I love the movies because the it’s full of flawed characters. I like stories with flawed characters because reality is the same way. Also, I feel like this movie is prime example of everything that was wrong about the 1980’s. Decadence, entitlement, vices, narcissism, and no love for your fellow man.
One of my favorite movies of all time is Goodfellas. Talk about flawed characters. But it's not just that the characters are flawed in St. Elmo's Fire, it's that, in my opinion, they're all incredibly surface level with little to no depth. Then you add the fact that they're all terrible people but yet, the movie wants you to sympathize with them. In Goodfellas, Scorsese doesn't want you to sympathize with those characters. He wants to expose the mob for the monsters that they are. That makes a big difference.
@@nathanmoore5435 Not sure I agree with this either. For most of the running time of Goodfellas the gangster lifestyle is glamorized to the point of exhilaration. Scorsese’s style is almost giddy. But let’s step back and look at the fact that you are comparing just-out-of-college, spoiled, floundering twentysomethings with guys who actually kill people. Again, St. Elmo’s Fire is a slick but trashy little paperback of a movie, nothing more, nothing less, but your indignant reaction is way out of proportion.
@@benskelly8892 Well I disagree. Scorsese shows all the facets of the gangster lifestyle. Yes he shows the glamor, but he also shows the genuine horrors of the lifestyle too. And the reason I made the comparison to St. Elmo's Fire is because I wanna make it clear that I have no problems with movies focusing on flawed characters, just as long as there is a sincerity to them or genuine substance, and I feel St. Elmo's Fire has absolutely none of that.
As a Gen Xer I despise this movie for perpetuating the worst stereotypes of our generation. This movie is best thought of as Less Than Zero without Bret Easton Ellis's sense of self-awareness.
Me too. I re-watch it every couple of years trying to like it, but I really just can't. It's an awful movie with awful characters. I love the actors in the movie but the movie is just crap.
SEF is an awful movie that I love but I’m still waiting to meet the people who inhabited the world of Less Than Zero. Never ever met any cool, rich, incredibly fashionable drugged up, sexy 20 something’s in my day. I knew lots of messy, annoying yuppies in my 20’s. Oh wait. I was an annoying, messy yuppie in the late 80’s. 😂
I couldn’t stand Demi Moore’s character. So conceited. She felt entitled to do whatever because she was pretty. She thought taking drugs was a joke. She thought she was so cool and interesting, not realizing what she really was, was a junkie 304.
St. Elmo’s Fire is a movie about a bunch of self absorbed yuppies who learn absolutely nothing from their irresponsible behavior. A much better film with a similar premise is Less Than Zero, where unlike St. Elmo’s Fire, does NOT have a happy ending.
I love Less Than Zero. Robert Downey Jr. and James Spader at their best, but as a Gen Xer, St Elmo’s is more realistic the LTZ. We went to college, coupled up while having sex with each other and stayed friends until we drifted apart in our 30’s. I knew lots of people who did drug. I saw friends who are doctors, lawyers and dentist today over dose. All of these people got their shit together and are alive today. So LTZ is a better movie but 99% of us didn’t die of drugs or AIDs. We’re dying now from cancer, heart disease and in car accidents.
The book Less Than Zero by Brett Easton Ellis is a pure distillation of nihilism. Worth a read but it makes you feel bad to have read it. See also American Psycho by the same author. The movies are totally tame by comparison.
SEF was a repulsive and condescending piece of nonsense. The characters ranged from annoying to revolting and insulting to the audience. Terrible script and complete lack of believability. The one character I did not hate as much was the one played by Mare Winningham (Wendy) I love her as an actress and I was constantly irritated by the people surrounding her from her dope friends to her misogynistic father (played by Martin Balsam- another fine actor) who kept insisting she get married and have kids. I saw this movie once on VHS and could barely finish it. I am not a Georgetown grad, but I know the place very well and while there are some stereotypes like that on campus, most are not and the movie would seem to imply otherwise. In short, a tasteless piece of cinematic dreck populated by actors who have done much better work
What you said about the movie is accurate. It is well directed and looks great on the surface, and the cast are great actors. However, the story and characters never develop.
Why do I like this movie? I was 14 and I truly thought this is what adulthood would be like. I wanted to own a jeep. Cruise the streets with my friends none of which wear seatbelts. It reminds me of my more naive days of being a 20 something who drinks daily (without harming my liver), smoke and have little bills to pay. Oh yea.....play the saxophone seductively. What a life that would have been. Yes I probably wouldn't have made it out of my 20s but I'd have awesome big hair. That's why I've always liked this film. It's never been deep but it's good looking.
