Philadelphia Reviews

• A good start.

  
  By A3D6TFYRMIV3ZL on 2003-02-04
  "This is the essence of discrimination: Formulating opinions about others not based on their individual merits, but rather on their membership in a group with assumed characteristics." (School Board of Nassau County v. Arline, 480 U.S. 273 (1987) (Brennan, J.), on remand, 692 F. Supp. 1286 (M.D. Fla. 1988)). This rule, reaffirmed by the landmark Supreme Court decision which, over the dissent of Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justice Scalia, first recognized the infection with a contagious disease (tuberculosis) as an actionable handicap under federal law, forms the initial bond between star litigator Andrew Beckett (Tom Hanks) and ambulance chaser Joe Miller (Denzel Washington), the unlikely team at the center of this movie. Because through these words, black attorney Miller begins to realize that his colleague Beckett faces a handicap which, in essence, is not so different from that confronted by many of his fellow African Americans. And because this is an incredibly effectively scripted Hollywood movie, we, the audience, easily get the point as well; even if we're white, and even if we're not gay and/or suffering from AIDS like Beckett.
  
  Of course, the insidiousness of the AIDS virus places those afflicted with it in a class of their own, and while the movie spares its viewers the pictures of some of the virus's most graphic effects, it does go to considerable length to show the physical decline associated with it - not only in the person of Beckett himself, for whose role Hanks literally almost starved himself. Some of the patients surrounding him in the movie's earlier emergency room scenes really were AIDS patients, whom Hanks had approached when preparing for the movie, and who had subsequently agreed to participate; and as Hanks emphasized during an appearance in Bravo TV's "Inside the Actors' Studio," not all of them are still alive. - Denzel Washington's appropriately named Joe Miller, middle class everyman in everything but the color of his skin (one of the movie's obvious bows to political correctness), displays an attitude uncomfortably familiar to many of us; shunning gays in general and the HIV-infected Beckett in particular, out of a mixture of ignorance about AIDS, prejudice against those suffering from it, and prejudice against gays. Both Hanks and Washington give strikingly emotional, profound performances that rank among the best in their respective careers - Hanks deservedly won both the Oscar and the Golden Globe for his portrayal of Beckett, but Washington unfairly wasn't even nominated for either. Yet, neither of them would have been able to shine as much as they do without their exceptional supporting cast; to name just two, Jason Robards, commanding as ever as Beckett's homophobic former boss (and role model!), and Antonio Banderas as his devoted lover.
  
  By the time of "Philadelphia"'s release, some of the early myths about AIDS had begun to disappear, and the yearly growing numbers of newly infected patients had brought it out of its erstwhile obscurity as "the gay plague." But indepth knowledge was still far from widespread, and therefore the movie not only brought awareness to the disease in general, but also made a couple of important points, from educating the public about the disease's method of transmission to emphasizing that it is by no means limited to gays and can even be contracted in something as life-affirming as a blood transfusion. (Indeed, several European countries were rocked by transfusion-related AIDS scandals right around the time of the movie's release). One of "Philadelphia"'s most quietly powerful scenes is the testimony of a female witness who was infected by just such a transfusion, and who emphasizes that having AIDS is not a matter of sin or morality: "I don't consider myself any different from anyone else with this disease. I'm not guilty, I'm not innocent, I'm just trying to survive," she responds when asked to confirm that in her case "there was no behavior on [her] part" involved and contracting AIDS was something she was "unable to avoid." - Moreover, four years before Ellen DeGeneres rocked the showboat with a kiss during an episode of her sitcom, and Kevin Kline and Magnum macho Tom Selleck locked lips in "In and Out" (the screenplay of which was inspired by Hanks's Oscar acceptance speech for "Philadelphia"), it was by no means a given that a movie would get away with letting Hanks and Banderas exchange acts of tenderness from caresses and kisses on the hand to a slow dance at a gay party.
  
  Given "Philadelphia"'s fundamental message and the memorable performances of its protagonists, it is a pity that the movie doesn't entirely avoid Hollywood pitfalls, such as its soggy ending with grease literally dripping off the screen and the undeniable taste of a sugar-coated afterthought, transmitting the message that even dying of AIDS is really not so terrible, at least for the surviving family who can still unite around the television set and wallow in their memories of their lost loved one. And while I do buy Joe Miller's transformation from a (somewhat stereotypical) homophobic male to a reluctant supporter of gay rights, I don't really see why Beckett suddenly assumes a cliche gay look the second he has been fired; not to mention that I suspect not everybody in his situation would have enjoyed such overwhelming support from his family.
  
  But ultimately, it is the movie's overarching message that counts. "Ain't no angel gonna greet me; it's just you and I my friend ... and my clothes don't fit me no more: I walked a thousand miles just to slip this skin," sings Bruce Springsteen, the movie's other Oscar winner, in "Philadelphia"'s title song. And Justice Brennan wrote in the Supreme Court's Arline decision that in amending federal law, Congress was motivated by "discrimination stemming not only from simple prejudice, but also from archaic attitudes and laws." This movie goes a long way in dispelling such attitudes. It alone isn't enough - but it is, as Andrew Beckett jokes about the 1000 lawyers chained together at the bottom of the ocean, a good start.
  
  Also recommended:
  Philadelphia
  And the Band Played On: Politics, People, and the AIDS Epidemic, 20th-Anniversary Edition
  In & Out
  Saving Private Ryan (Widescreen Two-Disc Special Edition)
  
  

• A Propaganda Flick Posing As Art

  
  By A332MW6OA1LYDF on 2000-06-21
  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 Homophone-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.
  
  

• A very human story behind the courtroom drama

  
  By A17FLA8HQOFVIG on 2002-05-25
  This 1993 film was the first major Hollywood movie with big name stars to deal with the topic of AIDS. As of now, with the exception of some independent films as well as some programs on television, it is the only one I know of. I don't know how it did at the box office but it did win a lot of awards and recognition, especially for Tom Hanks, who won an Academy Award for best actor.

  Cast in the role of a lawyer in a prestigious Philadelphia law firm who is fired because he has AIDS, Hanks really took on the role wholeheartedly. He must have dieted to starvation because his weight loss is quite noticeable and with the aid of good makeup, we see his physical appearance change before our eyes. Denzel Washington is cast as a lawyer too, but he works independently, taking on small cases of personal injury, even advertising his services on television. He's happily married with a wife and small baby and hates homosexuals. However, in spite of his feelings, he takes on Hanks' case, never completely giving up his negative feelings towards gays, but yet understanding his client's very human feelings about wanting to live.

