Is Disneyland the place where they kill your best (and only) friend, and blow your Lieutenant’s legs off?
Forrest doesn’t succeed because he’s a retard. Being a retard doesn’t make him happy. He’s miserable and confused by everything. The monetary success that he achieves by pure luck doesn’t make him happy, because it is meaningless to him. The only thing he ever really wanted was Jenny, but his love for her brought him misery, because he didn’t understand who she was, and then she died.
I hated it because Jenny knew who/what Forest was and took total advantage of his love for her.
“No plot” is one big reason I didn’t like the movie. The other is that I could not relate to Forrest at all. Combine the two and FG was like watching 2 hours of pointless occurrences.
I can’t answer the OP because I didn’t dislike it “so much”, but OTOH I didn’t like it much either.
As the various interpretations here show, it’s hard to say exactly what the movie was supposed to be about. Or what lessons, if any, it was supposed to teach.
What I took away was, You Never Know What You’ll Get, and Stupid Is As Stupid Does. So, be honorable, keep striving and maybe life will be interesting, if not wonderful.
It didn’t seem like much of a theme to hang a long movie on. All the events Forrest stumbled into were eye candy, but didn’t hold any meaning for me.
The biggest annoyance was that the movie seemed to promote Forrest as an honest, striving person who accomplished huge things despite his huge disability. But the film makers also made him a world class ping pong player, and an (almost) world class sprinter.
That seemed to undercut the handicapped man overcomes odds theme. Seemed not quite cricket.
I’d forgotten that part. I saw it on a plane back in the days where there was just that central screen, so my choices were watching it and staring at the back of the seat in front of me, which, sadly, had the passenger’s hairy-knuckled fingers curled over the top of it. There was more than one occasion where I gave up on the movie in favor of the seat back, but I’d eventually pull the headphones back on thanks to those knuckles.
In short, I hated Forrest Gump because it was tedious and schmaltzy. I think it would have worked well as a made-for-TV movie on The Hallmark Channel though.
It’s not so much that “stupidity brings happiness” its more like “if you question authority you will get AIDS and die. If you keep your head down and never question anything, you will be rewarded.”
I think you must have seen another movie by mistake, and confused the two.
Don’t remind me my last trip there!
Yes. I see that FriarTed loved and Hello Again hated the movie for what they both took its message to be, and I must admit that I’ve heard many people take that out of Forrest Gump. But to me it was the opposite. Forrest Gump becomes financially successful, but as pointed out it was all due to his luck, not really to any work he did. He stumbles upon all important events of the last 60 years in the US, doesn’t understand any of them but still manages to influence society in important ways. To me Forrest Gump wasn’t a tale of how everybody can succeed by working hard and avoiding free love and Vietnam protests, it was a satirical movie pointing out how ridiculous it is to believe that everyone can “succeed”, whatever that means, just through hard work.
Of course, I haven’t seen it for a long time, but I know I liked it the few times I watched it. And now I like RickJay’s explanation better than mine.
ETA: someone said that Forrest Gump is actually a cripple who becomes a world class ping-pong player and a near-world class sprinter. To me that’s all part of the “satire” aspect of the movie.
I liked the catchphrase from the book, “Being an idiot is no box of chocolates”.
Done there, been that.
(A) I’ve never, not once, liked anything that Tom Hanks was in.
(B) It never went full retard. He met the President, won a ping pong tournament. I always wondered what parents of really retarded kids thought about the sort of blithe minimalization of the life-impairing effects of mental retardation.
Completely off-topic, but this kind of comment always amazes me. I don’t leave the house without something to read, much less get on a plane.
The only way I could find myself on a plane without a couple of magazines, a book, and an iPod is if I were kidnapped or under arrest. 
Because it was just so… pedestrian.
Seriously now, I enjoyed Forrest Gump, but I do agree that it was over-rated. I also think Shawshank Redemption was over-rated. I think most things surrounded by mountains of hype tend to over-rated, but that’s hardly the fault of the work itself. So let me me get something straight with you folks who complain that Forrest was dumb, or his momma was a mess and didn’t want to admit his shortcomings, or how annoying it was that he was in love with an emotionally retarded druggie: You didn’t like the film because its characters were flawed?
I hated “Star Wars”, because Darth Vader was so mean. Who would want to sit through that?
I liked the book a lot more than the movie so was a bit let down when I saw it originally in the theater. However when I saw it again years later I liked it more, since there had been greater distance from reading the book and I could see the movie on it’s own merrits.
I still wish they had put in the scene in the space ship with Forrest! The orangutan and the female pilot though.
-XT
Yes! What a meanie-bo-beanie. :mad:
I haven’t seen the movie since it first came out, so take this with a grain of salt, but I recall the film presenting at least some of these character’s flaws as virtues. Certainly not Jenny’s drug addiction, but Forest’s limited capacity, and his mother’s defense of him in front of the school administrator seemed to be offered up as reasons why we should like these characters. To tie it back to Lemur’s snark, I don’t think Star Wars would have been terribly popular if it had presented Darth Vader as an admirable figure.
Like I said, though, it’s been more than fifteen years since I’ve seen the film, so my recollection may not be correct.
Oh, my. Such is the fleetingness of fame. RickJay, you’ve been whooshed.
Joe Bob Briggs is the name under which John Bloom, a Texas newspaper reporter, started a series of reviews of drive-in movies. His redneck persona was a satire of effete movie critics, but he truly loved and celebrated the violent and sexy b-movies of the 70s. As with any good satirist, he managed to slip wonderfully perceptive comments on American culture into the mix, and his writing style was hilarious. Imagine Cecil’s columns back when he was good transformed into movie shtick.
Of course Joe Bob Briggs was going to mock a Hollywood movie like Forrest Gump. You’ll notice that he only threw a couple of paragraphs on the movie on top of a review of Shrunken Heads, the real topic.
It’s true that by 1994, Bloom was stuck with Joe Bob persona and running it into the ground because nobody would accept anything else from him. Apparently he still does it, probably hating every minute he’s in this time warp. Again, much like Ed, come to think of it. But in those first years he was legendary.
As for Forrest Gump, buy the soundtrack.
I haven’t seen the film in a long time either, but I got the impression that we were supposed to like Forrest’s mom because she tried her best to be a loving, tolerant person who would raise her son to be the same, and that she would do whatever it took to make her boy happy, despite that he wasn’t operating on a full tank of gas. I never got the impression that Forrest’s “limited capacity” was one of the reasons we should like him. We were supposed to like him because he always tried to do the right thing, even if his idea of the right thing was at times amiss.
It seems to me that some people are going from A) Forrest Gump wasn’t bright and ran into a lot of dumb luck, and B) he was supposed to be a likeable character to C) We were supposed to like him because he wasn’t bright. Yeah, not so much.
You know it was funny, though. I cracked the living hell up.
It entertained me for what, three hours. I don’t ask a lot more of my movies than that.