DreamWorks Distribution | Release Date: June 18, 2004
8.1
USER SCORE
Universal acclaim based on 385 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
317
Mixed:
49
Negative:
19
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
4
PatC.Sep 6, 2005
Cheap drawn-out overdramatization and awkward slapstick blows situations that were trying to ring true. Spielberg needs to go back to making movies where the characters are carbon-based life forms.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
4
FilipeNetoApr 25, 2018
Anyone who has traveled by plane usually hates wait long at customs or passenger control, and can lose his composure with delays or baggage losses. In this case, the unfortunate passenger played by Tom Hanks will go through a bit of all thatAnyone who has traveled by plane usually hates wait long at customs or passenger control, and can lose his composure with delays or baggage losses. In this case, the unfortunate passenger played by Tom Hanks will go through a bit of all that for having lost his own nationality, ending retained "ad aeternum" in New York airport terminal. Assuming that this film is a comedy with some romance, the idea is good, even if it seems little logic. Despite this promising start, the script ends up lost in trivialities and huge plot holes. One of the most egregious is the fact that Viktor, Tom Hanks' character, who hardly spoke a word of English, having learned so quickly the language. His story with Amelia (played by Catherine Zeta-Jones) also does not fit in the rest of the film, so that is quickly cut with a simple and abrupt ending.

Tom Hanks deserves, however, congratulations. He was again perfectly up to his work. His character could be just a caricature of any citizen of the former USSR countries, but he managed to give it a very kind and patient soul, who easily conquers the public. Zeta- Jones had less luck with her character, poorly planned and poorly embedded in the plot but, nevertheless, made a decent and satisfying work. Stanley Tucci makes a good villain in the person of airport immigration director, Frank Dixon.

This film is pure entertainment, and it works very well in this light. But it could have been more intelligently developed in several aspects.
Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
6
JustinCDec 13, 2005
It's a good movie, don't get me wrong, just a loooooooooong and sometimes boring one.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
TyranianOct 5, 2019
The performances and premise are nice enough but the novelty wears off too quickly.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
Iky009Jan 3, 2014
Não um filme bom nem ruim, normal, apesar de seu melodrama ser quase inevitável de fugir tem alguns momento bons para um filme com um roteiro fraco.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
gracjanskiMar 9, 2021
The biggest mistake in this movie is unrealism in some Scenes and some characters like Frank Dixon (the commissioner at JFK). Other than that the movie is good, especially Tom Hanks as a rusian-like foreigner is incredible. Also some jokesThe biggest mistake in this movie is unrealism in some Scenes and some characters like Frank Dixon (the commissioner at JFK). Other than that the movie is good, especially Tom Hanks as a rusian-like foreigner is incredible. Also some jokes were funny, but some were stupid, because not realistic. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
Voodoo123Jun 6, 2022
Meandering drama that drowns under the weight of it's own ridiculousness. There are some fun moments in here but it's clear Spielberg was reaching for something more high brow but everything just feels too on the nose and 'forced' that IMeandering drama that drowns under the weight of it's own ridiculousness. There are some fun moments in here but it's clear Spielberg was reaching for something more high brow but everything just feels too on the nose and 'forced' that I never really felt any of the emotions from the poignant moments in it. Tom hanks feel wasted here I would've preferred to have seen hanks and tuccis roles reversed as the accent was far too distracting coming from Tom. Entertaining but vacuous. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
solomsApr 17, 2015
A good comedy, but nothing that we didn't saw yet. For Steven Spielberg I expected more. Tom Hanks did a great job, but for a comedy? There are people more fun and talented for this kind of movies. There are a drama too but it sounds likeA good comedy, but nothing that we didn't saw yet. For Steven Spielberg I expected more. Tom Hanks did a great job, but for a comedy? There are people more fun and talented for this kind of movies. There are a drama too but it sounds like many other movies that I just saw. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
kyle20ellisMar 28, 2022
Not a terrible film by all means, but one where it is easy to see why it would polarise viewers (as evident in the user reviews here) and why there are those considering it a lesser Steven Spielberg film.

