Why does Tom Hanks seem to be in nearly every movie?

1,295 words • 7 minutes

Well, the easy is answer is that while he technically has not been in every single movie since the early 1980’s, it just seems that way at times. Occasionally I fear going to the cinema for sure enough, with the regularity of a clock, the previews will announce that, once again, Mr. Hanks is appearing in yet another feature.

I find this to be a bit spooky. Is there a cosmic law that says that every movie goer must sit through another preview for a Tom Hanks film? With well over 50 movies to his name in addition to his stage work on Broadway, he has not lacked for visibility. We see him often… very often.

But let’s back up a bit. What could anyone have against Tom Hanks? He is, after all, the American Everyman. He was Capt. John Miller from the movie Saving Private Ryan, the Astronaut Alan Bean in Apollo 13, the voice of Woody in Toy Story, and of course Forest Gump. He played both a ship’s captain in Captain Phillips and an airline captain in Sully. And this short list merely scratches the surface of his filmography—there are plenty more.

Many of his films have been blockbusters and he is consistent in the roles that he accepts. The audiences find him believable and they never complain about him being miscast or straying too far from type. He can do either a general entertainment or a romantic comedy role without too much trouble and he doesn’t push his luck by going into the egoistical territory of conducting experiments with his films. He is ranked as one of the most liked actors in American movie history—so what’s not to like?

To add to his screen successes, he enjoys a great reputation for working well with his colleagues and those actors he directs. When he is away from the studio, he dedicates himself to many good causes such as working to honor veterans of World War II and sparking interest in space exploration. He seems to have no dark corners. He is what we see on the screen.

Was it really necessary however, for him to take the lead in so many Hollywood productions? It is almost as if he were on a conveyor belt—one movie after another.

A couple of years ago as we were taking our seats at the movie theatre, I facetiously told my date that it seemed as if it we were due for another movie from Hanks. Sure enough, as if Hollywood had heard my voice, the first preview was for his new film Circle with Emma Watson…and this as just a few short months after Sully had appeared.

Tom Hanks
during his senior year at Skyline High School in Oakland, Calif., 1974.

“So what?” you might say. “He is a good actor and I enjoy watching him.” That’s fair. You could even add that he has, for the most part, avoided seriously bad movies—those real stinkers that bomb with the public. But there are times when, for dessert, we want something other than an Oreo cookie. We want variety if, for no other reason, than a change of pace.

Yet those in favor of him have their reasons and they are not in short supply. A female friend who, while she agrees with me, adds a few more into the mix.

The first is that he is adept at playing the average guy. The viewer can imagine himself being that person up on the screen, a person you might work with, or who you might run into in the course of life. She pointed out that any number of other male actors are just too handsome to play that “Everyman” role. Brad Pitt or Pierce Bronson, for example, just would not be able to fit into many of the roles because, as we know from our life’s experiences, seriously beautiful people are usually not found doing just average things.

Yet he has used this to his advantage. Because he was not the most handsome man on the studio lot, he could express himself differently as an actor and do it in a believable way. There is an aura of authenticity that his everyman looks allow.

Another reason that he probably found so much work is that he is a dependable asset. His life has not been plagued by serious substance abuse issues and he leads, by all accounts, an extremely stable private life. When the curtain goes up Hanks is well prepared and ready to act—he knows his lines and what is expected of him. As simple and obvious as this sounds, over the years Hollywood directors have dealt with a number of serious dependability issues, even deaths, from their actors and that obviously throws a big wrench into filming and production schedules.

The fact however, is that once an actor has an initial success then further work comes easier. Yes, many directors have taken chances on unproven talent and had it pay off, but more often than not the film makers play it safe. If they find someone that the public likes, then they are reluctant to break the mold. This is good for the established actors but tough for the newer thespians. In the United Kingdom it is said that only 2% of all actors can actually make a living from their film, stage, or voice work and I imagine the numbers are much the same in the United States.

While we all enjoy some of the true ingenuity that comes from Hollywood and the world’s leading studios, this business is always finely attuned to the public sentiment.

This means that in playing it safe, a good deal of the storytelling on the screen is formulaic. The truth is that while we enjoy seeing the risks that pay off, we never see the risks that were not taken—and who knows what gems have remained hidden?

