Favorite John Hughes Movie

[Fievel]

Cool breakdown/review.

I had never thought of the similarities between Some Kind of Wonderful and Pretty in Pink. They're rather obvious. But that being said, they are their own individual films and I'll always love 'em. If I ever have the time, I'd love to do a marathon of Hughes's high school films.

[TheBaxter]

i think the biggest weakness of SKOW is eric stoltz. i usually like him in stuff, but he's not very good in this. not too believable as a high school kid, and not enough teen-age angst for this role. i'm not sure stoltz is a great choice as a lead, he works better as a supporting character. seeing this film, i can understand why he got replaced on Back To The Future.

[Spandau Belly]

I dunno, I thought Stolz did a good job with what he was asked to do here. He could seem sincere and sensitive without coming across corny, and he was able show his distant infactuation with Lea Thompson without seeming stalkerish, which is always a danger. From what I understand Stolz was fired from BACK TO THE FUTURE because he just couldn't bring a comic touch to the material, and maybe that's what's missing here to give his character that extra spark and make him more engaging. He mostly just seems like this nice sensitive guy who is maybe a bit boring. However I'm not sure if that's Stolz's fault or Hughes's. I agree that I've enjoyed him more in supporting roles, especially when he can go against his niceguy looks and be a bit sleazy like in PULP FICTION and RULES OF ATTRACTION.

[TheBaxter]

yeah, it partly may be the way the character is written too. he's too nice, too sensitive, too wholesome.... he's kinda like michael cera in a way. which makes me want to punch him in the face.

[Fievel]

he's kinda like michael cera in a way. which makes me want to punch him in the face.

How true!!
But thankfully Stoltz (who is 50 now! WTF?!?!?) is a much better actor (not great, but better than Cera) and has showed the world much more range than Cera likely ever will.

[Bloo]

he's kinda like michael cera in a way. which makes me want to punch him in the face.

How true!!
But thankfully Stoltz (who is 50 now! WTF?!?!?) is a much better actor (not great, but better than Cera) and has showed the world much more range than Cera likely ever will.

and now directs episodes of GLEE

[Fievel]

he's kinda like michael cera in a way. which makes me want to punch him in the face.

How true!!
But thankfully Stoltz (who is 50 now! WTF?!?!?) is a much better actor (not great, but better than Cera) and has showed the world much more range than Cera likely ever will.

and now directs episodes of GLEE

Wow! Seven episodes so far!!

[SilentBobX]

Don't think I've posted here but I have to profess my admiration of Uncle Buck. When I saw it, I wanted to be like that for my niece and nephews. Someone who could make a gigantic pancake breakfast, and genuinely freak them out(of course in a good way). Home Alone and his teen films may get more press, but Uncle Buck is my favorite. It combines Candy at his peak, doing simple, subtle comedy, good jokes, and of course, a love of bowling. You can't go wrong with this one, imho.

Mahalo

[caruso_stalker217]

"Melanoma Head's comin'!"

[so sorry]

I watched Sixteen Candles last night (one of my favs from the 80s).
One of the things that really struck me this viewing though: the kinda overt date-rapeyness of the entire post-party situation between hunk Jake Ryan and geek Farmer Ted.
And the use of the derogatory term "stick" a couple of times too.

[Peven]

Hughes is one of the most over-rated directors ever, he glorified date rapey guys and shallow, self-absorbed girls, and justified treating the Ducky's of the world as doormats to be taken for granted and laughed at. what a douche

[so sorry]

...glorified date rapey guys and shallow, self-absorbed girls, and justified treating the Ducky's of the world as doormats to be taken for granted and laughed at.

So...you basically just described high school, so perhaps he was on to something.

[Fievel]

...glorified date rapey guys and shallow, self-absorbed girls, and justified treating the Ducky's of the world as doormats to be taken for granted and laughed at.

So...you basically just described high school.

Exactly. His high school films really found a great (not perfect) balance of entertainment and accurate portrayals of teenagers - along with their struggles, emotions, behavior, interactions, etc. etc. Yeah, it was usually exaggerated to various degrees and often extremely so. But you take away all that obvious exaggeration and the essence of kids is there. And that comes down to the writing of the characters and the acting of the cast. Just realizing this as I type, but I felt the same about Superbad - you take away all the ridiculous scenes in that film and just focus on the kids - along with every aspect I mentioned above, and that's a pretty accurate portrayal of kids. Maybe even more so than Hughes' films.