  Joanne Woodward is cast as Hanks' mother and, even though her role is small, there are some very moving moments between them. Jason Robards is the partner in the law firm who expresses disgust at the fact that Hanks had the nerve to bring AIDS right into their office. Mary Steenburgen is the attorney for the law firm and she does an excellent job of very clearly bringing out some of the legal issues. And Antonio Bandaras is cast as Hanks' partner who has the unpleasant tasks of helping Hanks with his treatments. The whole cast does an excellent job. Every person seemed absolutely real under Jonathan Demme's very capable direction.

  Mostly the film involved itself with the legal issues and this kept it from being maudlin. However, there was no way it could help bringing out the very human story behind the courtroom drama. It's a story that had to be told to the world. And "Philadelphia" does an excellent job of doing just that. Recommended.
  
  

• Human Beings

  
  By A24P6QTZSLBOMS on 2001-05-02
  The movie Philadelphia, by Johnathan Demme, displays the struggle a homosexual man infected with AIDS encounters in obtaining justice because he was unfairly fired from his job. Andy Beckett, played by Tom Hanks, seeks a lawyer to defend his case. Joe Miller, played by Denzel Washington, is the lawyer who defends Andy Beckett. Miller is a character who the viewers can relate to because he is homophobic and has a great fear about AIDS. The disease was not well known in the early nineties when the film was made, and Miller expressed the same fears of the public. Joe Miller learned how to put his personal feelings aside and defend the law. Although he does not agree with homosexuality and has a fear of the AIDS virus, Miller learned to look past those emotions and defend a homosexual man with AIDS to ensure that the law was upheld through justice. Philadelphia is an excellent movie because the viewers can relate to the characters and learn from their experiences with homosexuality and AIDS.

  Joe Miller is a public defense lawyer who takes pride in his work. He is up for any challenge and rarely refuses to defend a client. Andy Beckett walks into Miller's office one day, seeking a lawyer. Miller is startled by Beckett's appearance because he looks ill and has a few lesions on his face. They shake hands, but Miller is extremely cautious about everything Andy touches. Andy Beckett introduces himself and explains to Miller that his employer fired him because he lost a serious document. Beckett wants to sue the corporation because he believes that he was fired out of prejudice. Miller asks what the prejudice is, and Andy says that the prejudice was against AIDS. Miller is afraid of the AIDS virus and does not wish to defend Andy. Andy is disturbed by Miller's refusal, but kindly departs the office.

  The doctor Miller saw directly after the meeting with Andy Beckett attempted to assure Miller that AIDS cannot be contracted through a hand shake or touch, it is only contracted through sexual encounters. Miller is still disturbed by the thought of AIDS, though, because he has a family to worry about. The fear of this disease, however, did not stop Miller from thinking about Andy. Miller is dedicated to the law and does not like to see unjust acts, but he did not know how to overcome his fear of Andy's virus. He tried to convince himself that he denied Andy because he did not agree with homosexuality, but the truth is that he could not face his fear. Many citizens of the United States had the same fear of AIDS in the late eighties and early nineties due to the rising number of outbreaks. Scientists and doctors could not figure out a cure for this and people panicked. The majority of outbreaks occurred in homosexual couples and people referred to the disease as the "gay plague" or "gay cancer". Thus, hatred formed against homosexual people. Miller displays this hatred in the movie.

  One day Miller is in the library reviewing material. He sees Andy a few tables over. A clerk is asking Andy if he would like to go to a private room after he brings him novels about AIDS. Andy does not want to go to a private room and a small argument arises. Miller walks over to Andy and starts talking to him. The clerk leaves and a few people around him move to other tables. Miller could not let his fear hold him back any longer. He helps Andy research and decides to defend him in court. A man's legal rights are more important than his personal situation. Miller puts aside the fact that Andy is homosexual, and learns to focus on his rights rather than his AIDS.

  As Miller grows close to Andy, he learns more about himself. Throughout the case Andy becomes more and more ill. Instead of being afraid of Andy as he was in the beginning, Miller is compassionate for him and the illness with which he struggles. Miller is not cautious about touching Andy or being around his homosexual friends. He learns to accept Andy for who he is and respect him as a human being. Miller sets an example for society to follow. The public needs to stop blaming homosexuals for the AIDS virus and learn about the disease. Homosexual people also need to be treated as every other human being and society needs to learn how to accept them. Miller proves that these acts can be accomplished in this movie.

  Philadelphia is a strong movie because it demonstrates two serious issues that citizens of the United States face. Homosexuality and AIDS arose abruptly and many people panicked out of fear of the unknown. The easy way out was to hate homosexuals because they were believed to be the cause of this disease as Miller did in the movie. People merely needed to educate themselves on AIDS and get to know homosexuals. They would discover that homosexuals are human beings just like everyone else and that the AIDS virus cannot be contracted through touch. Joe Miller set an example for Americans to follow in the movie Philadelphia.
  
  

• Demme Opens Our Minds, Our Hearts, Our Eyes, and.. the Door

  
  By A2ZSC81MXLBELX on 2003-02-22
  This review refers to the Columbia TriStar DVD edition of "Philadelphia"....

  In 1993 Jonathan Demme had many critics eating their words, as this breakthrough film dealing openly with Gays and AIDS become a box-office smash. Audiences were more savvy, then they were given credit for. Demme brings us a story that is stirring, heartwarming and intellegent. One that opened our eyes, hearts and minds to this devastating illness and the community it so affected.

  Tom Hanks plays a brillant attorney, working for a top law firm, who seems to be on top of the world. He is not however, on top of the world. This young brillant attorney has been sticken with the AIDS virus, and when his symptoms begin to emerge, he is fired from the firm. The reason he is given for his removal from the company..."an attitude problem".

  After many attempts to gain legal counsel, to help him fight the firm in a discrimination suit, he finally gets some help from an unlikely source. Denzel Washington is an attorney of another sort. He's "That TV Guy", a personal injury lawyer, who has not only gone up against Hanks in court, but is also a bit of a homophobic himself.

  So we watch, mesmerized, as surrounded by the love and support of his family, and his lover(Antonio Banderas), he fights as the disease progresses, and as they fight this landmark case in court. Another transformation that is remarkable to view is that of Denzel Washington, opening his mind and heart As he gains an understanding to his clients lifestyle and the disease itself.

  The Cast is no less than brillant.Hanks recieved Best Actor from Oscar as well as The Golden Globes and The Berlin Film Festival. It also includes Joanne Woodward, Jason Robards and Mary Steenburgen. Some critics, again, thought that the lead characters were wrong for the part. They likened that having Hanks and Banderas playing homosexuals, is the same as having whites play black roles. However, I personally feel that Demme made the wise decision as this film, the first of it's kind, was a story that needed to be told, and told well. Using Box Office draws, brought the audiences in. They not only loved the film but were gifted with a new awareness and understanding. So Five Stars to Director Demme for opening the door.

