda did not tell George about, but Hedda tells George only after Eileen accepts the invitation.

George isn’t thrilled that Eileen will be attending the party because Eileen has a reputation for being a drunk troublemaker who hangs out with other rowdy substance abusers. What George doesn’t know is that Hedda and Eileen had a torrid affair years before George and Hedda got married. In the original “Hedda Gabler” play and in other previous movie adaptations of the play, the third person in this love triangle was a man named Eilert Lövborg.

Eileen is an out-and-proud lesbian during a time when it was extremely rare for people to be openly queer. She is considered to be a brilliant non-fiction writer who squandered her potential because of her alcoholism. Eileen’s first book was a smash success. She has since sobered up and completed the manuscript for her second book, which she describes as a “sequel of sorts” to her first book. Eileen hopes her second book will be her spectacular comeback.

Not much is detailed about the love affair that Eileen and Hedda had, except that Hedda broke Eileen’s heart by deciding to end the relationship and pretending like it never even happened. Eileen had been hoping that she and Hedda would make a life together, but Hedda chose to marry George so that Hedda could present herself as a traditional, heterosexual society wife. Based on the way that Hedda acts in the movie, Hedda doesn’t really love George because Hedda is still in love with Eileen. The only thing that Hedda seems to love about George is whatever George can do to get Hedda what she wants.

During the course of the movie, conversations reveal more about the main characters’ backgrounds, motivations and entanglements. Hedda married George because Hedda is terrified of losing her status in society. Hedda only knows the life of being an aristocrat (it’s mentioned that her father spoiled her), even if she’s a financially broke aristocrat.

Hedda keeps her dire financial situation a secret from most people. (George knows, of course.) At one point, Hedda confides in someone at the party that the only inheritance item that she got from her debt-ridden, deceased father was a pistol. And at this point, you know that will be the pistol used in the shooting.

The lavish party is partly a celebration of George and Hedda’s recent wedding and partly a way to impress a very important guest at the party: Professor Greenwood (played by Finbar Lynch), the decision maker of who will get a prestigious fellowship position at the unnamed university where George wants to work. George desperately wants this job because, as he reminds Hedda, George has gone into debt because of the money he spent on the mansion and the party. “I hope you’re happy,” George tells Hedda at the party. Hedda says, “I am,” but her tone of voice and the expression on her face indicate that she’s not happy at all.

Before Eileen arrives, an uninvited female guest shows up because she’s looking for Eileen. Her name is Thea Clifton, formerly known as Thea Ellison (played by Imogen Poots), who is a former acquaintance of Hedda’s because they used to go to the same secondary school. Hedda greets Thea warmly and says she has fond memories of their school friendship. Thea has very different recollections and reminds Hedda that they were never friends because Hedda bullied Thea when they were students at the same school.

Thea looks frazzled and disheveled, so Hedda gives Thea a “makeover” by letting Thea borrow a formal gown and some of Hedda’s makeup so Thea can look “presentable” at the party. While they spend time together, Thea (who doesn’t know that Hedda and Eileen used to be lovers) excitedly tells Hedda that Thea left her husband to be with Eileen, who is Thea’s lover and writing collaborator. Thea is at the party because she wants to tell Eileen the news that Thea left her husband and is now free to move in with Eileen. Whether or not Eileen wants the same thing is shown later in the movie.

Thea says she was an uncredited co-author of Eileen’s first book, but Thea will be credited for co-authoring Eileen’s second book. Thea also tells Hedda that Thea is the main reason why Eileen recently gave up drinking alcohol and promised to live a sober and healthy life. Thea has plans for Thea and Eileen to be a power couple in the literary world. You can easily guess how Hedda will react to all of this information.

Eileen makes her big entrance by showing up not with one guest, as she had told Hedda over the phone. Eileen shows up with six or seven people, most of whom already look and act intoxicated. Eileen has also brought the manuscript of her second book with her. She foolishly tells people (including Hedda and George) that it’s the only copy of the manuscript.