[Ribbons]

Hughes is one of the most over-rated directors ever, he glorified date rapey guys and shallow, self-absorbed girls, and justified treating the Ducky's of the world as doormats to be taken for granted and laughed at. what a douche

In Hughes's defense wasn't Molly Ringwald the one who vetoed ending up with Ducky at the end of Pretty in Pink?

[Peven]

Hughes is one of the most over-rated directors ever, he glorified date rapey guys and shallow, self-absorbed girls, and justified treating the Ducky's of the world as doormats to be taken for granted and laughed at. what a douche

In Hughes's defense wasn't Molly Ringwald the one who vetoed ending up with Ducky at the end of Pretty in Pink?

I actually think I remember reading somewhere that they tested an ending with Ducky getting Molly and it scored poorly, so that is why they went with the ending we saw.


of course i am being extreme and somewhat hyperbolic, and I even kind of like "Some Kind of Wonderful", for the very reason that the "Ducky" in that movie gets chosen by our protagonist(Eric Stoltz) in the end, even though that "Ducky" is a chick (Mary Stuart Masterson), but overall I really do despise a lot of the stereotypes that Hughes glorified and affirmed in his movies

[Peven]

...glorified date rapey guys and shallow, self-absorbed girls, and justified treating the Ducky's of the world as doormats to be taken for granted and laughed at.

So...you basically just described high school, so perhaps he was on to something.

it isn't that he depicted that stuff, he endorsed it with his movies, that is my problem with him.

[TheBaxter]

of course i am being extreme and somewhat hyperbolic

[TheBaxter]

I watched Sixteen Candles last night (one of my favs from the 80s).
One of the things that really struck me this viewing though: the kinda overt date-rapeyness of the entire post-party situation between hunk Jake Ryan and geek Farmer Ted.
And the use of the derogatory term "stick" a couple of times too.

just wait til you rewatch Weird Science and pick up on the whole white slavery angle...

[TheBaxter]

Molly Ringwald was uncomfortable watching Breakfast Club with her pre-teen daughter

really interesting article that touches on both the good and the bad in Hughes' films (and even goes in-depth on that date-rapey sixteen candles scene).

one thing that sticks out about scenes like that, or the harrassment and implied sexual assault in breakfast club, is that, while that stuff did happen and still does happen a lot, the really troubling part of it is how those female characters were written to react to it in a way that demonstrates they welcomed or enjoyed being treated that way. the girl in 16 candles isn't bothered about having had passed-out drunken sex, instead she says she thinks she enjoyed it and then kisses anthony michael hall after. and in breakfast club, after being harrassed and possibly assualted over the course of a day, molly ringwald ends up with the character who's been victimizing her. it reinforces the male fantasy that women want to be taken advantage of by a stronger, "assertive" male. even pretty in pink, though there's not as much overt assault-like behavior, still reinforces that fantasy when molly ringwald's character goes back to the guy who basically dumped her and treated her like shit the whole film. not only reinforces it (because sometimes women DO go back to abusive men) but celebrates it.

however, i also feel like that is not solely a reflection of John Hughes, but is a reflection of that whole time. and those kinds of deep-seated attitudes have been around in films and entertainment a long time. movies and popular art reflect the times and the society in which they were created, and there are plenty of other films that depict women in subservient ways. as bad as the date-rape 16 candles scene seems, you've got other films like revenge of the nerds where one character basically tricks a girl into having sex with him by putting on a mask and pretending to be her boyfriend, and when he reveals himself, instead of her being horrified at being raped, she becomes his girlfriend. you can come up with plenty other examples. it's too easy to just blame individual filmmakers for issues that were, and frankly still are, pervasive through society. it's more constructive to learn from it so we can more easily recognize it and call it out when it happens today.