  You may also remember the wonderful music that came out of this film. Bruce Springsteen recieved an Oscar for Best Original Song("The Streets of Philadelphia"), and also was honored with a Grammy and a Golden Globe. There is also the beautiful closing song by Neil Young "Philadelphia", a terrific socre by Howard Shore and we are also treated to some beautiful music by Mozart and Giordano.

  The DVD is presented in Widescreen(Anamorphic), the sharpness and clarity of the picture is excellent. The sound, also excellent,has the choice of Dolby Dig 5.1 or Surround, go to the set-up for this. It may be viewed in French and Spanish, and has subtitiles in Spanish and Korean. On the back of the case(mine anyway) it says there are some production notes, I was unable to locate these in the menu. There are no other Special Features.

  This is a film, that defines courage in every sense. It is a film that you may even see the toughest of men wiping a little tear from their eye. It's okay guys, go ahead, we LIKE that!

  Thanks and enjoy.....Laurie
  
  

• Hear Springsteen's and Neil Young's songs, then press STOP
  By A1ARZLZRS4JZX7 on 2004-05-20
  "Philadelphia" is Hollywood's pathetic, hygienic attempt to deal with the maelstrom of controversy surrounding AIDS. It just doesn't want to offend anyone. (Even the Talking Heads's song "Heaven," heard in one scene, has its "heaven is a place where nothing ever happens" lyric rendered not so offensive.) The performances of Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington are noteworthy, but the film refuses to fully explore how AIDS can lay waste to a person's body, mind, and relationships. Does our main character's family and friends struggle with an admixture of hatred, disgust, pity, and sorrow for their infected son? Of course not! That would be too real for the suburban megaplex crowd and for the gay community. No, in "Philadelphia," the AIDS victim's family and friends are supportive until the end. Who's the bad guy? Well, it's our hero's employer, whose somewhat understandable fears of a ravaging syndrome (which was not fully understood in 1993) being introuduced in the workplace are portrayed as malicious. The subject of AIDS is a powderkeg, but in "Philadelphia," it seems about as controversial as cancer.
  
  
• Great Performances Overcome One-Dimensional Script
  By ACIBQ6BQ6AWEV on 2001-12-08
  Tom Hanks, Denzel Washington, and director Johnathan Demme more than deserve the accolades received for this story of a gay, AID-stricken attorney who sues the lawfirm that unjustly fires him; in fact, Demme and his cast are so incredibly good that you won't realize how one-dimensional the script is until you've had time to recover yourself after the film's powerful conclusion.

  The problem with the script, at least as I see it, is that PHILADELPHIA is written in such a way as to create maximum identification with and sympathy for Hanks, and in consequence it never goes any further than it absolutely must into the myriad of issues swirling around the AIDS epidemic; there is no real effort to look beyond the the deliberately glossy, upper-middle-class surface the film posits as reality. Well intentioned, no doubt, but the film never actually makes a viable statement of any kind.

  Even so, Hanks, Washington, and the astonishingly gifted cast turn PHILADELPHIA into a powerfully emotional experience, and that alone is more than worth the price of admission. Strongly recommended--but if you're looking for more in an AIDS-related film than an exercise in catharsis, you may be disappointed.
  
  

• Lawyers in love.
  By on 2002-03-14
  Self-congratulatory movie about a Philadelphia lawyer with AIDS who's wrongly terminated from the prestigious, Good Ole Boy law firm of which he was about to be junior parter. Chronologically speaking, Jonathan Demme's *Philadelphia* is a rather suspicious follow-up to his previous film, *The Silence of the Lambs*. What most may not remember is the beating he took from the gay community for that film. THIS film, therefore, seems like an overdetermined apology. But I digress. Well, not really: the notion of the movie being an "apology" strikes me as the key to the Aren't-We-Enlightened, And-If-You're-Not-We're-Going-To-Bully-You-Till-You-ARE attitude throughout. ... [Our] surrogate for this story is the Denzel Washington character, an ambulance-chaser who overcomes his reluctance to take Tom Hanks' unlawful termination suit. The movie's mighty hard on poor Denzel: Demme, avatar of Enlightenment that he is, goes out of his way to make Denzel's lawyer as friendly as possible . . . and as bigoted toward gays as possible, and not just early on in the proceedings, either. (He has some sort of epiphany late in the movie, one that we're not a party to.) Evidently we're supposed to wholly identify with Denzel: family man, hard worker, good American, and homophobe. The filmmakers work on the audience just as hard as they work on the ambulance-chaser: we and he need Enlightenment. I think we're supposed to be overwhelmed by the irony of Denzel and his white pals trading homophobic jokes; I just felt bullied by this rather questionable, in fact distasteful, sermonizing. Not that the movie is wholly without merit: from a technical standpoint, at least, Demme does some interesting things with the camera, particularly during the scene when Tom Hanks, attached to an I.V., explicates an opera to his lawyer. It was also cool to see Demme's mentor Roger Corman in a bit part. In fact, the performances are indeed solid all round -- even Robard's senior partner, despite the fact that the character is really poorly conceived (a "razor-sharp" legal mind would never behave that way on the stand).
  
  
• A powerful, sympathetic film.
  By A3GIZ356B0G69W on 2000-06-28
  Philadelphia's profound portrayal of a homosexual lawyer afflicted with the AIDS virus, Andrew Beckett (Tom Hanks), is perhaps the driving force behind the film's impact and overall importance. Hanks, after being wrongfully dismissed from his law offices, enlists the help of fellow lawyer Denzel Washington to sue the firm. Washington, after forcing himself to dismiss prejudice, fear and overall disgust, grudgingly accepts Hank's case. Thus, the drama begins. The idea of fear leading to hate is prevalent throughout the courtroom scenes, but it shadows in the light of the overall underlying message. Andrew Beckett has AIDS, and he is going to die.

  We, the viewers, witness Beckett's downfall to the virus throughout the film. His past is never fully revealed, but we gain insight to how his infection took place and how his family, as well as Beckett himself copes with death. All of these circumstances lead to a sympathetic, provoking performance by Hanks, which lead to an Oscar. His portrayal of a man dealing with death, loss and injustice invokes feelings of grief, sorrow and sympathy. Beckett is doomed, that much we know from the start, but the aspect of this film that makes it so significant is how Beckett, through Hanks, deals with the subject of his own eventual demise. He must learn to accept his fate if he is ever to survive the courtroom battle that ensues.

