You really can't make a movie about "being gay," or, more pointedly, "being-gay-and-discriminated-against" and not have the movie judged primarily as an agenda-flick, especially when the characters are as two-dimensional as they are in this story. Tom Hanks plays a gay man who for a brief, sad time in his life was sexually promiscuous. He caught AIDS.
His character doesn't work--he is a stereotype, or, rather, what the filmmakers would *like* to be a stereotype, I think: the sensitive, intelligent, put-upon Gay Man. His employers, who fire him immediately upon finding out he is gay and has AIDS, are stereotypical Villains. They seem to have very little to talk about (particularly around poor Tom Hanks!) other than gays, which of course they do in a coarse and insensitive manner. They are the Cold-Hearted Homophobes.
Denzel Washington is Hanks' lawyer, the Homophobe-Who-Becomes-More-Human by knowing the Gay Man.
Sound puerile? It is. What the filmmakers have failed to realize is that if you REALLY want to present a human drama, you can't keep the characters as two-dimensional as they are in Philadelphia. Hanks needs to be more than a Sensitive Gay Man. Jason Robards needs to be more than the Cruel Homophobe. And so on. In real life, people aren't that simple. This kind of b&w morality works in Hollywood adventure movies, but it doesn't work in art.
In addition to ignoring the complexities of human character, this movie totally ignores the complexites of the AIDS issue, and gay rights, simplifying them into a thin gruel of unthinking, maudlin, propaganda. This movie is a tearjerker if all you want is to have your position on the AIDS/Gay issue confirmed, but sorry mistake if you expect something with aesthetic merit, or thought-provoking content.
His character doesn't work--he is a stereotype, or, rather, what the filmmakers would *like* to be a stereotype, I think: the sensitive, intelligent, put-upon Gay Man. His employers, who fire him immediately upon finding out he is gay and has AIDS, are stereotypical Villains. They seem to have very little to talk about (particularly around poor Tom Hanks!) other than gays, which of course they do in a coarse and insensitive manner. They are the Cold-Hearted Homophobes.
Denzel Washington is Hanks' lawyer, the Homophobe-Who-Becomes-More-Human by knowing the Gay Man.
Sound puerile? It is. What the filmmakers have failed to realize is that if you REALLY want to present a human drama, you can't keep the characters as two-dimensional as they are in Philadelphia. Hanks needs to be more than a Sensitive Gay Man. Jason Robards needs to be more than the Cruel Homophobe. And so on. In real life, people aren't that simple. This kind of b&w morality works in Hollywood adventure movies, but it doesn't work in art.
In addition to ignoring the complexities of human character, this movie totally ignores the complexites of the AIDS issue, and gay rights, simplifying them into a thin gruel of unthinking, maudlin, propaganda. This movie is a tearjerker if all you want is to have your position on the AIDS/Gay issue confirmed, but sorry mistake if you expect something with aesthetic merit, or thought-provoking content.