Eileen’s presence at the party becomes extra-worrisome for George because he hears that Professor Greenwood is interested in hiring Eileen for the job that George wants. Meanwhile, party attendee Judge Brack notices the tension at this soiree and delights in stirring up a bit of trouble. That’s because Judge Brack and Hedda had their own secret affair before she married George. Now that George is in financial debt to Judge Brack, this corrupt judge wants to use it to his advantage.

The race and gender swaps for this version of “Hedda” are intriguing ways to re-interpret the story because there’s more at stake in the social-climbing motivations of many of these characters. Eileen is very aware that being known as a lesbian can prevent her from getting many opportunities because of homophobia. Hedda is unwilling to be open about her own queerness because of fear that she will be shunned by upper-crust society. It’s in contrast to Thea, who has chosen to be open about her own queerness and knows she will have some social stigma because Thea has left her husband for Eileen, and Thea wants to be Eileen’s live-in partner.

“Hedda” isn’t a “color blind” movie that switches the race of a main character and doesn’t acknowledge the racial switch. There are quick but noticeable references to the prejudices that Hedda experiences for being biracial. After Hedda is introduced to Professor Greenwood’s much-younger pretentious wife Tabitha Greenwood (played by Mirren Mack), Tabitha snidely whispers to her husband that Hedda looks “much duskier than I thought she would.” It’s also briefly mentioned elsewhere that Hedda is a “bastard child” because her parents were not married.

Women’s maiden surnames and married surnames are used by various people to claim identities or assert power. Hedda doesn’t mind if people still call her by her maiden surname Gabler because the Gabler name has much more clout in this community than the Tesman name. By contrast, George is visibly annoyed when people refer to Hedda as Hedda Gabler and keeps reminding those people that her name is now Hedda Tesman. Meanwhile, Thea no longer wants to be associated with her husband and tells people that she’s gone back to using her maiden surname Ellison.

Although “Hedda” has great production design and impeccable costume design, the movie’s best assets are the performances of the principal cast members—particularly Thompson and Hoss as two former lovers whose unresolved feelings for each other are the catalyst for much of the turmoil and chaos that happen at this party. Kathryn Hunter has a memorable cameo as George’s aunt Bertie. DaCosta’s “Hedda” screenplay is mostly lively and filled with a lot of sarcastic wit. Thompson and DaCosta (who previously worked together on 2019’s “Little Woods” and 2023’s “The Marvels”) are two of the producers of “Hedda.”

“Hedda” is told in five chapters, announced as Roman numerals. The middle part of the movie tends to drag. However, the last third of the movie ramps up the tension and concludes in a way that will be unexpected to people who are expecting a recycling of the original “Hedda Gabler” play. “Hedda,” much like the title character, can make someone’s head spin with an enticing tale, but it’s not the kind of story that’s designed to make everyone feel good.

Amazon MGM Studios’ Orion Pictures will release “Hedda” in select U.S. cinemas on October 22, 2025. Prime Video will premiere the movie on October 29, 2025.

Review: ‘The Assessment’ (2025), starring Elizabeth Olsen, Himesh Patel, Alicia Vikander, Indira Varma, Nicholas Pinnock, Charlotte Ritchie, Leah Harvey and Minnie Driver

April 13, 2025

by Carla Hay

Himesh Patel and Elizabeth Olsen in “The Assessment” (Photo by Magnus Jønck/Magnolia Pictures)

“The Assessment” (2025)

Directed by Fleur Fortuné

Culture Representation: Taking place in an unnamed society in an unspecified period of time, the sci-fi drama film “The Assessment” features a predominantly white group of people (with a few South Asian and black people) representing the working-class, middle-class and wealthy.

Culture Clash: A married couple must past a rigorous seven-day assessment test, conducted by a government assessor, in order to determine if the couple will be approved to have a child.