[so sorry]

Molly Ringwald was uncomfortable watching Breakfast Club with her pre-teen daughter

really interesting article that touches on both the good and the bad in Hughes' films (and even goes in-depth on that date-rapey sixteen candles scene).

one thing that sticks out about scenes like that, or the harrassment and implied sexual assault in breakfast club, is that, while that stuff did happen and still does happen a lot, the really troubling part of it is how those female characters were written to react to it in a way that demonstrates they welcomed or enjoyed being treated that way. the girl in 16 candles isn't bothered about having had passed-out drunken sex, instead she says she thinks she enjoyed it and then kisses anthony michael hall after. and in breakfast club, after being harrassed and possibly assualted over the course of a day, molly ringwald ends up with the character who's been victimizing her. it reinforces the male fantasy that women want to be taken advantage of by a stronger, "assertive" male. even pretty in pink, though there's not as much overt assault-like behavior, still reinforces that fantasy when molly ringwald's character goes back to the guy who basically dumped her and treated her like shit the whole film. not only reinforces it (because sometimes women DO go back to abusive men) but celebrates it.

however, i also feel like that is not solely a reflection of John Hughes, but is a reflection of that whole time. and those kinds of deep-seated attitudes have been around in films and entertainment a long time. movies and popular art reflect the times and the society in which they were created, and there are plenty of other films that depict women in subservient ways. as bad as the date-rape 16 candles scene seems, you've got other films like revenge of the nerds where one character basically tricks a girl into having sex with him by putting on a mask and pretending to be her boyfriend, and when he reveals himself, instead of her being horrified at being raped, she becomes his girlfriend. you can come up with plenty other examples. it's too easy to just blame individual filmmakers for issues that were, and frankly still are, pervasive through society. it's more constructive to learn from it so we can more easily recognize it and call it out when it happens today.

Well said (and well expanded on to what I briefly touched on).

I do see a difference between the three Molly movies you referenced. Sixteen candles is as much a comedy as it is a drama. Not that what happens at the end is funny, but it give the sense that The Geek ending up with the prom queen would actually never happen in a dramatic "real life" portrayal.

Breakfast Club and Pretty in Pink, however, are not intended to be funny, so the notion that the lead female character still ends up with the previous jerk-guy, while annoying and stupid as a viewer, is totally believable as a human being.

And in my head, the Preppy Girl in Breakfast Club doesn't end up being with the Fuck Up guy when school starts on monday. They just exchange knowing glances as they pass in the hallway, and continue on with their established social classes (again, something that is VERY real life).

[Peven]

Molly Ringwald was uncomfortable watching Breakfast Club with her pre-teen daughter

really interesting article that touches on both the good and the bad in Hughes' films (and even goes in-depth on that date-rapey sixteen candles scene).

one thing that sticks out about scenes like that, or the harrassment and implied sexual assault in breakfast club, is that, while that stuff did happen and still does happen a lot, the really troubling part of it is how those female characters were written to react to it in a way that demonstrates they welcomed or enjoyed being treated that way. the girl in 16 candles isn't bothered about having had passed-out drunken sex, instead she says she thinks she enjoyed it and then kisses anthony michael hall after. and in breakfast club, after being harrassed and possibly assualted over the course of a day, molly ringwald ends up with the character who's been victimizing her. it reinforces the male fantasy that women want to be taken advantage of by a stronger, "assertive" male. even pretty in pink, though there's not as much overt assault-like behavior, still reinforces that fantasy when molly ringwald's character goes back to the guy who basically dumped her and treated her like shit the whole film. not only reinforces it (because sometimes women DO go back to abusive men) but celebrates it.

however, i also feel like that is not solely a reflection of John Hughes, but is a reflection of that whole time. and those kinds of deep-seated attitudes have been around in films and entertainment a long time. movies and popular art reflect the times and the society in which they were created, and there are plenty of other films that depict women in subservient ways. as bad as the date-rape 16 candles scene seems, you've got other films like revenge of the nerds where one character basically tricks a girl into having sex with him by putting on a mask and pretending to be her boyfriend, and when he reveals himself, instead of her being horrified at being raped, she becomes his girlfriend. you can come up with plenty other examples. it's too easy to just blame individual filmmakers for issues that were, and frankly still are, pervasive through society. it's more constructive to learn from it so we can more easily recognize it and call it out when it happens today.

I was a teenager in the 80's and i couldn't stand Breakfast Club or Pretty in Pink and most of 16 Candles, and now i feel redeemed. seriously, I am pretty sure I have made at least a few anti-80's Hughes posts here. Hughes' ass has been kissed by many over the years claiming he was a genius ability to get inside of teens' heads and shows adults their world. I didn't need 30 years of distance to look back and see how fucked up they were in the power they gave certain types of characters, in both money and looks and social status.