  Perhaps the scene where his acceptance of fate truly occurs is after a party in his apartment. Washington is there to go over some questions with Beckett, but Beckett seems elsewhere, almost lost. He isn't lost however, in all reality, he is found. A powerful, heartfelt scene involving opera follows, in which Beckett understands, accepts and perhaps seals his fate. The scene, in my opinion, is one of the most powerful in recent memory.

  Three things sell Philadelphia: Hanks' character of Andrew Beckett, well-written script, and Jonathan Demme's humanistic approach to the film. These aspects make Philadelphia a worthy film indeed.
  
  

• As Powerful As Ever
  By AQQFI7YHMRL7S on 2006-05-26
  I purchase a lot of DVDs. For the past few years, it seems that almost every DVD comes in a special edition two-disc release that includes deleted scenes, documentaries, cast bios, trailers, teaser trailers, music videos, and the director's recipe for three-alarm chili. I usually don't have time to get beyond the first disc, and much of what I do get around to usually turns out to be as boring as it gets. This time, however, I am happy to report that the two-disc anniversary release of Philadelphia is worth both the money and the time invested in it, even if you already have Philadelphia on DVD.
  
  The special features include the 84-minute documentary, One Foot On A Banana Peel and the Other In the Grave, an extraordinary piece of amateur filmmaking by an AIDS patient named Juan Botas. What I did not know was that Mr. Botas' AIDS diagnosis provided the inspiration for director Jonathan Demme to make Philadelphia in the first place, as Mr. Botas was best friends with Mr. Demme's wife. In the meanwhile, Mr. Botas mentioned to filmmaker Demme that it was a shame that the black humor, amazing courage and other interesting dialogue that emanated from his fellow patients at the clinic where he was being treated was being lost forever as it left their lips. Mr. Demme gave Mr. Botas his hand-held camera, and the results so impressed Demme that he wound up releasing the documentary through his own production company. The finished film is touching, oddly comic, tragic and as effecting as any piece of drama you've ever witnessed. One of the patients from the doctor's office was also given a few lines in the main feature, Philadelphia.
  
  Which brings us to that film. At the time of its release, Philadelphia received some very harsh criticism from the AIDS community for its perceived flaws; it was judged by many as "too Hollywood" to be realistically representative of the HIV / AIDS experience. To their credit, in the background documentary included here, "People Like Us" (which was the original working title of Philadelphia) the creative team behind Philadelphia (including Jonathan Demme, Tom Hanks and the screenwriter Ron Nyswaner) meet this criticism head on, presenting a defense of their work that is both credible and illuminating. Many complained that Philadelphia was void of any tenderness or physical contact between the male couple (Hanks and Bandaras) but this is not only redressed by a closer look at their scenes together, an extremely intimate scene between the lovers in bed (which was excised from the final cut) was deleted not for its controversy but because the scene simply didn't work (having now seen it, I can attest to this fact). I have long seen this movie as not a film about AIDS per se, but as a film about homophobia. Indeed, the main thrust of the plot (besides the trial) is the transformation of the character of Joe Miller from committed homophobe to a more enlightened and tolerant person. One of my favorite scenes (which it turns out many people wanted to delete from the final cut) deals subtly with Millers transformation - the "opera scene".
  
  In that scene, Miller is asked by the character or Andy what he thinks about gay people. The attorney responds that, when straight people think of them at all, most straight people pretty much see all gay people as some sort of sub-human predatory monsters, out to ensnare the children of the world into a twisted sick life, and destroy all that straight people hold dear. Andy abruptly changes the subject, "Do you like opera, Joe?" he asks. Caught by surprise, Joe admits he does not know anything about it - and Andy Beckett - this sub-human destroyer of children, responds by tenderly and passionately explaining his deep love for beautiful music by allowing Joe to see just a small piece of exactly why so many gay men love opera. He plays the aria La Mama Morte, carefully, passionately and articulately explaining the story and the beauty behind the words and music. Joe is immediately transformed - it's clear that he is deeply moved. By playing the piece, La Mama Morte through again in its entirety, the screenwriter and director shows us that the music has stayed with Joe long after he's left Andy's home. We see him leave Andy's apartment and go home in a sort of daze, kiss his sleeping baby and slip into bed with his slumbering wife, while the beauty of the music haunts and caresses him, like a gorgeous gay lullaby. Some of my gay friends were among those who didn't get this scene - they saw it only as a stereotypical depiction of a gay man's love for opera. I got it right away - by exposing Joe to a thing of beauty he'd never experienced before, Andy had suddenly allowed Joe to consider that gay men were not only something more than what he thought, he demonstrated that we are capable of enormous passion and the ability to appreciate delicate beauty. This scene, more than any other, allowed Andrew Beckett to be transformed from a predatory sub-human freak into a human being, not only for Joe Miller, but for many in the straight audience. It has remained one of my favorite scenes in a movie ever, and a small part of what makes Philadelphia such a powerful experience.
  
  Highly recommended.
  
  
  
• VERY VERY GOOD
  By AM2PV53UX1JEQ on 2000-01-10
  Jonathan Demme is a director who manages to infuse his movies with wonderful subtle touches, like the all-important opening sequence in this movie, a montage of the City of Brotherly Love -- spiraling faces, painted murals, bombed out sections of old town -- to the haunting Springsteen song. As a mainstream movie about AIDS this is top-notch. Hanks is heartbreaking, as is Joanne Woodward in her usual no-nonsense form. The opera scene seems a bit over the top, and I miss a real connection between Hanks and his hot Latin lover Antonio Banderas, but this movie went a long way in bringing the disease and its presence among us real and acceptable to many more people. Responsible and poignant.
  
  
• Touching, Emotional Portrayal of AIDS Discrimination
  By A2IF6UKZCV0V0Y on 2000-05-04
  The first feature film to bring the horrible AIDS crisis to light. Tom Hanks ("That Thing You Do", "You've Got Mail") is exceptional as the AIDS stricken Attorney who files a wrongful dismissal suit against his prestigious law firm. Brings to light the horrible consequences of how society was dealing with AIDS (and more importantly, gay people with AIDS) in the early 90's. We've come quite a ways since, but still have far to go. Features Denzel Washington & Antonio Banderas ("Evita"). Ironically, a short time after the movie was released, a real-life case similar to the one in the movie occurred in Philadelphia, the City of Brotherly Love. The movie is a well-written, well-acted emotional roller-coaster ride through issues of love, hate, family-relations and pride. The most moving piece for my father (my parents saw this in the theatre before I did) was the scene featuring Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington with the striking classical music. The soundtrack for the film alone is touching and poignant.
  
