Review of Philadelphia (1993) by David M — 13 Dec 2009

I watched this right after watching Milk. I have to say, Milk is a far superior film. Philadelphia was still very good though. Philadelphia tells the story of an up and coming lawyer (Hanks) who is fired by his law firm after they discover he has AIDS and is a homosexual. Denzel plays his lawyer, a local TV lawyer, who has reservations about gays and AIDS. They're suing the law firm for unlawful termination, and discrimination.

The acting was strong, particularly from Hanks. He played the part outside of stereotypes and cliches, and portrayed a man dying of AIDS particularly well, as he slims down to nothing in the film. Denzel does his part justice, but his role is not written very well. The character's arc from bigot to friend is a little unbelievable, and forced. Karen Finley who plays the law firm's defense attorney plays a cold-hearted uber bitch very well, and steals some scenes.

The real weakness of the film is the direction, and some of the writing. there are some real weak spots as far as developing relationships, and allowing the characters realistic ways to get their personalities across, some of the scenes felt a little contrived, and preachy. Maybe it was Jonathan Demme, he seemed an odd choice anyway.

The story and teh message are what really make the film great, as it sheds light on subjects that were scary and foreign at the time. Kudos to Tom Hanks, as this was one of the first dramatic roles you really got to see him sink his teeth into, and show the promise that he later delivered in some of his Oscar performances 5-10 years later.