[TheBaxter]

...

what was that? i couldn't hear you over the sound of peven patting himself on the back.

Well said (and well expanded on to what I briefly touched on).

I do see a difference between the three Molly movies you referenced. Sixteen candles is as much a comedy as it is a drama. Not that what happens at the end is funny, but it give the sense that The Geek ending up with the prom queen would actually never happen in a dramatic "real life" portrayal.

Breakfast Club and Pretty in Pink, however, are not intended to be funny, so the notion that the lead female character still ends up with the previous jerk-guy, while annoying and stupid as a viewer, is totally believable as a human being.

And in my head, the Preppy Girl in Breakfast Club doesn't end up being with the Fuck Up guy when school starts on monday. They just exchange knowing glances as they pass in the hallway, and continue on with their established social classes (again, something that is VERY real life).

sixteen candles is definitely a comedy, and breakfast club is definitely more drama. it's ironic that the two scenes referred to were tonally different from the majority of the film in which they happened. the 16 candles scene was a more dramatic scene in an overall comedic film, and from what i remember of that breakfast club scene of bender hiding under the desk, it was played for comedy in an otherwise (overly) dramatic film. i'm not sure it makes much of a difference. sexual assault played for laughs is not less offensive than used as drama.

i think, more importantly, is that it's not the acts themselves, but how they are treated by the characters, and how the writers portray them to the audience, that determines their offensiveness. there's nothing inherently wrong with portraying assault, rape, harrassment, or misogyny in films. it's all based on context. in the case of a film like pretty in pink, where the main character ends up choosing the asshole over the nice guy.... yeah, that's completely believable and realistic (i've certainly seen it more than once in my experience) but what makes it problematic is that we the audience are obviously supposed to feel happy for her that she got the man of her dreams, even if he turned out to be an asshole who treated her like shit. if that choice had been framed as a tragic mistake that would just lead to more pain and unhappiness for the character, it would have been realistic and appropriate. instead, it reinforces the idea that women should be encouraged to choose the "bad boy", which then gives men an excuse to be "bad boys" without feeling bad about it, because, after all, that's what women want and deserve. in light of that article, it's even more ironic that this was the ending that molly ringwald forced them to film and the studio forced john hughes to use instead of the ending he originally wrote, where she does end up with the nice guy. it would have been interesting if she had addressed that in her article as well.

i just happened to notice that as a common theme while reading that article, the idea that these female characters (as written almost universally by men) are portrayed as being so accepting, and even welcoming, of the poor and sometimes criminal behavior they're subjected to. it's not hard to imagine that these characters, if they'd been written by women (other than teenage molly ringwald) who actually experienced this kind of behavior and knew how it really felt, would have been written to react in much different ways.

[Peven]

I certainly wasn't as sensitive to the way female characters were treated when I was a teenager and these movies came out, but I recognized that the portrayal of teens only fed into the existing social clique power structure of high school life and reinforced fairy tale-like ideas of it, like the big, hot, rich quarterback isn't really a shallow dick banging the head cheerleader after all, he is really sensitive on the inside and just needs the "right" girl to bring it out in him...or the shallow, hot, mean, bitch head cheerleader is really a nice, sweet girl who just needs the right experience to bring it out in her....and the lowly ordinary people should wish upon a star that they might get lucky enough to have sex with one of them. i don't feel sorry for Molly Ringwald's character at all in 16 Candles, she is a spoiled, arrogant, little twit. she is only 1 year older than the nerd but wouldn't consider going out with him in a million years, because he isn't good enough for her, she looks down on him with barely masked disdain, and it is an act of condescending charity that she does with her panties, not true kindness. but yet she thinks that she is good enough for Jake, a senior who is two years older than she is and probably the most popular guy in school, and that he should consider her as a love interest. and we should think jake is such a sweet guy.....why? what did he do at all to show a character trait that resembled true kindness or good character at all? he's rich, popular, good looking, and he likes the protagonist. that's it. he trashes his parent's house. he literally trades his passed out drunk girlfriend to another guy in order to get information about another girl. he lets a drunk kid drive his parents' very expensive car, both risking innocent lives and showing even ore disrespect to his parents. he's an asshole. but Hughes frames him as a good guy, and the protagonist's big reward at the end of the movie isn't finally seeing him for the shallow piece of shit he is but rather becoming his latest piece of ass.