Culture Audience: “The Assessment” will appeal primarily to people who are fans of the movie’s headliners and sci-fi dramas about futuristic worlds where the governments are oppressive and the protagonists have to make difficult decisions about compliance versus rebellion.

Alicia Vikander and Elizabeth Olsen in “The Assessment” (Photo by Magnus Jønck/Magnolia Pictures)

“The Assessment” is an emotionally somber but visually stylish drama that shows a post-apocalyptic society where people have to pass a government evaluation test for approval to become parents. The principal cast members give memorable performances. This movie seems intentionally set in an unspecified time and place because the underlying message is that what happens in the movie could happen in some variation at any time, in any place.

Fleur Fortuné, who has a background in directing music videos and short films, makes her feature-film directorial debut with “The Assessment.” The movie was written by Dave Thomas (under the alias Mr. Thomas), Nell Garfath Cox (under the alias Mrs. Thomas) and John Donnelly. “The Assessment’ (which was filmed in Spain) had its world premiere at the 2024 Toronto International Film Festival.

“The Assessment” begins by showing a scene of a girl name Mia (played by Suhayla Balli Al Soufi Del Diego), who’s about 12 or 13 years old, swimming in an ocean. Her mother is on the rocky shore and calls out to her: “Mia, come back!” It’s a flashback memory to a period of time when Mia last saw her mother. What happened to Mia’s mother is revealed in bits and pieces of conversations. Mia also had a sister, who is mentioned in the movie.

What is revealed is that this is a relatively new society that has left its “old world” behind because the “old world” became too polluted. Certain people who were considered “undesirable” or too rebellious were left behind in the “old world.” Those who made it to this new world are considered to be worthy of procreating so future generations can live in this new world.

But even among these “elite” survivors, there’s a hierarchy. Only a small percentage of people are chosen by the government to become parents. Those who are chosen have to go through a rigorous seven-day assessment test. During these seven days, the assessor lives with the prospective parents. The assessor’s decision is final on whether or not to approve the application.

When viewers first see adult Mia (played by Elizabeth Olsen) and her husband Aaryan (played by Himesh Patel), all of this background information is not revealed right away. What is shown early on in the movie is that Mia and Aaryan are happily married, but this upcoming visit from the assessor has caused tension in their marriage. In bed, Mia says to Aaryan: “What if we’re not good enough? I’m just nervous. It’s just all so secretive.”

Mia and Aaryan live in a modern-yet-retro-looking home on a rocky beach area. Mia is a sculptor who makes her art in a converted greenhouse. Aaryan works for the government as an artificial intelligence (A.I.) designer. The government has exterminated all real pets, so Aaryan is developing a secretive project that creates lifelike pets powered by artificial intelligence. The idea for these robot pets is so people can have a safe alternative to real pets. Aaryan has already built an A.I. cat as a beta test.

Artificial intelligence is an everyday and accepted part of life in this society. Mia and Himesh have an A.I. assistant that’s very similar to Amazon’s Alexa. The device’s owner can program the A.I. assistant to have different voices. Aaryan lets Mia know that he has changed their A.I. assistant’s voice to sound like his mother. Mia is okay with this change.

The couple’s assessor shows up fairly early on in the movie. Her name is Virginia (played by Alicia Vikander), who is a calm professional but very aloof and clinical. Virginia informs Mia and Aaryan that the couple made it into the top 1% of couples who are chosen for this assessment. Virginia tells Mia and Aaryan that they have the right to end the assessment at any time but warns that if they choose to end the assessment before it concludes, they won’t be given another chance to apply for another assessment.

Mia and Aaryan are also expected to give samples of their bodily fluids to Virginia, such as blood, mucus, semen and vaginal secretions. Virginia also says that Mia and Aaryan will be evaluated on their mental and emotional stability. And they are required to keep confidential everything that happens during this assessment visit. Needless to say, it’s a high-pressure situation for Mia and Aaryan to have one person (Virginia) decide whether or not Aaryan and Mia are fit to be parents.

