Reżyseria:
Jonathan DemmeScenariusz:
Ron NyswanerZdjęcia:
Tak FujimotoMuzyka:
Howard ShoreObsada:
Tom Hanks, Denzel Washington, Roberta Maxwell, Mark Sorensen Jr., Jeffrey Williamson, Charles Glenn, Anna Deavere Smith, Joanne Woodward, Jason Robards (więcej)VOD (4)
Opisy(1)
Andrew Beckett jest zdolnym prawnikiem zatrudnionym w prestiżowej kancelarii adwokackiej. Wszystko wskazuje na to, że czeka go wspaniała kariera. Wkrótce okazuje się, że jest nosicielem wirusa HIV. Beckett zostaje zwolniony z pracy za rzekomą niekompetencję. Dobrze wie, że prawdziwym powodem jest choroba, więc postanawia pozwać do sądu byłych pracodawców. W Filadelfii żaden prawnik nie chce zadzierać z wpływową kancelarią. Sprawy podejmuje się w końcu czarnoskóry adwokat Joe Miller. (Cinemax)
(więcej)Recenzje (5)
I really don’t understand why this uninteresting court drama has received such good reviews. The cards are shown from the start, everything can end in only in one possible way, and the road there unfortunately is neither entertaining nor riveting enough. I actually don’t like at all this type of “edifying” films (which would later become the prototypical Oscar contender).
()
Court dramas have a long tradition and privileged position in the American entertainment industry. In Philadelphia, it is evident that the studio considered it a showcase and approached its production with the expectation of festival accolades. Tom Hanks was already considered a big star at that point and the ideal representative of sympathetic characters driven by fate. The theme of AIDS in the 90s moved the public, and the deaths of charismatic figures in show business, such as Freddie Mercury, were still fresh in the memory. The public's attitudes reflected unease in a sexually open society, fear of a pandemic was pervasive, and concerns about infection were common and manifested in various prejudices. Directed by Jonathan Demme, an activist film was created to persuade, educate, nurture, and cultivate, but excessive noble intentions ultimately give rise to noble boredom. In the first half of the film, it still works more or less as it should, but in the second half, it occasionally slips into emotional manipulation and goes downhill, so to speak. Those who want to see an excellent drama that does not shy away from controversial moments should instead watch Dallas Buyers Club. I'm only giving it three stars because I sympathize with the creators' goals. Overall impression: 55%.
()
Tom Hanks doesn't deliver an Oscar-worthy performance, it's rather the makeup artists who should have received it, as they do brilliant work in every detail. Denzel Washington’s more progressive character stands out much more with his change in attitudes and opinions towards the infected lawyer, skillfully and effortlessly incorporated into the story of individuality, personal strength, and asserting one's rights. It's a shame that the issue of HIV/AIDS is outlined too black and white, with Tom Hanks representing “pure good” and the movers and shakers of high-society “dirty evil”. Thanks to Washington's eloquence and Jonathan Demme's directorial skill, this simplicity can be relatively tolerated, allowing the viewer to focus on the depth and narrative power that this film undoubtedly possesses.
()
Very nice. Sentimental to the bone, but nice. Besides, Denzel Washington and especially Tom Hanks – they do something remotely similar to what Rowan Atkinson did for Mr Bean – absolutely excel, and believe me, they alone make you want to experience Philadelphia, even though otherwise you probably won't see anything memorable in terms of drama.
()
You can think what you want about the movie, you can even criticize the theme and its conception, but the fact is that you simply cannot deny that it is somewhat naive - both in its depiction of illness and in the conversion of Denzel's character "to the true faith" of humanity - you will still have a primarily strong story with great actors, who turn a superficial spectacle into a proper drama.
()