Hughes created movies in the 80's where all the shallow, materialist values that Dr Seuss teaches kids against are embraced and celebrated.


but Uncle Buck is the shit, yo

[so sorry]

i don't feel sorry for Molly Ringwald's character at all in 16 Candles, she is a spoiled, arrogant, little twit.

That's a little harsh...she's a just-16 year old privledged girl. Emotionally she's clearly not mature enough. Give her a break!

but Hughes frames him as a good guy

I don't think this is true. He's not fleshed out enough as a character to say he's "a good guy". Like Samantha, he's a young privileged (more so) kid, and he's starting to realize his place in life isn't what he wants. Conflicted, etc, BUT...

he's an asshole.

True!

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

i don't feel sorry for Molly Ringwald's character at all in 16 Candles, she is a spoiled, arrogant, little twit.

That's a little harsh...she's a just-16 year old privledged girl. Emotionally she's clearly not mature enough. Give her a break!

Nah she's a set-entitled gentleman! Thinks that happiness is simply hooking up with a plank-brained dumb hunk who she has hardly even spoken to. That's Love? That's the key to all the joy in your life? Come the fuck on! I thought there was some ironic twist to come in her chasing after this guy - but in the end, no it IS what the film makers wanted.

John Hughes is such a Wanker sometimes. All those non Oscar winning actors on stage at the Academy awards so miserably wanting the audience to appreciate this not-even-Oscar-nominated crappy director can fuck off too!

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

he's an asshole.

True!

YOU'RE an asshole!

[TheBaxter]

i mean... we're talking about SIXTEEN CANDLES. it's a silly goofy comedy. now, if you want to tear apart Breakfast Club, because it actually has pretensions of being a "serious" examination of teen cliques and stereotypes and whatnot, fine. shred that thing to bits. but it seems a bit silly to apply a deep character analysis of a movie that features characters named Farmer Ted and Long Duk Dong. so maybe Ringwald's character was a privileged spoiled shallow bitch, or maybe she was just a girl trying to figure things out in the face of surging hormones, or maybe both. doesn't make the movie any less funny either way.

[so sorry]

i mean... we're talking about SIXTEEN CANDLES. it's a silly goofy comedy. now, if you want to tear apart Breakfast Club, because it actually has pretensions of being a "serious" examination of teen cliques and stereotypes and whatnot, fine. shred that thing to bits. but it seems a bit silly to apply a deep character analysis of a movie that features characters named Farmer Ted and Long Duk Dong. so maybe Ringwald's character was a privileged spoiled shallow bitch, or maybe she was just a girl trying to figure things out in the face of surging hormones, or maybe both. doesn't make the movie any less funny either way.

That's essentially what i said a few posts up...Sixteen Candles is a comedy, Breakfast Club is more serious. But Peven responded and I responded to his response!

Next topic: the real science behind Weird Science...discuss!

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

Serious or comedy man, it's gotta have - TRUTH. Which 16 Candles doesn't.

Now if you wanna dispute that with me just remember that EVERYONE, including the very best film directors and storytellers in the world all agree on the essentiality of this word.

What do I care none of you shmucks are real anyway.

[Ribbons]

I have not seen Sixteen Candles. But I HAVE also not seen Pretty in Pink.

[Peven]

is Bax saying that because a movie is a comedy that it doesn't affect the audience in terms of values or life-view or social sensibilities? because that would be extremely out of touch with reality. it was movies like Animal House and Porky's that helped to condition a generation of men my age to accept misogyny as "guy stuff'". trying to dismiss a serious discussion about the social ramifications of a movie because it is a comedy is glib.

Weird Science was simply a prequel to the BladeRunner movies, obviously.

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

I also think Planes Trains and Automobiles is Upper Class White Collar 1st World Problems condescending BULLSHIT!

Oooh poor me, I got a beautiful wife, family, great job and my life is so SHIT because it would be a HARROWING TRAGEDY if I don't get home to eat a big motherfucking Turkey for Christm... sorry, UK people, Thanksgiving!

