Philadelphia (1993)

Alright, here's how it is. Main review takes up a huge chunk of the blog. However, if you're looking for a quick synopsis of what I think, the bottom paragraph and mark out of 5 should suffice. Enjoy the review, or better yet: go see the film and enjoy that!

When Andrew Beckett (Tom Hanks) contracts AID’s and is promptly fired by his conservative law firm, he sets out to prove that he was fired because of his sexual orientation with the help of a homophobic small time lawyer.

Philadelphia starts out quite well. Everything seems happy, and generally, the mood is quite similar. Generally, there’s a positive atmosphere. We get to meet Mr Beckett, played to perfection (as ever) by Tom Hanks. Everything seems pretty perfect. But then suddenly, we find out that Beckett has AID’s. and about the same time he is revealed to have AID’s, he’s revealed to have been fired from a job he obviously excels at (he stays up working ‘till 10 fer chrissakes!) Obviously, something isn’t right.

Getting straight to the point: this film is now officially a period piece. I know that some people are still homophobic, but Philadelphia deals with homophobia in the early 90’s and the crisis of AID’s which just about everyone is now completely aware is very bad.

So, Beckett thinks he has a case, but because he’s dying of AID’s and everyone in the early 90’s was scared to death of anyone with this disease (or at least that’s what the film is trying to portray) he can’t get a lawyer. Naturally, he’s going to go to the token black lawyer Joe Miller (Denzel Washington) last. There’s this really fantastic scene where Beckett goes to Millers office and he has to say the words “I have AID’s…” That one moment in the entire film is completely priceless as both Hanks and Washington’s reactions are spot on.
Naturally, Miller is just as scared as everyone else is so he says no and this gives us the chance to explore a few other examples of prejudice. It’s only when Miller is thinks about the prejudice he throws towards Beckett that he realises, being black, he’s likely to be judged in exactly the same way. The best scene in the film is set in a library when Miller realises how the librarian feels about him as he walks past. And in the very same scene, is the most accurate portrayal of prejudice against gays when Beckett is asked if he’d ‘feel more comfortable’ in a private reading room. Once again, Hanks plays the role to perfection and the whole scene is incredibly awkward.

Everything plays out perfectly up until the trial. The scenes are interesting and the performances are great. But when the trial begins, the film unfortunately begins to fall apart.
Don’t get me wrong, the trial scenes are superb. They really strengthen my idea of Washington as a great actor. But because the film is about Beckett, and he really isn’t in a position to be saying much throughout the trial scenes, he has a lot of scenes devoted solely to him towards the end. In the early 90’s, seeing that a gay man was the same as any other individual would have been a great move to make, and would have put the film-makers in the gay rights activists good books. But it really does feel in these scenes like they’ve tried to hard. Tom Hanks cannot perform badly, but generally when not in court, the films writing seems shoddy. The screenplay is commendable only for the issues it raises because other than that, it feels a little bland. On top of that the direction doesn’t seem to exist. It almost feels as if everyone on set knew what they were doing and so director Jonathan Demme just sat back and watched them do it.

Despite this, the scenes with Beckett’s family are delightful and you almost feel as if you’re being welcomed into the family’s home thanks to the clever plot device of looking at things from the perspective of a handheld camera.
The opera scene is also very powerful and a very unconventional method of throwing in lighting to reflect the actors moods as opposed to what would be realistic really makes the scene strong.

Generally, the themes throughout the film are very strong and the entire cast (primary and supporting) are beyond perfect. It just seems to be let down slightly by the writing and direction.

Worth seeing for the performances, or if you want what I can only assume was a vaguely accurate portrayal of prejudice towards homosexuality and AID’s victims, but suffers as a film.

3/5