With these good arguments why then do I wish for less of Hanks instead of more? Quite simply it goes back to the desire for variety. I would have liked to have seen any number of other actors take up some of his roles just to give us a change of pace. It doesn’t even need to be high-risk, just something different.

The odd thing is that casting staffs do such a phenomenal job of being able to find just the right actor for a role. It is as if they can manufacturer the person they need right out of thin air. Why not then with the leading roles? Why the disconnect?

Tom Hanks, left
and Henry Winkler in a scene from the episode “Love and Marriage” of “Happy Days,” March 23, 1982.
Consider Hank’s cohort of contemporaries such as Jeff Bridges, Daniel Day Lewis, Kevin Bacon, Sean Penn, Nicholas Cage, Beau Bridges, Brad Pitt, Jeff Daniel, and others. While they all certainly have enjoyed successful and full movie careers, perhaps they could have taken one or two of the roles. Did Hanks, as a 42 year-old, need to be playing the role of Capt. John Miller in Saving Private Ryan? Was there not a much younger, and therefore more historically realistic, actor who could have played the role?

Which brings me to my last point. Why did Hanks himself not wish to pass the baton to someone younger—to give him a chance while he moves to the director’s chair. Yes, I know he enjoys working, but think of the fresh faces who would have brought new and enjoyable interpretations to a role. I would have thought that Hanks would have liked, at some point, to have stepped into the role of a mentor and cultivator of talent.

Hanks has undoubtedly earned his place as a beloved American actor—of that there is no question. But I do know that too much of a good thing is just that—too much.

In the meantime, enjoy the show,

9 Comments

  1. Linda

    Tom Hanks is a fine actor, and better than most of the contemporary you mention. For example I do not consider Brad Pitt or Kevin Bacon good actors. Tom Hanks deserves the roles he has had by today’s standards because there are few excellent actors out there. I do not see any who could hold a candle to Edward Fox, Sir Laurence Olivier or Sir David Niven, Bob Mitchum, Montgomery Clift, Richard Widmark, Cary Grant and so many others from that time. The only actor I appreciate today is the vastly underrated James Spader. I imagine as long as he draws breath Tom Hanks will get the roles because he has so little in the way of competition.

    Reply
    • NealSchier

      Recently I watched the 4 part series The Night Manager with Tom Hiddleston and Hugh Laurie. While Laurie is my age and thus younger than Hanks, I could see him doing a few of the roles that Hanks might be asked to do.

      Another Old Etonian, Damian Lewis, starred as Pennsylvania born and bred Major Dick Winters. He would have been a good candidate for the role in Saving Private Ryan. Lewis however, was born until the early 70s I believe and thus I can’t see him filling some of the other roles that were Hanks.

      I think Hanks, among other things, was just born in a sweet spot.

      Reply
  2. Alan

    Surely, for a lot of the reasons cited above (everyman looks, squeaky-clean past, etc.) he would be a shoo-in as the next president. I am sure he’d do a much better job than the incumbent, and he’s about the only person at the moment that I can see having an earthly chance of beating him.

    Reply
  3. Alan

    Should have said, in the comment above I was referring (of course) to Tom Hanks…

    Reply
  4. CB

    Tom Hanks for president!

    Reply
  5. Phil

    I think Hanks is always consistent (as you pointed out) and occasionally brilliant. I thought he was fantastic in Big, Forrest Gump, Castaway, and Punch Line. Ironically enough, I found his work in a movie he won Best Actor for to be contrived and tepid…..Philadelphia. I’m sure overexposure is a risk for every big name actor if his career spans decades; however, one thing actors can do is “reinvent” themselves from time to time. Look at Sean Connery……from James Bond to everyone’s favorite older guy. Sam Elliot did something similar as well. I wonder if Hanks has another transition coming down the line?

    Reply
    • NealSchier

      Well said Phil about an actor transitioning from one phase to another. Sometimes that can be tough as the audience gets set in its ways as well and likes what has been comfortable. Takes a bit of effort on both the actors and the viewers parts and that is probably what makes it so rewarding.

      Reply
  6. Tim

    That was Tom Hanks in Apollo 13??? I thought it was Alan Bean. I’ve seen Forest Gump, but I really don’t recall seeing Tom Hanks in that story.

