Showing posts with label John Hughes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Hughes. Show all posts

Monday, December 18, 2023

Home Alone In Concert (Revisit 2023)

 


One of my favorite concert experiences, is to see a film I love, with the score delivered by an orchestra. Earlier this year I had the chance to see "Star Wars" in Concert with the Austin Symphony Orchestra. I suspect that the music director of the symphony is a fan of composer John Williams (of course who isn't?), because this week, for the second time this year, a score featuring the music of Williams was featured accompanied by the film, in this case it was the holiday film "Home Alone". 

I was confident that I had written a post on this film before. I thought I might have seen it in a Fathom Event screening, so it would have been on my list of films I have covered. When I looked however, I found no record of having covered the movie before, so it turns out this will be a first time as well. "Home Alone" was the most successful film of 1990, and it shared end of the year financial records with "Dances with Wolves".  The Kevin Costner film ended up with all of the end of the year honors, but this John Hughes written, Christopher Columbus directed film ended up as the box office champ. So Kevin McCallister turned out to be the top Kevin of the year, at least when it came to money. The two Academy Award nominations that "Home Alone" did receive however, both went to John Williams, one for the song he wrote which Leslie Bricusse did the lyrics for, and a second for the score of the film.

Before I get to the music, a little at least about the film. Certainly, almost anyone reading this will have seen "Home Alone", it has become a Christmas Classic. It was the first 20th Century Fox film to be released to the sell through market on VHS, and became, along with E.T. the Extraterrestrial, the biggest selling video of the era. This movie has been in the heads of families for more than thirty years, and it has been parodied relentlessly as well as making a star out of Macaulay Culkin. The plot has been described by some as "Die Hard" with a kid.  Young Kevin, having been accidentally left behind by his family, defends the homestead from burglars played by Joe Pesci and Daniel Stern. Amazingly, Pesci was also in the very different role of  Tommy DeVito, a murderous Mafioso, in theaters just a few weeks before this comic role. The combination of the two may have been the reason that his performance in "Goodfellas" was the sole Academy Award win for that film. 

Director Chris Columbus was responsible for adding the character of the neighbor, suspected of being a shovel killer, Mr. Marley. The character played so effectively by Roberts Blossom, is one of the things that raises the film from a slapstick farce to a more touching human comedy. The movie features several sequences where eight year old Kevin, speaks quite wisely, but still like a kid, and most of that works pretty well. His encounters with the checkout girl at the grocery store, and the Santa finishing his shift, let us believe a lot more in the final conversation with Marley in the church. Of course there is plenty of eye poking, three stooges type humor when the home invasion starts, so you can laugh and cringe simultaneously.  

The audience for the concert was wired for this experience from the very start. There was a noticeable amount of applause and cheering for the 20th Century Fox logo at the start of the film. Maybe some of the audience was like me, nostalgic for a classic film studio that no longer exists. The theme music plays throughout the picture, but it is in the last half of the film that the music soars, in part because of the chorale music and singing that occurs around the time Marley and Kevin have their conversation. In the concert hall, this was accompanied by a 70 person chorale of high school singers who came in and sat in front of the orchestra, after an intermission, which is invented by the event and not part of the original film. 

I have said it before to others when talking about this movie, it is so much better than it has a right to be and than you remember. I took my kids to see the film when they were four and two, neither remembers the experience but I do. We went with my best friend's family, they had two children the same age as ours, and we all enjoyed the movie as best as young kids could. It became a favorite of James, my friend's son. Three years later I lost my friend to cancer and his family dropped out of our lives, but I always think of them when I see this movie. Merry Christmas, ya filthy animals.


Thursday, August 17, 2023

Ferris Bueller's Day Off-Paramount Summer Classic Film Series

 


Let's face it, "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" only pretends to have a social value buried in it somewhere. It is not really there. Cameron is a puppet, Sloane is a trophy, and Mr. Rooney is the Coyote to Ferris's Roadrunner. It's a live action cartoon set in Chicago, featuring misbehaving high school kids against the world. We root for them because their antagonists are so exaggeratedly drawn that you want them to succeed in spite of how obnoxious they can be.  Ferris is an entitled brat, Cameron is a put upon drone and Sloane is the eye candy they drag along with them. That said,  he's very popular. The sportos, the motorheads, geeks, sluts, bloods, wastoids, dweebies, dickheads - they all adore him. They think he's a righteous dude, and for the most part so do I.

Ferris is living out a fantasy of a day skipping school. You get your best friend, your best girl, in the coolest car possible, and you lead them on an adventure that will be talked about the rest of their lives. Of course we love it, we all wish we could do some of those things, and boy do John Hughes and Ferris Bueller sell us on that dream. I remembered the review from Siskel and Ebert when Gene complained that the kids didn't do anything very interesting on they day off. They went up in the Sears Tower, ate at a fancy restaurant, went to a Cubs game at Wrigley field (Gene's big complaint was that they didn't sit in the bleachers), spent time at the Art Institute of Chicago, hijacked a parade in an elaborate fantasy moment, and outwitted their nemesis at every turn. He had a pretty high standard for what a good day in Chicago would be. He also complained that the breaking of the fourth wall was not funny. Before it was used in every comedy show in the 2000s, it was not typical for characters to address the situations they were in from a third person perspective, now that is everywhere, Hughes was just ahead of his time.