  
• Gripping And Compelling
  By A1YQ6QB2127AJ4 on 2004-01-03
  "Philadelphia", based on a true story, is one of the best releases of 1993, starring Tom Hanks, Denzel Washington, Mary Steenbergen, Antonio Banderes, and more. Its production was extra crutial being that during the time of release, many were still severely fearing AIDS. The producers accomplish every scene wonderfully. The movie's portrayal of AIDS and its victims is very accurate to reality. The plot was written beautifully, though sad. It explores more than just AIDS; it explores discrimination against those who have it and against homosexuals. Such combination remains ahead of its time. The plot becomes more interesting as Andy Beckett's lawyer becomes more educated about such issues and begins changing his beliefs about them. Its emotional impact is intense, never held back for a second. It forces audiences to feel the events. The movie is more than entertainment; it's also educational.

  Tom Hanks's Oscar winning performance as Beckett is heartwrenching. His every drop of heart and soul was poured through his performance. His previous hardcore research about the lifestyle, the disease, and the actual events is obvious. This is one of many movies that proves that Tom Hanks is one of the best actors in history. Denzel Washington's performance as Beckett's lawyer is beautiful. His acting skill proves very crutial in his character's personality and point of view. All other actors, major or minor, also perform their roles wonderfully. Everyone, including Hanks and Washington, offers their own useful emotional prospective to this movie.

  Bruce Springsteen's Oscar winning song "Streets of Philadelphia" is a beautiful way to begin the movie. Its dark theme matches the plot perfectly. It also offers new prospectives to the movie. This song will be a classic in the following years. The original score was also composed beautifully(not by Springsteen), giving the movie more intensity and emotion.

  The make-up team's research of AIDS and its victims proved highly crutial. Their work on Tom Hanks was highly accurate to reality. There were no flaws to the physical symptoms, ranging from skin tone, changing hair color, lesions, and eyes.

  "Philadelphia" is a great movie for those looking for a powerdrama. This is sure to please audience for many years to come.
  
  

• Fear and Loathing
  By AD2DDHLD6FRFM on 2002-04-01
  In March 2002, Denzel Washington was awarded his first Best Actor Academy Award. It was a little late in coming. A myriad of roles in films like "Bone Collector" and "A Soldier's Story" were all Oscar performances. But perhaps his best was in "Philadelphia". 1993's "Philadelphia" is the brutal, uncompromising story of a hot young lawyer, fired by his firm for being gay and contracting a virus. The principal attorney charges that "Andy brought AIDS into our offices". A heart-rending, spell-binding expose of prejudice and bigotry in 20th Century America, "Philadelphia" is really a horror film, where the monster is you and I. We're guilty. We shun the homosexual and bar the AIDS victim. We extend little mercy to society's modern "lepers". Do you doubt it? Then pick up this marvelous DVD. In "Philadelphia", Tom Hanks won his first of 2 Academy Awards. Directed by ace Jonathan Demme, it features Antonio Banderas, Joanne Woodward, the late Jason Robards, and movie director Roger Corman. The award-winning soundtrack includes haunting Neil Young songs and music from Bruce Springsteen. The DVD has no chapter stops, no bios, no trailer, and no featurette. In fact, "Philadelphia" has no extras at all. That's OK. This 125 minute classic movie is all you need. Maybe more than you can take.
  
  
• Ah Andrew, Ah humanity!
  By A26JGAM6GZMM4V on 2003-10-21
  All of the praise which this film has received and continues to receive is well-deserved. After seeing it again recently, however, I now think that the film's social issues have become, in the minds of many people, more important than its artistic issues whereas I see them as being of equal and inseparable importance. With all due respect to all the male AIDS victims when this film was cast, none of them could have achieved what Tom Hanks did in the role of Andrew Beckett. I presume to suggest, therefore, that this is a work of art which addresses truly serious issues which include but are not limited to AIDS within our society.

  That said, the basic plot focuses on Beckett's wrongful termination by his law firm employer after its managing partner Charles Wheeler (Jason Robards, Jr.) and his senior associates learn that Beckett has AIDS. (He had not previously informed them.) He is represented in court by Joe Miller (Denzel Washington) who runs a highly-visible, high-volume firm which specializes in representation of individuals seeking damages such as those which result from automobile injuries. Miller is a homophobic when he first meets Beckett (who seeks him out) and declines to represent him. Later, he changes his mind for reasons which are best revealed in the film. All of the acting is first-rate. The film's dramatic impact is largely explained by the fact that Demme (with strong support by Hanks) was determined to treat an immensely complicated and sensitive situation with appropriate style, grace, taste, and respect. He and his associates succeeded.

  Hanks received and deserved an Academy Award for best actor. My own opinion is that Neil Young deserved the Academy Award for best song which was awarded to Bruce Springsteen. Better yet, they should have called it a tie. Both deserved it. Given all the copy cat and sappy "music" which is composed for most films, Young's "Streets of Philadelphia" and Springsteen's "Philadelphia" are not only uniquely powerful but enduringly haunting. My favorite scene is the last one which allows extended emotional involvement of the audience. No dialogue. No theatrics. Given how Andy Beckett's personality and character are presented in the film, this is precisely the way he would want his story to end.
  
  

• A startling and gripping performance by both
  By A253W0EDTXK5E4 on 2004-10-30
  One of the great films of the last quarter century, it is about time that this movie comes to DVD as a special edition. This is definitely one of Denzel Washington's best performances, but I have to believe that has a lot to do with the fact that the best actor of our time, Tom Hanks, played the starring role. The interaction between both actors, and the beautiful characters they create, bring more goosebump worthy scenes to the screen than any movie has the right to have. In what I consider to be Tom Hanks' single greatest scene of his career, I watched a moment that truly made me forget where I was. Washington plays an ambulance-chaser who takes Hanks' lawsuit over AIDS discrimination, against his better judgement. The opera scene, where Tom Hanks, walking around his apartment with an IV bag, explains to Washington about the pain and emotional struggle of a fictional character in an opera. This scene is absolute perfection. From the camera angles, to the lighting, to the performance by both actors, true emotion pouring through their skin to the very screen itself. This scene has no peer. The film is a great creation, from beginning to end, but, it is a must-own for anyone, purely because of this one moment. Anyone associated with filmmaking, from writers to directors to actors, should order this DVD as soon as possible and study the passion and humanity involved in the making of this film.
  
  
• How do you measure a year in the life?
  By A2EGK0YRDF4ZZB on 2001-08-29
  For any of you Rentheads out there, yes, the title of my Philadelphia review is from the musical Rent, more specifically the song "Seasons of Love." I saw the musical Rent before I saw Philadelphia and some of the same basic human emotions and reactions regarding AIDS, homosexuality and mortality that are in RENT apply equally well to Philadelphia. "Philadelphia" follows the journey of lawyer Andrew Beckett as he sues his firm for firing him on the grounds of discrimination. The catch: Beckett is gay and is in the final stages of AIDS.