I appreciate the effort you put into your review of St. Elmo's Fire, Nate. It is far from a perfect movie, let alone a great one, but I challenge you to reconsider its purpose. St. Elmo's is about the difficult transition a circle of friends experiences shortly after graduating college. The cap and gown ceremony forces the characters to end their childhood and begin their adulthood whether they are ready or not. They aren't, and they cling to their circle of college friends and keep congregating at St. Elmo's Bar, their favorite college hang-out. All the characters are flawed and there is no hero in the film. Even so, their circle of friendship remains intact despite their misadventures and poor judgment. There is also a sense of closure at the end in which the main characters are as ready as they can be to embrace adulthood and move on with their lives. The Billy character is a prime example. He struts around in the movie wearing his fraternity blazer, and he goes back to campus to play football with his fraternity brothers. Billy is nostalgic about the college party life and he yearns to find his way back to it. He is impossibly attractive, and his promiscuous prowess leads to an unplanned pregnancy and a marriage to a young woman he doesn't love. Billy's a mess and the only thing the guy has going for him beyond his good looks is his talent as a musician and his circle of loyal friends. In the end, Billy gives up on finding a way back to campus, he divorces his wife who wants to leave him, musters up the courage to leave his circle of friends, and heads to New York to pursue his passion for music. Will he succeed? Who knows? He has the talent and the looks, and at least he is going for it. The circle of friends watches Billy depart from the bus station together, and I think it is a touching scene. The Kirby character, your favorite, is obsessed with an older student who already graduated and now works as a resident at a local hospital. Kirby is obsessed with her, and his obsession crosses the line from romantic pursuit to stalking, no doubt about it. Even so, Kirby ultimately realizes the ridiculousness of his behavior and sees the humanity of the young doctor he had put on a pedestal. He doesn't even keep the Polaroid photo taken of the two of them together. Kirby just drives away and lets go of his college dream girl. The next stop for him is moving on to law school. The Wendy character loves Billy, but there is much more to her story. She has domineering wealthy parents who want to marry her off now that she is properly educated. Wendy doesn't want that for her future, and she doesn't really want Billy despite her feelings for him. Wendy wants to be independent and self-sufficient. She wants to be on her own, and she chooses to give her virginity to Billy near the end of the film because she is ready to become a woman. The film has many flaws. It never lets the viewers see what the characters' lives were like together before graduation, and the closure provided at the end isn't strong enough. Have the characters truly learned their lessons or not? Is St. Elmo's a BAD film? It's not that bad Watch it again in six months.
@@jimclarke9036 You did a great job with all that you said. I adore St Elmo’s Fire and know every line by heart. I was 19 when the movie came out and watched all of the Brat Pack movies. This one is my favorite even though I agree with what Nathan said. I still watch it several times a year.I think this movie really brought the 80’s alive and what was going on then. Your analysis of the characters is great.
St. Elmo’s Fire is a movie that is of its generation. Is it a great movie? No, but it wasn’t trying to be. It’s just a movie made for entertainment and, as a 80s kid, it was entertaining. That’s what people who weren’t there don’t get. Movies used to be entertaining. Let’s look at a “hit” movie today. You’re telling me that Anyone But You is anything but a cut and copy piece of shit? I wouldn’t expect anyone that was alive when St. Elmo’s Fire was released to get it. It’s just a movie of its time. Now que all the comments of “I was alive and I hate it!”
I agree with you for I have never liked St. Elmo's Fire only thing I enjoyed was the score and the song. I was 13 in 1985 and remember how huge this movie was at the time. I will give this movie credit for being a nice time capsule of the eighties with the clothes, hairstyles, cars and interiors.
This is one of those movies that you needed to be alive in the 80’s to maybe understand the cultural impact it had. I think the soundtrack and the songs were more impactful than the movie I think people liked the theme songs, and looking and attractive actors who weee popular at the time. But the movie, as a stand alone film, is bad. And it’s bad because the character are all self centered a-holes.
The movie somewhat announced and represented the definite end of the end of any left trace of the Youth of 1960s, the symbolism was concretized when Rob Lowe´s character took the bus and got away from the bunch. John Travolta had injured mortally the 1960s in 1975-76; before him, in 1973, the disco-music and fashions showed up in New York, and took quite a while to invade the rest of the USA, but while spreading it was murdering the 60´s ethos. Saint Elm´s yelled that other Youth, very different and opposed, had taken over "The Youth Torch" and all the "Love and Peace" BS was gone with the wind.
Nate, you raised some excellent arguments. I truly had forgotten about this film for some time. The Room was a bad film that did not pretend to be anything else. SEF was a terrible movie that was striving to be socially relevant using beautiful, hip actors to explain preppie angst in the 1980s. I am sort of joking because these kids seem to be a bunch of entitled, self absorbed arrogant bubbleheads and the audience is supposed to like them because they dress nice, make sanctimonious speeches, and engage in misconduct. The film is loathsome because the creators believe they have something sublime when this would not make it on an ABC After School Special I am not sure the characters have to be likable. I think if the setting is that the characters are not and the audience is with them on that, it makes for a better movie. Thinking of Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia. Not ostensibly likable characters but we love watching them. These are unlikable characters but not by design
You're right. Just as long as the characters are interesting or have depth, then their likability isn't as important. But all of the characters in this movie are about as surface level as it gets haha and on top of that they're terrible people.