When Ferris addresses the audience, he says things that the target audience will relate to. "I'm not going to live in Europe so why do I care if they are socialist?" He is the unstoppable force that is impervious to the barriers that are thrown up against him. Cameron points out the fantasy at one point, "He never gets caught".  We see that superpower played out repeatedly and we are in on the joke. We know it is a fantasy and that's what helps make it so much fun. Of course Ferris did not choreograph the parade watchers and participants in the dance sequence in downtown Chicago, that is just the dream and it is an enjoyable one. 

Matthew Broderick was becoming a big star at the time and this role sent him to the top. He was never lumped in with the brat pack actors of his era, and he managed to play a lot of parts that showcase him as the star, not just one in an ensemble. His supercilious delivery of his lines and attitude to everyone else in the film is right, but it could easily be off-putting. Broderick manages to wald the line between everyman and arrogant snot pretty well. The sort of tacked on relationship advice he gives to Cameron seems plausible only because he is a kid as well. 

The parade, the good natured theft and return of the Ferrari, the intricate tricks Ferris used to fake out his parents and anyone else questioning hi illness are all humorous moments that are not meant to be taken literally. It's not really a film about empowerment, it's a film that embraces a philosophy of fun, regardless of how difficult the dream would be to attain. Life moves pretty fast, maybe we ought to enjoy it while we are here. 
I had this poster on the wall of my office at school for several years. 



Wednesday, July 23, 2014

AMC Classic Series:The Breakfast Club



I've seen this movie dozens of times since 1985. It was a film that I used in my Small Group Communication class to discuss several different concepts of group dynamics, include roles, norms, power, self-disclosure and climate. All of those points are still interesting but this is a film blog and the real reason for discussing it are the cinematic qualities of the film. There are three subjects that I want to address in regard to the film making; the setting of the film, the themes of the film and the performances.

I was listening to a podcast today that discussed a movie that was based on a play, and the participants wondered how that film could have been done on the stage with the number of locations that were used. I'd go the opposite direction, why hasn't anyone turned this into a play? It is perfect for a community theater or high school little theater project. There is one main location, two secondary locations and then some transition material that takes place mostly in hallways. This film is ninety percent five people talking in a single room. John Hughes, the writer-director manages to make the potentially claustrophobic location interesting by having the characters move seating positions, step off into side areas temporarily and insert two or three sequences where a chase or an escape occurs just outside of the room. I do think that many audience members will be a bit tense because there is not a lot of action, but the characters manage to keep things compelling.

The first time I saw it, I was young enough that I could largely identify with the themes of alienation being expressed here. This is a Generation X movie, just as that generation was being defined. Kids felt out of touch with their parents, mostly because the parents had achieved some level of economic status that they had expectations and demands on their kids that the young people were unsure they would be able to live up to. The kids were also sometimes resentful of the expectations being heaped on them. As I have grown older, I tend to see a little more that this is high school drama being played out here. There have always been cliques, parents are often less than what we might hope, and bullying and social jockeying have always been a part of adolescence. The movie starts off with a quote from a David Bowie song. It feels more appropriate to the counter-cultural revolution of the late sixties than the bleak indifference that is the subject of this mid-eighties film. What is not overwrought however are the feelings of loneliness and isolation that kids can feel, even when surrounded by others. Only one character claims to have no friends, all the others resent their friends, are pressured by them or are defensive about them in some way or other. The interaction between the characters may border on maudlin or hyperbolic at times but they are real emotions and they reflect the way real kids might have felt.

What was most impressive to me were the performances by the cast. Judd Nelson goes a little over the top occasionally, but the scene where he reveals through mimicry his family dynamic is heart breaking. Watching the other actors respond to it was an opportunity to see how acting so often is not about being at the center and having the most lines, but being in the moment and treating the characters honestly.  Emilio Estevz was never this good in anything else he appeared in. His Jock, Andy, feels powerless and uncertain in the face of his future and his expressions show that. There is a nice warm moment at the end when he connects with Allison that gives him a little more hope. Molly Ringwald had "Sixteen Candles" behind her and "Pretty In Pink" in front, and she was in the sweet spot of her career playing the contemplative pretty girls with a lack of confidence. Ali Sheedy's character does not even speak for the first third of the film but she manages to command attention. Her lines when she is manipulating Claire are sarcastic but also thoughtful and unpredictable. Anthony Michael Hall is the biggest surprise, I forgot how touching and honest and funny his character was. The look on his face when he delivers his explanation of why he has a fake ID is great, as if he could not understand why anyone would not have the same reason. Paul Gleason may have had a bigger role in some other movie but I can't think of what it might be. Most of his other parts he is in the background, here he is the main antagonist. As I got older I understood his defensive impulses more, they reflect years of experience and frustration but also an inability to change. His voice conveys those very characteristics when he is having his heart to heart with Carl the Janitor but especially in his one on one confrontation with Bender.

Is this still the must see movie for high school kids to bond over? I don't know. It still worked for me as I watched it on the big screen. The final defiant salute that Bender gives still brings a little thrill as I identify with the rebels for a moment. The homophobic language would not go far in a script these days, and the pot smoking would probably earn it a more restrictive rating. I would not want to encourage getting high as the best way to break the walls between kids in their teens. That it worked for the "Breakfast Club" is probably more of a screenwriters crutch than reality, but the feelings that get discussed and the frustration of the kids, now that is genuine.