At first, Mia and Aaryan are overly accommodating and polite because they want to do everything they can to impress Virginia. But over time, Mia becomes very uncomfortable with the process and openly questions Virginia’s tactics. Mia’s discomfort starts on the first day, when Virginia asks for explicit details on the couple’s sex life. Virginia writes everything down in a notebook.

Later that evening, when Mia and Aaryan are in their bedroom and getting sexually intimate, they are shocked to see that Virginia has opened the door to watch them in the hallway. Mia and Aaryan are embarrassed and stop what they’re doing. But Virginia orders them to keep doing what they’re doing and to pretend that she’s not there. Mia is much more reluctant than Aaryan to go along with this order.

Another major test comes when Virginia does some Method acting and pretends that she is a misbehaving and cranky toddler, 24 hours a day. The idea is to test the parental patience of Aaryan and Mia. You can easily predict which of the spouses will get frustrated and lose patience first.

What isn’t so easy to predict are some of the mind games that Virginia plays with this couple. These mind games have nothing to do with their skills as a parent but have to do with testing how strong the couple’s marriage is and their trust in each other. Viewers will start to wonder about Virginia’s manipulations: “Is this really part of the assessment, or is this something that Virginia that is doing that’s separate from the assessment?”

Although there’s friction between Mia and Virginia, there are a few moments where Mia opens up to Virginia. When Mia is asked why she wants to become a parent, Mia says: “I want to give a child what I never had: a sense of belonging.” Mia is the character who is the most likely to be an independent thinker, which is why Olsen gives the movie’s standout performance. Vikander’s performance becomes more layered as more things are revealed about Virginia.

Most of “The Assessment” features scenes only with Mia, Aaryan and Virginia. However, there’s a pivotal scene during Day 4 of the assessment’s when Virginia has invited six guests over to the couple’s house for a dinner party on short notice, without the consent of Mia and Aaryan. It’s another one of Virginia’s tests.

The six people invited to the party are Aayran’s accomplished mother Ambika (played by Indira Varma); a prominent scientist named Walter (played by Nicholas Pinnock); Walter’s snobbish wife Evie (played by Minnie Driver); and a friendly lesbian couple named Serena (played by Charlotte Ritchie) and Holly (played by Leah Harvey) with their daughter Amelia (played by Anaya Thorley), who’s about 5 or 6 years old. Serena and Holly, who are strangers to Mia and Aaryan, reassure Mia and Aaryan because they say that Amelia was the result of Serena and Holly getting an approved assessment. There’s tension between Mia and Evie because Mia used to be Walter’s lab assistant before Mia was married and might or might not have had an affair with Walter.

“The Assessment” is meant to make viewers ponder just how far they would be willing to go to take this type of test. The test isn’t just about getting “approval” to become parents. It’s also about how much control people will allow a government to have in their lives and how much people will choose to go along with outrageous orders without questions or criticism.

Some viewers might not like how the movie ends. However, the conclusion of the movie can be effectively intepreted as a sign of despair or sign of hope. Viewers are free to decide, based on their personal opinions and perspectives.

Magnolia Pictures released “The Assessment” in select U.S. cinemas on March 21, 2025. The movie was released on digital and VOD on April 8, 2025.

Review: ‘Here’ (2024), starring Tom Hanks and Robin Wright

November 2, 2024

by Carla Hay

Robin Wright and Tom Hanks in “Here” (Photo courtesy of TriStar Pictures)

“Here” (2024)

Directed by Robert Zemeckis

Culture Representation: Taking place in Philadelphia from 1503 to 2022, the dramatic film “Here” (based on the graphic novel of the same name) features a predominantly white cast of characters (with a few Native Americans and African Americans) representing the working-class and middle-class.

Culture Clash: The movie’s story shows what happens on a section of land through various centuries, including the conflicts and challenges of families who lived in a house that was built on the land in 1907.