Yeah I know there's parallels to how Steve Martin isn't having real problems like John Candy does in this film, but as this movie's narrative really agrees with Steve's sentiments and shares the same feelings and importance as he does and does kinda think "Fuck this guy" at Del Griffith in comparison, I think this film is quite up it's own arse and snobbish and don't really give a fuck about REAL problems and how people in Africa are DYING on Christmas Day! "Tonight thank God it's them instead of you?" Those side parted hairstyles middle age silver haired snobs looking at their oh so perfect family don't give one flying fuck about those poor skinny black people one bit. At least those Ethiopians have a lower body studly % than you big bellied boring mature wankers that don't even call my lonely ass self out for a pint anymore! I hope you're oh so perfect daughter grows up to become a whore and your oh so good looking son gets done for DUI and goes to jail for life shaming your name!!!


JOHN CANDY'S DEAD DAMNIT! DEAD! AND HIS BROTHER IS FUCKING A MERMAID FISH! HAVE SOME RESPECT!!!

[TheBaxter]

only if you ignore everything i wrote in the very first post that set off this whole discussion in the first place. i've been pointing out the date rape and assault and harrassment that occurs in movies like 16 candles and revenge of the nerds and others, or the racial stereotyping and other offensive stuff in those movies. i love those movies, i grew up on those movies, but i can see more and more of the negative stuff that was in some of those movies when i watch them now.

but there's a difference between calling out a movie for reinforcing negative stereotypes or harmful behavior, vs. debating whether a particular character is "arrogant" or a "bitch". so what? there are plenty of arrogant, stupid, self-involved, "bitchy" people in real life. and comedy often is based on exaggeration, so characters in those movies are going to have even more exaggerated versions of those traits. it just seems silly to put a character in such a goofy comedy under the psychological microscope, which is probably more analysis than the writers put into it themselves.

[TheBaxter]

I also think Planes Trains and Automobiles is Upper Class White Collar 1st World Problems condescending BULLSHIT!

Oooh poor me, I got a beautiful wife, family, great job and my life is so SHIT because it would be a HARROWING TRAGEDY if I don't get home to eat a big motherfucking Turkey for Christm... sorry, UK people, Thanksgiving!

Yeah I know there's parallels to how Steve Martin isn't having real problems like John Candy does in this film, but as this movie's narrative really agrees with Steve's sentiments and shares the same feelings and importance as he does and does kinda think "Fuck this guy" at Del Griffith in comparison, I think this film is quite up it's own arse and snobbish and don't really give a fuck about REAL problems and how people in Africa are DYING on Christmas Day! "Tonight thank God it's them instead of you?" Those side parted hairstyles middle age silver haired snobs looking at their oh so perfect family don't give one flying fuck about those poor skinny black people one bit. At least those Ethiopians have a lower body studly % than you big bellied boring mature wankers that don't even call my lonely ass self out for a pint anymore! I hope you're oh so perfect daughter grows up to become a whore and your oh so good looking son gets done for DUI and goes to jail for life shaming your name!!!


JOHN CANDY'S DEAD DAMNIT! DEAD! AND HIS BROTHER IS FUCKING A MERMAID FISH! HAVE SOME RESPECT!!!

yeah, like all those fucking sharks swimming around, and people making documentaries about them, while kids in africa are dying and starving. obviously anyone who would make a film about sharks, big studly sharks who eat more in a single day than some of those kids eat in a year, must not care about famine and starvation and human beings at all! talk about First Ocean Problems! we should kill all the sharks, and then feed them to the african kids so they don't have to go hungry anymore.

if you're with me, call my new charity i just set up a few minutes ago... 1-800-SHARKS4KIDS. every $100 you give to me, i'll send a 100% authentic african child's turd with a shark tooth encased inside it, to commemorate this hunger-ending initiative.