  We see Beckett as a capable lawyer, compassionate, determined to make a change in the world. He hides the telltale KS (Kaposi's Sarcoma) lesions on his face from his coworkers with makeup but he is noticeably thin and fatigued. Suffering from severe chronic diarrhea as a result of KS and AZT, he is taken to the hospital where we first meet his longtime companion Miguel (Antonio Banderas), a rather headstrong yet tender lover who is fiercely devoted to Andy. Later we meet Joe Miller, the lawyer that we first see Andy arguing a case against in the beginning of the film. Miller is a stereotypical "ambulance chaser" with the prerequisite cheesy TV ads. He is also an extreme homophobe and is fearful of HIV. Throughout the film Joe Miller learns to accept Andy for the goodhearted, decent person that he is and the fragility of all life. He does not agree with Andy's lifestyle but does not want to abandon him, knowing that in his condition Andy could never defend himself.

  The months pass quickly, and Andy's deterioration is frighteningly rapid. His hair thins and turns grey, he requires blood transfusions, he is gaunt and grey and suffers from frequent respiratory infections. He knows that he will die soon and tries to face death with dignity, echoing the lyrics from the RENT song "Will I?": 'Will I lose my dignity Will someone care Will I wake tomorrow From this nightmare?' Andy's fears and his love for life are beautifully expressed during a monologue set to the aria "La Momma Morta" performed by Maria Callas. Miguel wants Andy to start writing a will and planning for his memorial, but instead Andy throws a "celebration of life" party for himself and his friends (mostly homosexuals with the exception of Joe Miller and his wife. Joe handles the occasion beautifully considering his intensive dislike of homosexuality).

  Andy is attacked from within and without: AIDS ravages his body while lawyer Belinda Conine (Mary Steenburgen) tries to rip apart his credibility and personal life on the witness stand and in the court. Andy is made to confess his past mistakes that have ultimately and unknowingly cost him his career and his life: his past visits to a gay pornography theatre, at least one anonymous sexual encounter at said theatre (interestingly enough this occurred 10 years earlier when he was still with Miguel, yet Miguel was not infected, suggesting that this act was a momentary lapse in judgment rather than an habitual act). This admittance to Andy's having sex with a stranger and contracting AIDS is used against him, showing that he was a threat and could have infected Miguel and other partners with AIDS. Miguel watches, tortured, from the bench. Andy is increasingly ill and frail in the courtroom and eventually collapses. Inevitably Andy dies in hospital with Miguel at his side.

  Antonio Banderas is absolutely amazing in his role as Miguel--the slow dance with Andy at the party, the arguments at home, the anguish and tenderness in his eyes as he kisses Andy's fingers, the only part of him not tubed, as Andy is dying. His eyes reflect so much love for Andy, fear of losing him, pain at seeing the agony he lives through every day with AIDS. He has been with him for a decade, and suddenly mundane moments take on new meaning as there will not be others to follow. He too must face Andy's mortality, and he appears outwardly gruff and argumentative. He must appear courageous for Andy's sake and his own or he would become lost in his grief.

  In my opinion this is the definitive role of Tom Hanks' lifetime. Andy is an ordinary man: a devoted lover, a decent, honest person, and an outstanding lawyer. He tries to do what is right, what he believes in, to be proud of himself and his accomplishments. Tom Hanks brings a wisdom and tenderness to the role that makes him ultimately believable and not just a victim. Just a glance from Hanks, a word, a gesture, conveys more about Andy than pages of dialogue ever could. The loving glances between Miguel and Andy and Andy and his family, his look of hopelessness as he stands on the street after being refused by Joe Miller, his face as he is on trial, sick and alone and having to defend his actions from the past. He faces injustice and loss with courage. Tom Hanks becomes Andy, going through a physical and spiritual transformation that touches our souls.

  This movie does an excellent job of covering both the treatment of homosexuality and the AIDS epidemic in the U.S. during the early 1990's. Because it is a mainstream film it shies away from certain elements, mainly more physical contact and scenes between Miguel and Andy, and focuses more on Joe Miller's gradual acceptance of AIDS and Andy's homosexuality. There are many scenes involving fear and hatred directed at homosexuals and offensive language and jokes. But "Philadelphia" has something meaningful to say about the power of love and support in times of need, about understanding and being tolerant of alternative lifestyles, and about accepting the inevitability of death with grace and courage. An excellent film, touching and thought-provoking.
  
  

• Might just change the way you think
  By A3PSXLJYK0XQWA on 2003-10-05
  Philadelphia deals with a big, big tacky theme. It's about homosexuality, homophobia, AIDS, justice and death. Before that scares you off, though, it's handled in such a manner that even those with the most delicate senses won't be offended.

  Philadelphia chooses to forgive instead of judge (Which is ironical, since it's basically a court-room drama.) It chooses to include instead of exclude, and the theme of tolerance works without being sappy. I'm not a homophobe but I'm not a liberal, either. Still, with the exceptional screen writing and extraordinary acting by Hanks and Washington, I could see from homosexuals' viewpoints without judging or disliking them in the least. I have to say this movie changed my perception quite a bit.

  Oh, and that scene with Tom Hanks and the opera... I could feel tears welling up in my eyes. I was so completely caught up in this character, I felt a pain in my heart like a twisting knife. If you've ever lost someone you love prematurely, you'll know what I mean.

  Every aspect of the movie worked just fine. Especially the delicate juggling between the accepted homophobic viewpoint of the times, and the struggle gays and lesbians have to make to simply live and love.

  Emotional catharsis, impact, entertainment, whatever you're aiming for, I can promise you that Philadelphia won't fail.
  
  

• On the streets of Philadelphia
  By AL5OEDM8TPTKV on 2004-11-14
  Back in 1993, AIDS had been in the forefront of the news and everyone's minds for quite a while. Still, a major Hollywood movie still hadn't dealt with the subject matter. Sure we had some incredible films like "Longtime Companion" and the stunning "Parting Glances" (both which I highly recommend as truly visionary cinema), but they were more independent and not likely seen by mainstream audiences. Finally, with the foresight of Jonathan Demme, and the star power of Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington, Philadephia roared onto the screens and into our hearts. And now, finally, we have a DVD treatment that this movie truly deserves.
  