Culture Audience: “Here” will appeal mainly to people who are fans of the movie’s headliners and don’t mind experimental movies that are dull and disjointed.

Tom Hanks and Robin Wright (center) in “Here” (Photo courtesy of TriStar Pictures)

“Here” is an overinflated bore that should have been a brief visual arts installation instead of a feature-length movie. The story is too fragmented for character development. The visual effects make real people look like video game characters. “Here” has a much-hyped reunion of the director and the two main stars of the Oscar-winning 1994 blockbuster “Forrest Gump” for an entirely different story, but this reunion in “Here” fizzles instead of sizzles. “Here” had its world premiere at the 2024 edition of AFI Fest.

Directed by Robert Zemeckis (who co-wrote the “Here” screenplay with “Forrest Gump” screenwriter Eric Roth), “Here” is adapted from Richard McGuire’s 2014 graphic novel of the same name. “Forrest Gump” co-stars Tom Hanks and Robin Wright, who played a couple with a troubled relationship in “Forrest Gump,” also portray a couple with a troubled relationship in “Here.” The story concept of “Here” is simple, but it’s difficult to make a meaningful movie out of it. That’s because the story structure (which takes place over multiple centuries) is constructed as visual snippets of the lives of people who occupied a particular section of land in what would become the U.S. city of Philadelphia.

“Here” begins with eye-rolling pretentiousness by showing this section of land during an era when dinosaurs roamed the earth. Dinosaurs are seen galloping and charging through this land. During this brief part of “Here,” people might be wondering, “What is this? A dinosaur movie?” A montage then shows changing seasons and how the land evolved over the next centuries.

And then, the movie’s story officially begins in 1503, when an oak tree sapling begins to grow. The movie later shows that the oak tree was cut down in 1899. In 1907, a Cape Cod-styled house was built where the oak tree used to be.

Some people who hear about this movie might have the wrong impression that “Here” only shows the interior of a house’s family living room throughout various decades. That’s only partially true. Although the majority of “Here” consists of the interior living room scenes, the movie has many scenes that take place outdoors, before this house was built in 1907. These pre-1907 outdoor scenes are ultimately unnecessary and distracting.

These pre-1907 scenes take place in the section of land when it was an undeveloped wooded area. In 1609 and 1610, an unnamed man (played by Joel Oulette) and an unnamed woman (played by Dannie McCallum), who are both Native American, become a couple and have a baby. Their “courtship” consists of the man giving the woman a handmade necklace. That is all you will learn about this couple in this dreadfully shallow movie.

The couple is only shown hanging out in this wooded area. You don’t get to see where they live for shelter. You don’t get to see their personalities. You don’t get to see how they raise their child. You don’t get to see anything about their tribe or community. And you don’t even get to see them talk, because the “Here” filmmakers decided that the Native American characters needed to be completely mute in this movie.

Depriving these Native American characters of names and dialogue just reeks of filmmaker condescension, as if just showing these Native Americans in a few short-lived moments is enough to fulfill diversity requirements. It’s an appallingly tone-deaf approach to diversity. And it’s an example of how underrepresented people are often presented as “inferior” or “less than” the demographics who get the most screen time and dialogue in the average Hollywood studio movie.

“Here” also has intermittent scenes taking place in the 1700s to show portions of the life of Benjamin Franklin (played by Keith Bartlett), his wife Elizabeth Franklin (played by Leslie Zemeckis), their son William Franklin (played by Daniel Betts) and William’s son Billy Franklin (played by Alfie Todd). “Here” isn’t a biopic of the Benjamin Franklin family, so these scenes look jarringly out-of-place, especially since “Here” does a lot of non-chronological timeline jumping.

One minute, there could be a scene taking place in the house in the 20th century. The next minute, there could be a scene taking place in the wooded area before the house was built. There are superficial references to the Revolutionary War in the Benjamin Franklin family scenes. You will not be getting any history lessons from watching this movie.