[Ribbons]

It's funny, because even though John Hughes movies are clearly a product of the '80s, I do think in retrospect they introduced elements of humanity to the comedy and teen-comedy genre that were previously lacking. Movies like The Breakfast Club or Sixteen Candles (which, granted, I haven't seen) may have some of the typical hallmarks of raunchy, sex-crazed fare like Porky's, but are also making a concerted effort to steer the story in another direction. And while it's fair to point out that the characters in movies like Ferris Bueller's Day Off or Planes, Trains and Automobiles (or Home Alone, if you want to count that as Hughes's) are all well-off and wealthy, there's a class consciousness that permeates a lot of his work. Kirks may mock Steve Martin's character in PTA, but his self-absorption and complete obliviousness to the struggles of the man sitting next to him are kind of the point. And Vacation is a darkly perfect comedy about a man of little means trying desperately to provide his family with a piece of the American Dream that remains just out of reach. These characters are all middle-class or lower-middle-class at worst, and sure, there are starving kids in Africa, but that tension nonetheless elevates the material -- which becomes painfully obvious compared to the Brat Pack's later attempts to recapture lightning in a bottle with empty garbage like St. Elmo's Fire. I don't know if Hughes is a genius or an auteur or whatever, but there was a certain something to the movies he made that Hollywood tried and failed to recreate.

[so sorry]

I or Sixteen Candles (which, granted, I haven't seen)

Please rectify this situation posthaste!

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

I or Sixteen Candles (which, granted, I haven't seen)

Please rectify this situation posthaste!

And don't expect me to talk to you anymore.

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

I or Sixteen Candles (which, granted, I haven't seen)

Please rectify this situation posthaste!

Please grow a cock posthaste.

[Peven]

It's funny, because even though John Hughes movies are clearly a product of the '80s, I do think in retrospect they introduced elements of humanity to the comedy and teen-comedy genre that were previously lacking. Movies like The Breakfast Club or Sixteen Candles (which, granted, I haven't seen) may have some of the typical hallmarks of raunchy, sex-crazed fare like Porky's, but are also making a concerted effort to steer the story in another direction. And while it's fair to point out that the characters in movies like Ferris Bueller's Day Off or Planes, Trains and Automobiles (or Home Alone, if you want to count that as Hughes's) are all well-off and wealthy, there's a class consciousness that permeates a lot of his work. Kirks may mock Steve Martin's character in PTA, but his self-absorption and complete obliviousness to the struggles of the man sitting next to him are kind of the point. And Vacation is a darkly perfect comedy about a man of little means trying desperately to provide his family with a piece of the American Dream that remains just out of reach. These characters are all middle-class or lower-middle-class at worst, and sure, there are starving kids in Africa, but that tension nonetheless elevates the material -- which becomes painfully obvious compared to the Brat Pack's later attempts to recapture lightning in a bottle with empty garbage like St. Elmo's Fire. I don't know if Hughes is a genius or an auteur or whatever, but there was a certain something to the movies he made that Hollywood tried and failed to recreate.

come on, man. you haven't even seen two of the movies and yet you're analyzing them???? and NO, these kids aren't all middle-class or lower-class, Hughes movie's have all sorts of wealthy privileged white people in them. but since you haven't even seen the fucking movies you wouldn't know that, would you. I hope you didn't pull a muscle as much as you were stretching to make excuses and rationalizations for a rich, white, male director who made misogynistic movies for other privileged white males to enjoy.

[Ribbons]

Oh, Peven.

I haven't seen Sixteen Candles or Pretty in Pink, no, which I made a joke about before. I've seen every other John Hughes though (besides for Uncle Buck), as well as Porky's and St. Elmo's Fire, which I mentioned. You'll notice that I included neither of those two movies in my discussion about class.

and NO, these kids aren't all middle-class or lower-class, Hughes movie's have all sorts of wealthy privileged white people in them. but since you haven't even seen the fucking movies you wouldn't know that, would you.

And while it's fair to point out that the characters in movies like Ferris Bueller's Day Off or Planes, Trains and Automobiles (or Home Alone, if you want to count that as Hughes's) are all well-off and wealthy, there's a class consciousness that permeates a lot of his work.

I do, in fact, know that. I said that all the "poor" characters are lower-middle class AT WORST, not that every single character in every film was. Please try harder next time.