  Andrew Beckett, high priced lawyer of a top Pennsylvania law firm, suffers from AIDS quietly at the beginning of the film. A lesion betrays his secret quickly, leading to his dismissal. Firing back, Beckett attempts to secure the services of Joe Miller, a personal injury lawyer with an everyman reputation. At first rejecting his offer and even pouring salt in his wounds by mocking him, Miller is converted to the cause after witnessing subtle discrimination in a library. It is through Miller that everyone can approach this story, and it is through Beckett that we learn dignity and we learn pain.
  
  Much as been said about Tom Hanks' Academy Award winning performance as Beckett, and Denzel Washington's wonderful portrayal as Miller. Together, the two are an acting powerhouse, both equally dynamic and compelling in their characters. One can only wish they would team up again sometime in the future. At any rate, they are supported by a fine ensemble, starting with the late Jason Robards to the rarely seen and much missed Joanne Woodward, whose performance will reduce you to tears in seconds.
  
  Included in this DVD package are several documentaries detailing the development of the movie. The director's and writer's commentaries shed wonderful light into the process that went into making the movie. The few deleted scenes are wonderful to see, especially during a "settlement" negotiation between the parties. One very poignant thing mentioned in the documentary were the number of people suffering with AIDS that were employed in this movie, both in front of and behind the scenes. Very touching.
  
  But this isn't just a movie about AIDS. This is a movie that soars above the simple "movie of the week" syndrome, and dares to address such things as tolerance, acceptance, getting over your fears, and welcoming people for who they are. It's amazing how relevant and meaningful those messages are today. In a climate of unacceptance and intolerance to others, hopefully Philadelphia's essential meanings will continue to ring as a bell of Liberty, and not just in the streets of the town of Brotherly Love.
  
  
• Questions to the film critics....
  By A2Z3H53CTY8Z3P on 2005-12-10
  I saw Philadelphia for the 1st time two nights ago. Even though I enjoyed the movie (Hanks performance was excellent, the courtroom scenes were not too boring, and Antonio Banderas is always hot!)I have a question for reviewers who keep criticizing the film for the support that Beckett's (Tom Hanks) family shows. Why is that deemed unrealistic/too Hollywood? In my opinion that was one of the most beautiful aspects of the film. Believe it or not there are many families who are supportive and loving to their homosexual relatives. Often it is the cliche to make the homosexual person an outcast in the family or hated by his father etc. Since I am seeing this film 12yrs after the release I am used to seeing gays in cinema/television having troubled relationships w/their families if they have one at all. Also for any family to want to turn their back on their dying son is heartless, so it was refreshing to see a gay son so unconditionally loved by his family.
  A second question is for one reviewer who felt the ending was "greasy". Why did the ending not make sense? There was a scene w/Beckett and Miguel(Antonio Banderas) where they discuss planning a memorial service. Beckett obviously wanted a memorial service/life celebration not your standard funeral. So the ending made perfect sense to me. Also I do not think Washington's character(Miller) made a complete 360 on his views on gays. But it would be unrealistic for him to have that experience of defending and working w/Beckett and not come away with something.
  
  
• it's not about the acting...
  By ANPD7MPSASM8E on 2006-06-06
  Two of my best friends were living their last days when Philadelphia was made. One of them went to the Dr. whose office was used in the opening scenes, and was receiving an experimental drug that was the precursor to today's more successful cocktails. I watched them struggle at a time when Reagan wouldn't even say the word AIDS to the public. Bush wasn't much better. So to have a film come out that tried its best to tackle the most tragic disease in our lifetime, one that touched me personally, well, I was and am willing to forgive a couple of shortcomings. It was a monumental film for anyone struggling with AIDS, and for those who helped support them, giving us all one of the first voices that permeated the psyche of our country, beyond the boundaries of NY and SF.
  
  Now I just learned a good 14 years after the fact, that one of those best friends, Tim Pettifer, was among the guys in the waiting room in "One Foot On A Banana Peel and the Other In the Grave" which is included here. In his characteristic modesty, he never mentioned that it might be produced, and it was released after he died. I'm going to buy it of course, and am filled with nervous anticipation (and dread) at the thought of seeing him come back to "life". I've never stopped grieving this loss.
  
  My point is that the work and effort that went into this film went far beyond Hollywood and acting and such. It spoke a truth that was, at that time, not being talked about intelligently, if at all. As one of Tim's caregivers, I know for a fact that there was so much in Philadelphia that was spot on. The film bears witness to an excrutiating moment in time, when most of our nation was in total denial. Sadly, not much has changed.
  
  
• MIND GAME
  By A1MX6D3JK6IKDW on 2008-01-24
  If you'd told me 15 years ago that Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington were about to become major forces in Hollywood, I'd have told you that it was well past closing time. To me, Hanks was a great guy who'd be forever saddled with class B material, while Washington was just the new handsome face on the block. This film changed everything for both of them. In the first place, for the umpteenth time, this is a story of prejudice. The relative paucity of reviews for an Academy Award winner such as this may still indicate some confusion amongst the voters. Secondly, the script material and the acting skill of our protagonists matured both of them exponentially amongst the viewing public. Can one really believe that "Forrest Gump" would have produced such fabulous results for Hanks were it not for this film? Or that Washington seems to be everywhere garnering quality roles? Finally,and less obviously, we again relearn that prejudice is not an inborn instinct; it is learned behavior that has been proven time and again in a child's sandbox. Lest we forget, visit one from time to time and take a moment to reflect.
  
  
• Tom Hanks... Outstanding
  By A7U9ZYF780PE9 on 2000-03-20
  Some say that this movie is a bit too one-sided. Perhaps it was, but I think that was necessary to convey the movie's messages of discrimination and prejudice. But this review is not to speak of the political implications of the movie. I would like to congratulate Tom Hanks for such a brilliant performance.

  There was one particular scene that moved me. When he seems to be without hope. He is standing alone on the street wearing his baseball cap, looking around and on the verge of tears, but there are no tears - just an image of hopelessness. It was at that moment when I realized the pain of Hanks' character Andrew Beckett, and I felt it with him. 5 stars, Tom Hanks.
  
  

• Great performances but a little too controversial
  By on 1999-10-21
  I think Hollywood went a little off the deep end with this film. It's a good movie but it preaches way too much. My views are very conservative and I just found the subject matter to be a little too off color. But on screen you will see Hanks and Washington give excellent performances. I pondered at the end of the film who gave the best performance. And no matter what your views are you can't deny Tom Hanks the oscar for this film.
  
