The Ending of Tom Hanks’s Here, Explained

Robert Zemeckis has one of the most eclectic filmographies in history under his belt. From the ever-prevalent and mainstream Back to the Future series to his infamous motion capture version of A Christmas Carol, Zemeckis’ body of work has always been concerned with emerging technology. The director seemingly has a fascination with integrating or establishing cutting-edge developments in filmmaking.

Zemeckis’ latest venture into this territory is Here, which employs the use of a de-aging artificial intelligence technology on actors called Metaphysic Live that works in real-time as opposed to post-production. However, this is not Here‘s only technological gimmick. The movie also takes place entirely within one room and from one camera angle (except for it being moved once, but we’ll get there). Despite these cinematic innovations, Here has not been very well-received by critics or audiences. One major reason being cited for the backlash is the film’s ending. So, how does Here end, and is it as bad as everyone says?

Here We Go Again

Here reunites Zemeckis with past collaborators Tom Hanks and Robin Wright, who starred together in what is arguably the director’s most beloved and controversial movie, Forrest Gump. Following Forrest (Hanks) as he falls in love with Jenny (Wright) and has just about every adventure imaginable over the course of his life, Forrest Gump paints a sweeping picture of America through several significant historical moments from the 1950s to the 1970s.

Audiences were quick to call out the apparent similarities between Forrest Gump and Hereas soon as trailers for the latter dropped earlier this year. The comparison seems to be intentional on the part of both Zemeckis and the marketing team. Not only is Here visually reminiscent of Forrest Gump at times (Tom Hanks and Robin Wright appear as both younger and older versions of themselves, as do other leading members of the cast), but it also shares a thematic likeness in that both films aim to cover a lot of historical ground. Furthermore, Here and Forrest Gump share a screenwriter, Eric Roth.

What’s Going on Here?

Here follows various stories within one house and all the different people who came to live there over time, spanning from the age of dinosaurs to the present day. The entire story is told non-linearly and through the use of panels on screen that often indicate multiple timelines at once. It focuses predominantly on the Young family, who first moved into the house in the 1940s. After the conclusion of World War II, married couple Al and Rose Young (played by Paul Bettany and Kelly Reilly) move into the home.

The Young’s have three children named Richard, Elizabeth, and Jimmy. Richard grows up (now played by a de-aged Hanks) and, once a teenager, begins dating Margaret (de-aged Wright). When Richard gets Margaret pregnant, they decide to set aside their respective dreams of being a graphic artist and a lawyer and raise the child in the home with the help of Al and Rose. Richard and Margaret get married in the home, and eventually, Margaret unexpectedly gives birth to their daughter, Vanessa, there as well.

Over time, tensions brew over the number of people living in the home and Margaret repeatedly asks Richard for a place of their own. Richard makes excuses about the state of the economy. Al develops a drinking issue until one day Rose has a stroke, inspiring him to turn over a new leaf. Al decides to leave the house to Richard and Margaret. Al, Richard, and Margaret take care of Rose in the home until she passes. Vanessa grows up, goes to college, and moves out. Richard and Margaret file for divorce. Richard nurses the now-ill Al in the home until he, too, passes. Finally, Richard makes the choice to sell the house.

Other characters and timelines throughout the course of the film include the inventor of La-Z-Boy and his wife (who resided in the house in the ’40s before the war), the home’s first tenants at the turn of the 20th century, and Benjamin Franklin’s illegitimate son, William, whose estate is the entire backdrop for the film. Notably, the film indicates that the land the house is now on was originally the territory of the Lenni-Lenape people. A Lenni-Lenape woman sees a hummingbird in one significant shot.

Lastly, in modern-day, a couple named Helen and Devon move into the home with their son Justin. They are living in the home during the COVID-19 pandemic and even lose their housekeeper, Raquel, to the disease.

Here Is How it Ends

In the present day, Richard and Margaret enter the home, which is empty and prepared for an open house. Richard lends his arm to Margaret, who now has dementia. Richard tells her about the life they led there and all the people they shared it with. Margaret does not seem to remember anything, not even Vanessa. However, when Richard mentions a time when Vanessa lost a blue ribbon as a child, Margaret’s memory is jogged. She becomes emotional and says “I love it here” as, for the first time in the film, the camera moves.

It pans from its stationary position to the back part of the house (an unassuming and empty room and kitchen), then out and beyond to show the home’s exterior. Lastly, it pans further out to show the house from the perspective of the top of the William Franklin house as a hummingbird buzzes across the screen.

There Is Not Much Here

The ending of Here contains the only diversion from the single-frame stunt. Viewers would expect this change to carry thematic or plot significance. In practice, it simply pans to more of the house. There is no real deeper detail uncovered or twist revealed. The camera shows us more of what we already assumed was there. It is deeply unexciting but relatively clear what Zemeckis was trying to accomplish with this choice. Seeing as the catalyst for this movement is Margaret’s “I love it here” incited by her dementia, it seems that Zemeckis is showing us the house through her eyes. As the memories become less fuzzy for Margaret, the audience is given more information.

The hummingbird, which appeared in several earlier eras, particularly those shown on the land before the house was built, is clearly a symbol of nature connecting all the different lives through time. These choices are legible, surely, but they lack a salience that makes the viewer second guess if there is something deeper under the surface. Yet, the end of the film is just as straightforward as the rest. The various beings that dwell on this land are connected, and there is, in fact, more to the house than you saw in this one shot.

The effectiveness of Here‘s ending mirrors its success as a whole.Unlike the famously affecting Forest Gump (to which it practically begs comparison), it fails to pack any serious emotional punch. Despite having “main characters,” the choppiness with which it dedicates its screen time to various characters makes investment into any particular plotline quite difficult. The idea of having an entire movie take place in one room and from one angle is certainly interesting in theory but in execution it feels claustrophobic and eerie.

The use of artificial intelligence (while terrifying) is impressive and proves Zemeckis is still a cinema frontiersman. Here has some heart and generally good performances from its cast. Still, its fatal flaw is just that it never quite becomes as interesting as it needs to be to warrant staring at the same room for 104 minutes. Here’s ending is logical, but it is not especially moving.