[TheBaxter]

i think in Hughes' movies, it's less about class than it is about underdogs. sometimes class plays a part in it, like in pretty in pink. but other times, they are underdog characters for other reasons, economic status notwithstanding. with the teen films, a lot of times it's social status, he seems to have a soft spot for the nerdy/geeky characters usually played by anthony michael hall in weird science/16 candles/breakfast club, or the outcasts like ally sheedy or duckie, or the nonconformists like ferris bueller and molly ringwald in pretty in pink (although there is an unfortunate strain of these characters seeking the acceptance or celebrating their graduation to joining the more privileged prep/jock/popular social classes). but even in his non-teen-focused movies, he is sympathetic to underdogs and "losers" whether it's clark griswold, who is typical middle class and meant to be good at heart even if he's a bit of a dolt, or the home alone kid who's rich but feels forgotten and ignored (just like the main character in 16 candles) before being literally forgotten and left alone to fend against a pair of burglars. yeah, first world problems and all, but that's such a lazy attack on films, as though only poor people have problems and any art that doesn't address poverty or injustice is not worthwhile (which pretty much rules out the vast majority of art produced since the beginning of human history). Hughes' characters may not be the best examples of humanity, but hey, at least they resemble actual human beings, unlike the characters in, say, a Wes Anderson movie.

[Peven]

Oh, Peven.

I haven't seen Sixteen Candles or Pretty in Pink, no, which I made a joke about before. I've seen every other John Hughes though (besides for Uncle Buck), as well as Porky's and St. Elmo's Fire, which I mentioned. You'll notice that I included neither of those two movies in my discussion about class.

and NO, these kids aren't all middle-class or lower-class, Hughes movie's have all sorts of wealthy privileged white people in them. but since you haven't even seen the fucking movies you wouldn't know that, would you.

And while it's fair to point out that the characters in movies like Ferris Bueller's Day Off or Planes, Trains and Automobiles (or Home Alone, if you want to count that as Hughes's) are all well-off and wealthy, there's a class consciousness that permeates a lot of his work.

I do, in fact, know that. I said that all the "poor" characters are lower-middle class AT WORST, not that every single character in every film was. Please try harder next time.

I'm not even talking about the three movies you listed, though they are great examples of Hughes telling stories through the eyes of white privileged people. "Sixteen Candles" is about a spoiled rotten overprivileged 10th grade white kid who thinks her life sucks because the most popular boy in high school, a senior, doesn't love her yet. but of course, by the end of the movie she gets him. Pretty in Pink is about a how a girl's happiness depends on getting one of the rich privileged boys to love her because boys like her aren't good enough for her, including the one who has stood by her through thick and thin. but then he's poor, so no dream come true for her there. Breakfast Club is sickeningly misogynistic and only reinforces the cliché high school clique mentality by affirming stereotypes. Hughes just did redux after redux of the same old white girl needs a rich white prince to make her life complete story. or in the case of Ferris and Trains or Home Alone the story of rich white princes and their "struggles". of course i haven't even mentioned the gross negative racial stereotypes of the Asian exchange student in Sixteen Candles. even Uncle Buck is just another portrayal of an upper class white family and Buck, who hasn't followed the upper middle class white path is portrayed as a loser, while the obviously out of touch parents who haven't spent enough time wit their kids to have any real sense of what is going on with them are portrayed as the "good" people. is that trying hard enough for you? and i did that without any of the condescension you rely on, either.

he has one bright spot, one movie that I genuinely like that doesn't fit with the rest of his filmography. "Some Kind of Wonderful" IS a real story of an underdog, the only real underdog Hughes ever championed, that realizes in the end that all that glitters is NOT gold, and makes a choice based on who has been true to him instead of who he thinks will be a ladder to a "better", upper middle class life.

[Ribbons]

and i did that without any of the condescension you rely on, either.

I'm sorry for being so disrespectful, Peven. From now on, I will only speak to you like this:

but since you haven't even seen the fucking movies you wouldn't know that, would you. I hope you didn't pull a muscle as much as you were stretching to make excuses and rationalizations for a rich, white, male director who made misogynistic movies.

[Peven]

that was anything but condescension. first, I gave you the respect of being a fellow adult that could handle being held to reasonable standard of having seen a movie before evaluating it, and I was calling you out for failing that standard in this instance. I expected better from you. I also gave you the credit for not being intimidated or offended by some simple profanity used for emphasis. you're a meg-mod, after all. I was also giving you the credit for having the ability to discern the difference between the truth and a rationalization.

I was being critical, sure, but certainly not condescending.

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

Ribbons, if you don't like it, don't come here.

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

I still think everyone in The Breakfast Club are a buncha gentlemen.

[Peven]

all except Alli Sheedy .........she's got a certain.....something

[Wolfpack]

She's a real case of baskets, that woman.