My favorite part of the Demi Moore suicide scene was that it directly follows the repossession of all her stuff but they let her keep that porcelain clown. I just imagine the crew being like, "Yeah, you can keep that creepy thing."
It's one of my favorite films but I am 48. My teens did not get it either. I think a lot of the appeal of these movies is based (often) on the time period they were made in. It's not a deep film but for my generation, it's a staple!
There are some films that capture the zeitgeist for the good and the bad. This film epitomises that. It won't make sense to this generation. I think it influenced things like Friends.
@@sg24336 It undeniably tap into the times had clever writing and brought comfort, laughs and aspirations to millions… even billions of people. It was starting to lose it’s way towards the end, but that can happen to any show running relentlessly that long and was also a product of its times.
Child of the 80’s and new subscriber here. I related much more to 1973’s American Graffiti for its characters and their development over a single night. You genuinely care about them and the last scene hits you in the feels. Highly recommended if you haven’t seen it. Keep up the great work!
OMG i couldn't agree more.... I'm a genxer and i hated the characters in this film...... I will say one thing about the 'stalking' scenario and they way it was dealt with.....'Times have changed' and for the better, as far as things like this go and i don't think someone as young as you can truly understand just how much the world is different to what it was like in the 80's.... I mean all you need to do is watch 'Revenge of the Nerds' to see what was considered actually funny back then is outright rape nowadays
I like St Elmo's fire overall, I would give it like a 7/10, I think the biggest problem is that there were too many storylines in a movie that isn't very long and most of them have a weak ending. I never had a problem with all the characters being pricks because these are mostly spoiled rich kids that went to Georgetown, and this is how many of them do act in real life.
I am 46 years old and I used to like this movie. You made some great points about the nasty characters. I think “St. Elmo’s Fire” was supposed to be a “coming of age” movie like 1983’ s “The Big Chill”.
Exactly, it's about being floored and making mistakes and coming to terms with how life is compared to how you hoped it would by the time you were in your 20s. Now everybody acts holier than thou and floorless but that's not the reality. We are all floored human beings with shortcomings. Is anyone fully cooked in their 20s?
As someone who was 9 years old when it came out and saw it in endless runs on cable, what I can say is that we knew it was trash when it came out, but it was our trash. It is gloriously terrible.
That’s a top comparison. I definitely feel the way SEF was filmed and produced and the actors made the awful characters more watchable. I found the people in Rules Of Attraction and the film more unbearable. The FaarkQuu scene at the dinner table was funny though, but otherwise, it just doesn’t have the fond cult appeal of the former. That and its early 2000’s fashion doesn’t help much either.
@@VanielDeeform I absolutely love Rules of Attraction. I think it perfectly balances the dark stuff with humor. And reminds me a lot of my college experience, albeit a bit more extreme and dramatized
You're not wrong. Im going to add something. I was 20 and this was my erra. This movie is sadly acceptable as to how things went. 😅😂. We did fool around and get along afterwards. Sport sex was not uncommon. Overspending and all the drinking and stalking etc. That happened. I can't tell you how far we have come. It was, unfortunately, far more real than you want. Rob Lowe's character is pretty true to how some guys act. Im not giving Hyperbole. I wish i waz. Those 80s were crazy
Got to agree. Grew up in the same era with a big group of friends who met in highschool and went through college together. There were unfulfilled crushes on idiots, falling for one another's boyfriends/ girlfriends, being hung up on our virginity, drunken kisses and car fumbles with friends, disastrous attempts at marriage and parenting. We acted on all of our impulses. It was messy and effed up, yet none of it really changed our affection for each other. My kids are appalled at the movies I loved at their age. Not only by St Elmo's Fire, but Sixteen Candles (racist and SA), Pretty in Pink (Duckie and Blane are emotionally manipulative) Breakfast Club (Clare and Bender are toxic/the pretty girl makeover trope). So I guess it's a generational value thing.
Professor of Rock youtube channel did a video about the theme song from this movie. Basically the writer of the iconic "Man in Motion (St. Elmo's Fire)" song wrote the song about a Canadian athlete named Rick Hansen who had been paralyzed in an accident and went on a wheelchair world tour. There was a book written about Rick Hansen called *Man in Motion*. So the writer of the St. Elmo's song got hired to write a song for the movie. And he had this song he wrote but hadn't released about Rick Hansen. So he literally just rewrote the hook to add "And St, Elmo's Firrrrreeeee" to tie it into the movie. He didn't even bother to change the lyrics about the wheelchair (Gonna be a man in motion, all I need is a pair of wheels). And it seems like it has nothing to do with the movie. Nobody is in a wheelchair. Nobody is overcoming adversity. The same guy wrote some other big hit songs from some 1980s/1990s movies. He just really phoned this one in. It sounds like the whole thing was just a low effort cash grab at the end of the Brat Pack movie wave.
