I cannot enter Spielberg’s shoes, nor read his mind. What I can do is to assess his creative persona - what challenges this great movie maker - from the films that he has created.
One look at the impressive list and we get the picture - ET, Jaws, Schindler’s List, Saving Private Ryan, Jurassic Park, and so on. I am tempted to conclude that what tempts him is the sheer creative challenge of bringing alive situations that are extremely difficult to recreate - be it the bloody warfare on the coast of Normandy, or the fictitious world of dinosaurs.
I think this backdrop is necessary to understand the context of The Terminal and what might have motivated Spielberg to take up the project. A man who, by stroke of fate, finds himself exiled to the visitors’ lounge of the JFK airport, who is completely lost in the sea of faceless, impersonal humanity (he doesn’t even understand their language, leave alone their culture), and has no clue as to how he can escape the situation, is a unique situation - enough to excite the creative juices of Spielberg.
Add to this the challenge of shooting almost the entire film within the confines of what is shown as parts of the JFK, and yet keeping alive the interest of the audience, and you (Spielberg, rather) have a daunting task to put it mildly.
The movie, however, did not live up to my expectations. Let me try and articulate why.
Whatever might have been Spielberg’s subjects, however implausible or realistic, he has always lent immense credibility to these by the sheer virtue of his treatment. And this is precisely where he has somewhat failed in The Terminal.
The situation is itself not unrealistic - we have a live example of an almost identical situation, albeit at the Charles DeGaul. No, I think what is not so realistic is the way the story is shown to build up, and finally end. I presume Victor would have had close relatives or friends back home. Why then do we not get to see any scene where is remembering them, or missing them. He is shown to be brave in coming to terms with the impossible situation he is faced with, but I think a touch of vulnerability to the character ( maybe he breaks down, alone, at night in complete hopelessness and dispair, maybe he has a brother or sister who he misses terribly) would have made him more human.
The romantic angle was sweet, but not entirely necessary. I must confess, though, that it did add to the entertainment value of the movie. But there was something frivolous about the entire thing. The candle-lit dinner, courting arrest as a consequence of the desperate heroic act of the Janitor, the entire airport bidding farewell to Victor. Why, all this was almost bollywoodish, if you ask me.
No, I am forced to come back to my point. This was just not the quintessential Spielberg movie.
There is a paradox, though. I am happy that I saw it. I know that I would have seen it even if advised against it. It was all worthwhile because of the inimitable Tom Hanks. He personified Victor Novarski. No surprises there.