
The movie stars Tom Hanks, as Alan Clay, an American businessman/salesman
who has experienced a series of late life (he is in his fifties) reversals –
divorce, loss of job, loss of home and savings, inability to pay daughter’s
college tuition, etc. Much of this is
revealed to us in an amusing introductory segment set to the lyric of The
Talking Heads song Once In A Lifetime
(“That is not my beautiful house”, as house vanishes; “This is not my beautiful
wife”, as wife disappears, etc). For me, anyway, this rather tongue in cheek
intro, treating Alan’s misfortune as a kind of joke, undercuts the dramatic
situation Alan is in, and made it more difficult for me to take his predicament
– and thus the movie - very seriously.
In any event, as the picture gets underway, Alan has been handed a
chance to redeem some self esteem and good fortune. He is in the Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia or KSA (“You may ask yourself, How did I get here?”) hoping to close a business
deal with the King on behalf of an American IT company. The king plans to build
a brand new city in the desert, albeit on the red Sea (King Abdullah Economic
City or KAEC), and Alan’s task, aided by a team of young techies, is to sell a state
of the art holographic conferencing system for use there. However, the improbable
(but true) KAEC project, literally located in the middle of nowhere, seems to
be stalled, and so are Alan’s efforts to set up a meeting with the king or his
representatives. Day after day the promised meeting is postponed. Day after
day, Alan commutes from his luxury hotel in Jedda out to the depressing site - a
few solitary buildings, most of which are unfinished, amidst the sand dunes -
only to be told nothing will happen today. Meanwhile, his team is stuck in a
big tent in the desert with no amenities.

Throughout much of the novel, Alan’s mood is one of quiet
desperation, an existential angst. On some level he blames himself, but more
disquieting is his doleful recognition that the American dream may have failed.
The movie alludes to a few of the events
in Alan’s life which gave rise to these feelings (via a few flashbacks). But it
makes little effort to portray his dour state of mind nor to incorporate Eggers’
concerns about the the exporting of American jobs or the downturn in the
American psyche. The point of the book
or any meaning at all is largely lost in the pursuit of smiles, and eventually
in a far from credible romance.
Movies aren’t books, and it’s dangerous to compare a film to its
source novel. A film should be judged on its own, as cinema. My point, however,
is that Eggers’ book was a serious work with some thought provoking
contemporary themes. Tykwer’s movie is a light entertainment with few ideas.
And we get a bit of unlikely romance, as toward the end of the
picture Alan gets cozy with his female Arab physician. (I know, here’s another
character who does not meet our expectations about KSA culture.) Her name is
Zahra, played by Sarita Choudhari (Homeland).
The developing relationship between Alan and Zahra is sweet, adorable even, but
not very enlightening – other than to illustrate that Alan is lonely (and
Zahra, too, apparently).
I generally like Tom Hanks and consider him one of our finest
actors. He was more than fine in Hologram. As his character is afflicted with an undue
share of setbacks and maladies, he reacts beautifully, with a seemingly endless
variety of different looks: chagrin, resignation, frustration, hope, determination.
Hanks even manages to capture a bit of the novel’s melancholy, notwithstanding
a screenplay and directorial style which consistently aims for wry levity.
I think Tykwer was trying to have it both ways – to honor Eggers
novel and to tell a story that goes down light and easy. He wound up with a mishmash
- a story that meanders and feels incomplete, without a point of view, a merely
pleasant film that lacks credibility as a drama and is pretty lightweight for a
comedy.
To be fair, I should add that the photography is quite beautiful in
parts, and A Hologram for the King is pretty to watch.
My advice: save your ducats, and if you want to see the
cinematography or catch some nice performances by Hanks, et al, wait for the
DVD.
98 minutes.
In wide release.
I thought Eggers' book was a reference to Kafka's The Castle, which was unfinished. Eggers provided an ending, definitely unlike anything Kafka would have done. Thanks for tipping me off the movie.
ReplyDeleteSuch dedication, reading the book as well as viewing the movie. I'm curious: Had you read the book in the past before seeing the movie, or did you read it afterwards? Or possibly (showing huge dedication) re-read the book after reading it in the past and after seeing the movie?
ReplyDeleteKeep up the good work.
~ Tom