Recently, the filmmaker Robert Zemeckis was a somewhat confusing figure. The director of such beloved films as the “Back to the Future” series, “Forrest Gump,” “Cast Away,” “Death Becomes Her” and “Who Framed Roger Rabbit” has delivered almost as many failures as successes, if the We also consider Discover “The Polar Express”, “Beowulf”, “Welcome to Marwen” and “Pinocchio”. An experimentalist obsessed with special effects and the dramatic power they can exert in cinema, Zemeckis is always trying something new, especially with motion capture technology. This doesn’t always work: many of these projects drift into an uncanny and unattractive valley. Despite his many attempts, he has not yet succeeded.

In his new intergenerational family drama “Here,” based on a 2014 graphic novel by Richard McGuire (developed from a six-page comic published in the comic book anthology “Raw” in 1989), the experience is the story itself, a family story. spanning generations – and centuries – all told from a fixed point of view. In his formally inventive graphic novel, McGuire used pictures within pictures to visually represent different periods within a single panel.

Zemeckis maintains the pictures-within-pictures conceit as a transitional flourish in the film version of “Here,” but the plot itself is more about jumping through time while holding the camera stationary. There are many residents of this space, from a Native American couple (Joel Oulette and Dannie McCallum) in the pre-Columbian era, to a young Victorian-era family (Michelle Dockery and Gwilym Lee) who move into their modest colonial house, and then later, recliner inventor La-Z-Boy (David Fynn) and his fiery wife (Ophelia Lovibond), who take over the house. There’s also a modern-day Black family (Nicholas Pinnock, Nikki Amuka-Bird, and Cache Vanderpuye) navigating the COVID-19 pandemic and the Black Lives Matter movement.

But the story primarily focuses on a family who occupied the house for most of the 20th century: a World War II veteran, Al (Paul Bettany), his wife Rose (Kelly Reilly) then their son Richard (Tom Hanks) and his wife Margaret (Robin Wright). And yes, Hanks and Wright have been digitally de-aged – we first see them as teenagers – and no, that doesn’t work at all (there’s something very strange going on around Hanks’ aged mouth ). Sure, the trio of Hanks, Wright and Zemeckis provide the gimmick of a “Forrest Gump” reunion, but why do we have to age Hanks when there are his real sons Colin and Truman at home? Even Wright has an actress daughter who looks like him, Dylan Penn.

“Here” also has that Gumpian quality of major historical events aligned with personal stories: Benjamin Franklin (Keith Bartlett) and his son William (Daniel Betts) occupy the colonial mansion across the street; a pregnancy is announced as the Beatles take the stage on “The Ed Sullivan Show”; and seemingly everything important happens in this godforsaken living room, including weddings, births and breakups.

The story in “Here” surrounding Richard and Margaret is relatable, entirely predictable, and completely boring. They get pregnant as teenagers, move in with his family, he gives up art to get a real job, she wants her own space, etc. Ostensibly, their story is about navigating the ups and downs of life, but ultimately it turns into a rather discouraging story about two people who take too long to pursue the things that make them happy, and for for her, it’s about getting out of this damn house, even though if she ever left, there would be no “Here” here.

Changing hands over the years means real estate agents come in and out throughout the film, and by the time the credits roll, you’re half-expecting the logo of a homeowner’s insurance company, because it’s This is what this whisper of a film looks like: an advertisement for home insurance. To be frank, there are 30-second spots that have inspired more tears and emotion than the flat and pointless “Here.”

Richard and Margaret’s daughter, Vanessa (Zsa Zsa Zemeckis), disappears around the age of 16 and never appears again, which is a shame, because the most interesting story isn’t the story of the father’s parents. baby boomer, but perhaps that of their Gen-X daughter or their zoomer grandchildren. could benefit from their generational wealth. “Here” doesn’t want to delve into the nuances surrounding this. But maybe property values ​​are just where the mind wanders when the story that unfolds is so bland and bland.

This year saw other bold projects from aging filmmakers who experimented with cinematic form and function on their own terms – notably that of Francis Ford Coppola “Megalopolis,” and “ ” by Kevin CostnerHorizon.” Although the efforts have been laudable, the results have unfortunately all been failures and “Here” is no exception.

Katie Walsh is a film critic for the Tribune News Service.