Philadelphia

Overall, I found Philadelphia to be a pretty good movie. I thought the film was captivating for the most part, and while I wasn't blown away in awe by the film, there were many understated moments that allowed me to pause and reflect on the state of discrimination in my own society.

I felt that the acting was certainly the strongest point of the film. Not surprisingly, Tom Hanks is given a great deal of credit for his performance as Andrew Beckett, an aspiring homosexual lawyer who not only has his physical life cut short by AIDS, but also his career is destroyed by the social diseases of bigotry and misunderstanding as he is wrongfully dismissed by his employers because of his condition. The physical implications of his ailment are obvious and need not really be discussed, but what I really liked about the movie is how it gives insight into far bigger social ramifications. The horrors of homophobia were really exposed and I wondered if we really have progressed so much as a society since 1993 when Philadelphia was released or if there has in fact been little change. It's pretty ironic that Beckett is so quiet and reserved about his life given that many people have the misconception that homosexuals try to force their nature upon other people and can't control their emotions. Philadelphia clearly undermines this notion by showing that homosexuality doesn't present a threat to society, but rather the ignorance and hatred that many people have in response to homosexuality is the real problem. However, this isn't to say that Tom Hanks delivers the only memorable performance in the film. I really enjoyed Denzel Washington in his role as Joe Miller, an initially homophobic lawyer who only takes Beckett's case for wrongful dismissal as a means through which he can boost his own reputation and image. Miller's loudmouthed and blunt nature really contrasts with the personality of Beckett as he is able to articulately voice Beckett's grievances against those who have wronged him. Although Miller is shown to be unreceptive and misinformed at first, his transformation by the end of the film resonates a positive message and gives hope that others can change as well.

While I appreciated that the film didn't try to shove a moral in my face and left the ending open to interpretation, I still feel like there were points where the movie kind of dragged. The constant switching between the court hearings and the personal lives of both Beckett and Miller was effective at times, but the movie also lost some momentum at these points. Often I found that the movie was building towards a powerful conclusion during the court scenes, but then it would revert to a past part of Beckett's life that wasn't really related to what was going on in the main plot. I felt that some of the flashbacks had nothing to do with Beckett's condition, and really had no contribution to the message of the film involving ignorance and discrimination. Thus, the action and intensity of the film would be interrupted with events that were fairly irrelevant and served little purpose other than lengthening the film's runtime. Honestly though, this is a fairly nitpicky point and if you watch the movie it doesn't happen too often, but when it does it's annoying.

One aspect of the film I enjoyed is how it delivers a positive message at the end by showing that we all have the power to change, and that it is never too late to right a wrong. I was particularly impressed that the film managed to leave me with a positive and heartwarming feeling given that the main character is inflicted with an ailment that he has no hope of recovering from. Thus, while the movie shows the inevitability of physical death and decay, it also performs the far more important task of showing that it is possible to overcome adversity even in the face of the most bleak outcomes such as combatting AIDS. The transformation of Joe Miller throughout Philadelphia really punctuates the message that the movie tries to send. Even though this is Andrew Beckett's story, Miller is a crucial component for representing society. Miller's final speech in court is evidence of his evolution as he is able to overcome his initial distrust and skepticism of Beckett in order to combat the far bigger scourges that plague our civilization. This movie gives me hope that we can become a more accommodating and understanding society over time.

Philadelphia isn't the most awe-inspiring or intense drama. However, the film featured some great performances and left me with a sense of satisfaction because it gave me hope that we have the capacity to change for the better. This is certainly a movie worth watching, and I especially recommend it to anyone who likes any of the other Tom Hanks dramas.