'The Terminal' is not Spielberg's
Not a terrible film by all means, but one where it is easy to see why it would polarise viewers (as evident in the user reviews here) and why there are those considering it a lesser Steven Spielberg film.

'The Terminal' is not Spielberg's worst film, to me 'The Lost World: Jurassic Park', '1941' and 'War of the Worlds' (which had a very good first half and completely fell apart halfway through and never recovered) are worse. Ranking it in his filmography, it is nowhere near close to being one of his best and while not rock-bottom to me it is lesser Spielberg.

Starting with 'The Terminal's' merits, the production values are top-notch and Spielberg regular Janusz Kaminski's cinematography is once again beautiful and a major plus. While not some of his best work, John Williams' score is pleasantly understated and slick without over-emphasising the mood.

Of the performances, which mostly are good, Tom Hanks makes a valiant effort in the title role and does an excellent job on the most part and Stanley Tucci clearly enjoys himself as Dixon. Hanks and Tucci's chemistry is where 'The Terminal' is particularly strong. The supporting cast are good, and Kumar Pallana is quite a scene-stealer (though the wet floor stuff does get over-used and repetitive).

'The Terminal' starts off well. The story is intriguing, there is a razor sharp satirical edge to some of the comedy and there is an affecting whimsy.

However, 'The Terminal' is hurt by the second half being nowhere near as interesting and Spielberg himself (regardless of his technical mastery) playing it too safe with a subject matter that should have been executed in the film more sharply and harshly. There is too much emphasis on the airport-terminal-as-microcosm-of-society angle and it just doesn't work because of how tentatively and safely the subject is approached.

Credibility rapidly decreases and gets increasingly strained and too often replaced by the sentimentality going into saccharine overload. Really could have done without the romantic subplot, that was not necessary, felt like thrown in padding and was completely underdeveloped and featured far too much. The lack of chemistry between Hanks and Catherine Zeta Jones doesn't help, nor does despite her beauty Zeta Jones being so bland in a role that gives her practically nothing to do. The characters are also far too neatly black and white with stereotypes that won't bode, and actually hasn't boded, well with some.

Overall, wildly uneven that had potential to be good but doesn't ever fully convince. 5/10 Bethany Cox
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
thebagginsAug 24, 2018
The fake reviews on this site are just out of control! Tom Hank's attempt at slavic is just horrible to watch. I didn't give a shyte whether he made it out of the terminal or not by the end, and I cared more for Gupta's juggling tbh. TheThe fake reviews on this site are just out of control! Tom Hank's attempt at slavic is just horrible to watch. I didn't give a shyte whether he made it out of the terminal or not by the end, and I cared more for Gupta's juggling tbh. The films also at least 30 min too long, and if you make it to the end like I did then you'll be dumber for doing so. Don't do it. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
Jaredc324Dec 13, 2019
WHen it could've worked better as a grueling, tragically romantic indie-pic (which not to lie, i thought it was) turns into a happy-go-lucky Chris Columbus tale for the whole family, when i realized it was directed by Spielberg, it came to noWHen it could've worked better as a grueling, tragically romantic indie-pic (which not to lie, i thought it was) turns into a happy-go-lucky Chris Columbus tale for the whole family, when i realized it was directed by Spielberg, it came to no surprise. BUt as magical as it comes off, doesn't ring with the same level of wonder as similar toned films such as "Catch Me if You CAn" or "E.T." Mainly because Hanks' character and the world in itself doesn't have enough dramatic juice to keep the steaks rolling, even though it plays like it does. In the end, you begin to retreat the hope and wonder that "Terminal" could've been a masterful exploration of an unnacepted immigrant and just fall into the seemlessly in-the-motions romancity that it plays off, so you go home with the splendor like it's Christmas Eve but without the substance it teased at providing. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
Toasty87Jul 12, 2020
It's very slow but the acting saves it in most scenes could be shorter in run time.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews