Love Denzel. Am also very sad to have missed a discussion about killing people with hammers! Nobody told me...have you all just met me or something?:) OK, reasons why hammers are quite common as murder weapons. 1. Almost everyone has one. 2. They are cheap. 3. People don't always plan ahead when they kill, get pissed off and whack somebody with whatever comes to hand.( I read a book with a whole section on it, but that is what I remember.)

And how was Philadelphia not meant to be touching and inspirational?

Oh, of course it was, but not in the mawkish, not-that-bright "Tom Hanks movie" way.

Oh, of course it was, but not in the mawkish, not-that-bright "Tom Hanks movie" way.

Which I never actually used as the criteria for a Tom Hanks movie, so I feel okay on it meeting my definition.

I don't know what you're asking.

You're saying the movies that don't stick out for you give you an impression, right? But obviously some give more of an impression than others, so I don't understand how they're not sticking out, at least a bit.

Yeah, I don't know.

I don't like Reese and I don't think there is anyone equal to, or even close to, Katharine Hepburn these days.

No, she was really special, KH.

Cast Away felt touching and inspirational. Or at least felt like it was trying to be. And Hanks' character may not have been "not that bright," but he was slowly going insane, which is similar somehow.

And his character in Catch Me If You Can was TOTALLY "not that bright" at least in the sense that he spent most of the movie being made a fool of. And the scenes between him and Leo were incredibly "touching and inspirational" - generally, I think the Tom Hanks portions of that movie were very much formulaic for him.

Being a bad person, I haven't seen Philadelphia.

I definitely think he's a typecast actor, though. I've seen him in Sleepless in Seattle, Forrest Gump, Apollo 13, Cast Away, You Got Mail Catch Me If You Can, as well as bits of Big, and I feel like I know exactly what a Tom Hanks movie is going to contain from these films.

Tobey is totally going to grow up to be the same thing.

I disagree, Nova--I think it's very hard to figure out where an actor's career is going to go. No one would have pegged early light-comedy-goofy-looking Tom Hanks to become a huge movie star. On the other hand, Treat Williams was supposed to be the next big thing in the 90s. If you had asked anyone who saw "Hair" they would have told you he was going to be HUGE. Then he kinda disappeared until playing the lead in a pleasant TV show.

Ha! It is hard, I agree. In fact, I'm gonna "What Scrappy Said" my own argument.

Still, Tobey seems like he COULD be moving in the same direction. Peter Parker, played by Tobey, feels exactly like that kid in Cider House Rules. Not that the characters are the same, at all really, just that they FEEL the same somehow.

I didn't see Seabiscuit, but it didn't look all that different, honestly.

(Note: This Is Not A Problem. I adore Tobey.)

Watched Ned Kelly. Orlando does have more range than I might have thought. No idea if he'll be called on to use it ever again.