Get all your news in one place.
100's of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Comment
Emma Beddington

Tom Hanks reckons 35 is the worst age. This is why he’s wrong

Digitally altered to look younger, Tom Hanks and Robin Wright hug in a still from the film Here.
Age shall not wither them … Tom Hanks (left) and Robin Wright in the age-hopping drama Here. Photograph: AP

If you’re 34, watch out: Tom Hanks says 35 is the worst age. Why ask Hanks – delightful as he seems – as opposed to, say, the highly qualified global community of happiness psychologists and social scientists? Because he’s got a film out, duh – Here, which required him to be rejuvenated to various ages, including his dread mid-30s. “Your metabolism stops, gravity starts tearing you down, your bones start wearing off [and] you stand differently,” Hanks told Entertainment Tonight. “You no longer are able to spring up off a couch.”

This is such a movie star answer. Hanks’ gripe is physical decline and yes, when your face, body and spring-off-a-couch-ability are how your worth is gauged, feeling that you’re physically degenerating must open up an existential abyss. For civilians, he’s wrong though: it’s 47.2. That’s when the US National Bureau of Economic Research concluded human unhappiness peaks. That finding in 2020 reinforced previous research on the “U-shaped happiness curve”: we start happy, wellbeing bottoms out at about 50, then we perk up again. The U-curve has been challenged, but seems robust; a 2021 review found “remarkably strong and consistent evidence across countries” of U-shaped happiness trajectories.

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100's of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.