In “Here,” Hanks and Wright portray a longtime married couple named Richard “Ricky” Young and Margaret Young. Most people who want to watch “Here” for the scenes with Hanks and Wright will be disappointed to see that these two stars are only in about half of the movie. The other scenes are for the characters who are in various timelines. Some of these other characters are family members of Richard and Margaret, while most of the other characters do not know the Young family at all.

Here are the characters who live in this house at various times:

Married couple John Harter (played by Gwilym Lee) and Pauline Harter (played by Michelle Dockery) are the house’s first residents in 1907. John really wants the house and persuades a reluctant Pauline that they should buy the house. John is enthusiastic about being a private airplane pilot in his spare time, so he later mortgages the house to buy a small airplane. John’s airplane pilot activities cause tension in the marriage because Pauline thinks it’s a dangerous hobby. Pauline is particularly upset when she finds out that John took their daughter (born in 1911) on the plane with him for a short ride.

Leo Beekman (played by David Fynn) and Stella Beekman (played by Ophelia Lovibond) are a free-spirited, childless married couple who live in the house from 1925 to 1944. The scenes with the Beekmans are competently acted but have no real emotional connection to the rest of the movie. All you will learn about this couple is that they have a fixation on a reclining, swiveling chair that they call a “relaxy boy chair,” and at one point in time Leo took partially nude photos of Stella to make some extra money.

Al Young (played by Paul Bettany) and his pregnant wife Rose Young (played by Kelly Reilly) move into the house in 1945. At the time, Al is 22 years old and a World War II veteran. It’s later shown that Al has undiagnosed post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and he abuses alcohol as a way to cope with his mental illness. Al has a moody personality that becomes volatile when he’s drunk. Rose is a dutiful and passive wife who has to cope with Al’s unpredictable mood swings.

Al, who grew up during the Great Depression, is constantly worried about money, which is why he took a stable job as a corporate salesperson. Their first child Richard, nicknamed Ricky, is born shortly after they move into the house in 1945. Al and Rose eventually have two other children: Elizabeth (born in 1950) and Jimmy (born in 1952). When Richard is about 16 years old, Al loses his job and has a period of unemployment, which causes turmoil in the marriage of Al and Rose.

Various performers depict the children of Al and Rose, at various stages of the children’s lives. The role of underage Richard is portrayed by Ellis Grunsell, Teddy Russell, Finn Guegan and Callum Macreadie. Lauren McQueen has the role of young adult Elizabeth, while Grace Lyra, Jemima Macintyre, Billie Gadsdon and Beau Gadsdon portray Elizabeth as an underage child. Harry Marcus has the role of young adult Jimmy, while Diego Scott, Logan Challis and Albie Salter portray Jimmy as an underage child.

Richard is very artistic and shows from a young age that he has a talent for drawing and painting. He especially likes to make portraits of his loved ones. Richard wants to be a graphic designer, but Al discourages this career and tells Richard that Richard should choose a profession that has more financial stability and requires wearing a suit in an office.

At 18 years old, Richard (played by Hanks) and his 17-year-old girlfriend Margaret (played by Wright) are in love with each other. The first time that Richard brings Margaret to his house to meet his family, she makes a good impression. Rose tells Margaret that Rose regrets giving up a career as a bookkeeper to become a homemaker. Rose advises Margaret to not make the same mistake and to pursue any career path that Margaret wants to have.

One night, when Richard and Margaret are alone in the living room, they have sex on the living room couch. She gets pregnant from this encounter. Richard and Margaret then have a quickie wedding in the living room in April 1964. In case viewers don’t know it’s 1964 in this scene, the movie makes a point of showing that during the wedding ceremony, the TV in the living room is tuned in to the Beatles performing on “The Ed Sullivan Show.”

In September 1964, Richard and Margaret’s first and only child Vanessa is born. Richard puts aside his dream to become a graphic designer and takes a job as a life insurance salesman to support his family, as they continue to live in this house that is owned by Al and Rose. Vanessa as a child is portrayed by Albie Mander, Eloise Ferreira, Eliza Daley, Elodie Crapper and Faith Delaney. Vanessa as a young adult is portrayed by Zsa Zsa Zemeckis.

