---

Years ago, I started listening to a film podcast. It was a great podcast that I really enjoyed. Until one day I stopped. The reason? The host said something so pretentious that I couldn’t bring myself to listen any more. It the year that Roma was nominated for an Oscar and the controversy of it being made for Netflix. He and his guest were saying that not seeing Roma on the big screen was the worst thing you could do. Something that irritated me no end because of how ridiculous that is. Firstly, it was only released in certain cinemas, so not everyone had access to it. Secondly, it was made for a streaming service so that must have been taken into account. I hate that breed of film people who try to make people feel guilty for not going to cinemas. The people who pretend that going to watch a film is the greatest thing you could do. I love films but I also have a little bit of perspective. I love films but there is a little more to life. So, I wasn’t sure how this book would go. I was interested but wary that it would be a similar thing How would it turn out?

“I don’t hate any films. Movies are too hard to make to warrant hatred, even when they are turkeys… Walking out of a movie is a sin.”

So says Bill Johnson, the great director at the heart of this book. He goes on to say that “anyone who says they hated a movie is treating a voluntarily shared human experience” like a bad travel experience. I’ll admit, I found myself checking out at this point. Obviously, Tom Hanks is biased, but this book sometimes reads like the worst Hollywood propaganda. I sort of see what he’s saying because a lot of people work hard to create something. However, I also disagree with the basic statement. People work hard on all sorts of things but that doesn’t mean it deserves praise. Making a film is a business thing and not a personal thing. In his debut novel, Tom Hanks tries to prove the opposite.

This is the story of a film. It starts in the 1940s with the creation of a comic book that eventually becomes the next big Hollywood director. We track its progress and see all of the ups and downs of production. We also have to wade through all of the personal context of pretty much everyone who works on the film. At times it’s painstakingly slow and a tedious read. I know that Hank is trying to make a point but he’s doing so in such a laborious and blatant manner. He’s trying to prove that films are more than just a story but are a part of everyone who plays a role in making them. It is their shared history and passion that brings it to life. All of which means, apparently, that you can’t say you hate a film. No matter how bad it is.

I wonder what Tom Hanks feels about saying you hate a book? I don’t think I want to go that far but I definitely think this needed some editing. Did the Hollywood star get too much free rein while writing? Surely that’s the only explanation for the endless sections of context. Reading this book is a slog and I say that as someone who listened to it. I’d never have finished if I’d tried to read a physical copy. It just never seemed to end. I love epic novels that span decades but a good writer can make them seem like no time has passed. It felt like it took an eternity to get through this.

I knew the only way I would read this would be to get the audiobook. After all, the best way to read a book by Tom Hanks would be to hear Tom Hanks narrate it to you. I was wrong. His narration was stilted and robotic. It made the book even harder to sit through. This might have something to do with the sentence structure which wasn’t exactly lyrical. Not that I think that’s a bad thing. Not everything has to be complex. I just think the prose lacked the kind of musical quality that effortless writing has. I don’t think Tom Hanks is a bad writer but nor do I think this was great writing.

This is a book filled with the worst sort of stereotypes. Let’s talk about the great director who is tasked with making this film. He just felt so unrealistic. He’s described as some sort of god who is effortlessly cool and a true visionary. There’s nothing he can’t do and nobody who dislikes him. If this was some jokey ssend-upof the film industry then I could understand. However, Hanks is playing this totally straight. It’s all a bit much. And what of character depth? There’s no real character development here. I don’t believe that giving someone a detailed backstory is the same as giving them substance. I guess I expected more from Tom Hanks.

In the book, we are told that it’s not okay to say you dislike a book. “The worst anyone should ever say about someone else’s movie is, ‘Well, it was not for me but, actually, I found it quite good.'” I’m afraid that I can say that I found this book to be quite good but I can definitely say that it wasn’t for me.