  
• Very powerful and moving! 4 1/2 stars!
  By A3NBHD2FW44TAM on 2000-12-04
  Philadelphia is an extremly powerful and moving film. Tom Hanks(in his oscar winning role) plays Philadelphia attorney Andrew Beckett. Andrew is a homosexual and has AIDS, both of these thing he is concealing from his bosses. After a mishap Beckett is fired, but he believes he was fired for AIDS discrimnation. He goes to many lawyers finally ending up at Joe Miller, a homophobic personal injury lawyer played by Denzel Washington. Miller is hestitant to take his case, but finally does. Philadelphia is not a court drama, although some of it takes place in court. It explores the subjects of AIDS and its discrimnation, and homosexuality and its discrimnation, as well as prejudices against these subjects. Tom Hanks won best actor, and Bruce Springstein won best orignal song at the Oscars. The songs Streets of Philadelphia by Springstein and Philadelphia by Neil Young are great. This is an excellent film. Don't miss it! Rated PG-13 for adult content and situations, and profanity.
  
  
• Hanks-Washington Shine
  By A1GN8UJIZLCA59 on 2001-01-31
  Philadelphia was Jonathan Demme's follow up to Silence Of The Lambs. Doing a 180 degree turn in stories, Philadelphia is basically a courtroom drama with Andrew Beckett, who is a gay man with the AIDS virus, suing his former employer, Wexler, Wheeler, a large, powerful and influential Philadelphia law firm, for wrongful termination based on discrimination due to his medical condition. Andy is an up and coming lawyer who is given a big and important case. At a meeting with the partners, one of them notices a lesion on his head, but Andy makes a story up about it. Andy works on the case while having some complications from his sickness. He completes the work, but at the eleventh hour, the case is mysteriously lost and all records are lost. The files are found, but Andy is terminated supposedly for incompetence and a bad attitude. Andy decides to sue, but is turned down by many law firms, including Joe Miller who is an ambulance chaser with over the top TV ads, as they are afraid of the case. Andy decides to represent himself, but when Joe, who is black, sees the treatment Andy receives at a law library, he agrees to represent him. Joe has prejudices of his own as he hates homosexuals, but he believes Andy's rights have been violated. Tom Hanks is absolutely stunning as Andy. We see him slowly succumb to his disease and his transformation is startling. He depicts Andy with grace and avoids any stereotypical characterizations. Denzel Washington is equally amazing as Joe Miller. He plays the role with the right amount of force, but peels back the layers to show an understanding side. Joe is a blowhard and hardheaded, but in the end shows compassion. Jason Robards is commanding as Mr. Wheeler, the bigwig at the law firm and Joanne Woodward plays Andy's mother with class. Mr. Demme gives a real feel for the city of Philadelphia. The movie was the first mainstream Hollywood film to make the subject of AIDS its main plotline. The film walks a fineline and avoids becoming too preachy. Mr. Hanks deservedly won his first of his two consecutive Best Actor Oscars, but Mr. Washington was every bit his equal. Bruce Springsteen also won an Oscar for his haunting song "Streets Of Philadelphia".
  
  
• Very Dramatic
  By A2HWD9PTM7RBXN on 2001-02-24
  This movie is indeed very touching. It really brings the AIDS crisis to life and raises many questions. Hopefully one day we will have some more answers. Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington are superb in their roles. It is very interesting to watch as Washington becomes more accepting of the lifestyle of homosexuals and the advent of the crisis of AIDS. What is also a nice in this film is the support Andrew Beckett(Tom Hanks) feels from his family regarding his discrimination battle. There needs to be more positive movies showing family support today.

  The music of Bruce Springsteen and Neil Young fit in perfectly with the scenes of the film. People often overlook Neil Young's song and normally I do not like Mr. Young's music. However, this song is truly on a par with Springsteen Award Winning song as it amplifies the mood of Andrew Becket's fuenral perfectly.

  Overall, this is one memorable movie from the 1990's and it can be appreciated by almost anyone.
  
  

• INSULTING TO THOSE WHO DIED
  By A1669CQLTCJN5 on 2002-11-27
  THIS MOVIE IS AN INSULT TO EVERYBODY WHO DIED AND TO EVERYONE WHO LOST A LOVED ONE.
  
  
• Important social commentary
  By AP0DQSDFSLP4P on 2002-12-31
  Based on a real-life case, director Jonathan Demme ("The Silence of the Lambs") sets out in "Philadelphia" to recount the struggle of one AIDS-infected man seeking judicial redress after he is fired from his job, he believes because of his sexual orientation and terminal illness. Though it certainly wasn't the first film to deal with AIDS, "Philadelphia" was the first major studio to take on the subject with an A-list cast. As attorney Andrew Beckett seeking to challenge his job termination in court, Tom Hanks, of course, won the first of his two back-to-back Oscars ("Forrest Gump" followed a year later), and has solid support by Denzel Washington as the reluctant fellow attorney who pleads Beckett's case; Jason Robards, in the dispassionate role of the law partner who orchestrates Beckett's dismissal; Antonio Banderas as Beckett's lover; and Joanne Woodward as Beckett's supportive mother. On that count, the film may be somewhat idealistic in that, tragically, not all gay and AIDS-infected men have the support of their families. But the film does provide important social commentary on institutional prejudice and case law as it applies to the person with AIDS. Sadly, while the film ends with some measure of justice for Beckett, his real-life counterpart was not successful in winning his case against the employer who fired him. The film garnered a second Oscar, that one for Bruce Springsteen's powerful "Streets of Philadelphia." In sum, "Philadelphia" is a relevant social film that speaks to our individual and collective conscience.
  
  
• another overrated movie
  By A36RS3ZMNE9JSQ on 2005-07-17
  This movie had the potential to tell a compelling story, but for me it missed the mark. It's not a bad movie, but I didn't think it was so great.
  
  The movie had good believable acting from Hanks and Denzel Washington, but the part the movie fails in is the TELLING of the story. There's just too many courtroom scenes and not enough character development, and without that, it gets pretty boring and repetitive. You can't give the movie credit for the story it's TRYING to tell, because as far as I'm concerned, the story it DID tell was not told in an entertaining way.
  
  The two main characters weren't developed enough. For one, the transformation of Denzel's feelings about gay people was not believable, there just wasn't enough shown on screen to make the viewer believe that he would have any reason to change his feelings. The way it was directed, it looked as if that opera scene is what changed Denzel's feelings about Hanks, and that's ridiculous to have someone's lifelong feelings that has been etched into their persona be changed almost because of a single incident (like I said, the way it was directed implied this). They should've shown a gradual change and made it interesting, maybe throw in a scene where Denzel protects Hanks from ridicule or something, I don't know, just show some sort of growing relationship to make the viewer care.
  
  

• And the Band Played On
• Rain Man (Special Edition)
• Forrest Gump (Two-Disc Special Collector's Edition)
• The Pelican Brief
• Malcolm X