Richard and Margaret are loving and devoted parents to Vanessa, but trouble is brewing in the marriage, beginning in the marriage’s early years. Richard keeps postponing plans for him and Margaret to get their own home because he says they can’t afford it. Margaret, who is a homemaker, offers to get a part-time job to help with the expenses, but Richard wants to be the only income earner for their family. Adding to the marital strain, someone in the Young family has a major health crisis in 1979.

While all of these issues are going on in the Young family, “Here” abruptly cuts in and out to scenes that happen before and after the Young family members are living in that house. It’s later revealed that someone in the Young family sold the house in 2005, but Richard and Margaret go back to visit the house in 2022, when the house is up for sale again. This visit is not spoiler information because it’s in the trailer for “Here.”

In 2015, a family of three move into the house: Devon Harris (played by Nicholas Pinnock); his wife Helen Harris (played by Nikki Amuka-Bird); and their teenage son Justin Harris (played by Cache Vanderpuye), who is a high school student. The Harris family has a housekeeper named Raquel (played by Anya Marco-Harris), who gets COVID-19 in November 2020. Don’t expect to learn much more about this family.

Just like in the scenes with the Native Americans, “Here” clumsily handles the scenes with characters who aren’t white. The Harris family scenes have a racially condescending tone to them because the most memorable scenes with the Harris family have to do with pointing out that this family is African American. When the Harris family first moves into the house, Devon comments on how this house probably used to be owned years ago by people who never thought a black family would live there. Later, “Here” has a scene where Justin gets a family talk about how to deal with racist police officers.

“Here” is so enamored with its concept of “scenes (mostly) from a living room,” this ultimately flat and listless movie fails to explore deeper issues and refuses to answer inevitable questions. One of the biggest unanswered questions is: Why is married Richard so stubborn about living with his parents when he knows it makes his wife unhappy?

Richard took a job as a life insurance salesperson so that he could support his family, but obviously the job doesn’t pay enough for him to feel financially independent. It’s not as if Richard and Margaret have several children to financially support. They only have one child. This isn’t a situation where Richard and Margaret stayed in his parents’ house for a few years after their marriage. They stayed for several years.

After a while, it just doesn’t ring true that Richard (who lives rent-free in his parents’ house) isn’t making enough money to save for a down payment and mortgage on a small house for his family of three. Richard doesn’t have any addiction or spending problems that would explain why he keeps using the excuse that he can’t afford to buy a home of his own. By having Richard and Margaret “stuck” in the house for more years than what Margaret wants, it looks like a very contrived reason for the couple’s marital strife.

And speaking of things that look phony, the de-aging visual effects in “Here” are not entirely convincing, especially in scenes with Hanks, Wright and Bettany portraying characters who are supposed to be younger than 25. The faces don’t look natural. And neither do many of the body movements.

The best aspects of “Here” have to do with the movie’s production design, which looks meticulously accurate for each era that is depicted. There are some scenes where the background of the living room is clearly not real but is the creation of computer-generated imagery (CGI), making it obvious that “Here” blurs the lines between real production design and CGI design. The movie’s costume design is quite notable. However, production design and costume design are not enough to make a good movie.

“Here” undoubtedly has a very talented cast, but they are restricted by having characters with personalities that lack depth and have scenes that are cut too short and edited in an off-putting way. If “Here” had omitted everything that happened before the house was built and just focused on the two most interesting families who lived in the house, then “Here” might have been a meaningful film. As it stands, “Here” is a fairly ambitious experiment that is a failed experiment because of muddled storytelling that is in service of soulless visual effects.

TriStar Pictures released “Here” in U.S. cinemas on November 1, 2024.

Copyright 2017-2025 Culture Mix
CULTURE MIX