    On the other hand, I really loved Frantic. What a great story and Harrison Ford did such a great job of playing Harrison Ford, the doctor whose wife was kidnapped.

    Just saying…

    Reply
    • NealSchier

      I admit that I am in a minority of one when it comes to Hanks overload. Although most of his movies are far far far too dark for me (other than Lincoln) I think of the true expertise that Daniel Day Lewis brought to the proceedings…or Joaquin Phoenix playing Johnny Cash.

      I am not saying that some of the actors extent when Hanks was filming a lot could have done better than he did, but rather that some of the secondary roles are always so perfectly cast that the studios certainly had/have the capability to cast a wide net and find some other talent. Lets mix it up a little and not always depend on the same actors to just trundle out film after film. Heck, they could have let Sullenberger play himself!

      Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

9 Comments

  1. Linda

    Tom Hanks is a fine actor, and better than most of the contemporary you mention. For example I do not consider Brad Pitt or Kevin Bacon good actors. Tom Hanks deserves the roles he has had by today’s standards because there are few excellent actors out there. I do not see any who could hold a candle to Edward Fox, Sir Laurence Olivier or Sir David Niven, Bob Mitchum, Montgomery Clift, Richard Widmark, Cary Grant and so many others from that time. The only actor I appreciate today is the vastly underrated James Spader. I imagine as long as he draws breath Tom Hanks will get the roles because he has so little in the way of competition.

    Reply
    • NealSchier

      Recently I watched the 4 part series The Night Manager with Tom Hiddleston and Hugh Laurie. While Laurie is my age and thus younger than Hanks, I could see him doing a few of the roles that Hanks might be asked to do.

      Another Old Etonian, Damian Lewis, starred as Pennsylvania born and bred Major Dick Winters. He would have been a good candidate for the role in Saving Private Ryan. Lewis however, was born until the early 70s I believe and thus I can’t see him filling some of the other roles that were Hanks.

      I think Hanks, among other things, was just born in a sweet spot.

      Reply
  2. Alan

    Surely, for a lot of the reasons cited above (everyman looks, squeaky-clean past, etc.) he would be a shoo-in as the next president. I am sure he’d do a much better job than the incumbent, and he’s about the only person at the moment that I can see having an earthly chance of beating him.

    Reply
  3. Alan

    Should have said, in the comment above I was referring (of course) to Tom Hanks…

    Reply
  4. CB

    Tom Hanks for president!

    Reply
  5. Phil

    I think Hanks is always consistent (as you pointed out) and occasionally brilliant. I thought he was fantastic in Big, Forrest Gump, Castaway, and Punch Line. Ironically enough, I found his work in a movie he won Best Actor for to be contrived and tepid…..Philadelphia. I’m sure overexposure is a risk for every big name actor if his career spans decades; however, one thing actors can do is “reinvent” themselves from time to time. Look at Sean Connery……from James Bond to everyone’s favorite older guy. Sam Elliot did something similar as well. I wonder if Hanks has another transition coming down the line?

    Reply
    • NealSchier

      Well said Phil about an actor transitioning from one phase to another. Sometimes that can be tough as the audience gets set in its ways as well and likes what has been comfortable. Takes a bit of effort on both the actors and the viewers parts and that is probably what makes it so rewarding.

      Reply
  6. Tim

    That was Tom Hanks in Apollo 13??? I thought it was Alan Bean. I’ve seen Forest Gump, but I really don’t recall seeing Tom Hanks in that story.

    On the other hand, I really loved Frantic. What a great story and Harrison Ford did such a great job of playing Harrison Ford, the doctor whose wife was kidnapped.

    Just saying…

    Reply
    • NealSchier

      I admit that I am in a minority of one when it comes to Hanks overload. Although most of his movies are far far far too dark for me (other than Lincoln) I think of the true expertise that Daniel Day Lewis brought to the proceedings…or Joaquin Phoenix playing Johnny Cash.

      I am not saying that some of the actors extent when Hanks was filming a lot could have done better than he did, but rather that some of the secondary roles are always so perfectly cast that the studios certainly had/have the capability to cast a wide net and find some other talent. Lets mix it up a little and not always depend on the same actors to just trundle out film after film. Heck, they could have let Sullenberger play himself!

      Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Share This