LoL!! Ok so none of this is true. Just bc a UA-camr said it - doesn’t make it so. In reality David foster - huge producer who also wrote the love theme - contact parr to cowrite the song. Parr couldn’t come up with lyrics and foster showed him a news clip of Hansen who was steering his man in moon wheelchair tour. Back then it was only known up here in Canada. These things were all the rage here with Terry fox, Steve dingo and Rick Hansen. This inspired parr and he decided he wanted to help Hansen with fundraising so he wrote the lyrics on purpose to suit both. So there are many like that apply to both vaguely. “Wheels” is of course a direct reference to Hansen but parr also said he intended it to be a possible reference to Demi’s jeep. And of course with or out the jeep, the lyrics suit young people in the 80’s - “wheels” being a car. And of course a few lines “moving straight ahead you knew it all” suit the movie more than Rick Hansen lol. So the lyrics were written with both purposes in mind.
For anyone in their 20's who had a hard time finding their way in life, you can take that story from it. But otherwise, yeah it's not realistic. Those seven characters would never be friends in life. Maybe two or three at the most
I watched St. Elmo's Fire for the first time a few months ago. I had a similar reaction to what your thoughts were. The entire time I found myself asking whether I was supposed to intentionally hate everyone in this movie. I also read that Joel Schumacher based Emilio Estevez's character on his own experience in college. He apparently was relentlessly obsessed with someone in his college classes and used that as the inspiration for Emilio Estevez's role. That is truly disturbing stuff, and I wonder if the object of Schumacher's eye knew what was going on.
Just found you channel because of your BRATS video, and my wife and I are digging your style dude. Keep up the great work, can't wait till you can make this your full time gig.
For whatever reason, probably because of the recent Brat Pack doc, St. Elmo's Fire is being talked about again - but honestly, it was a sort of packed away movie - not forgotten necessarily, but definitely packed away. Over the years, until now, this movie did not become canonized or revered or gain cult status the same way a lot of its contemporaries did - The Breakfast Club, Sixteen Candles. St Elmo was a popular movie of its time - but it just didn't stay in the public consciousness the way a lot of the other films did. St. Elmo's Fire suddenly being talked about alongside the "classics," has surprising to me.
As someone who came of age when this came out, I couldn't figure out why I didn't like this film. I wanted to like it because like you said, it looks good and it had major stars of that time. If there was one redeemable character it would have saved it. Good thoughtful review.
I could not agree w/you more. I grew up with these movies but just saw this one only recently and wish I hadn't. I thought the same: the story structure was terrible and the character development was shallow and completely unrealistic. What could have been an examination of entering "the real world" as the sobering experience it can be, the film instead assigns the characters trivial issues/problems and milks the crap out of it (mostly by relying on more outlandish behavior.) I don't blame the actors: they have the burden of bringing these unrealistic, unlikable, and/or vapid characters to life let alone attempting to make them likable. But, while the Breakfast Club was absolutely rooted in the reality it faced making it a pithy project, St. Elmo's delivers the opposite. Deep as a puddle.
Just subscribed to your channel. You are great! You do such a good job dissecting movies. I am a 59 year old woman so was definitely around the same age as the Brat pack. I absolutely love St Elmo’s Fire and know every line by heart but I do agree with everything you said. I think I love it because it is so 1980’s so it takes me back to those days with the hair styles and clothes, and of course pre internet and smart phones. But your assessment is spot on. I listened to Joel Schumacher’s commentary while I was watching the movie and he said the 80’s was a time where a lot of these young rich kids were graduating college and getting these big jobs but definitely not ready for the responsibility. Many of them got big heads like Judd Nelson’s character and Emilio’s character. And the whole thing with all of the 7 friends doing everything together and sticking together through Billy and Jules acting the way they did would never happen.
I don't think it is possible to be harsh enough. This is the epitome of a movie being far less than the sum of it's parts. Just excruciating from beginning to end to the point where I had to remind myself that everyone in this film did something else that I actually enjoyed.
I watched this movie two times (years apart). This first time I was largely unimpressed and bored. I watched again hoping to see something I missed. Nope missed nothing. The only character I had any respect for was Wendy because she didn't fall for the family pressure and join the family business and/or marry a man her family approved of. Instead she worked in a job she wanted despite her family seeing it as beneath her (and them). The only thing that got in the way of my appreciation of her was sleeping with Billy. Maybe at some level that was also Wendy saying no to her family as well. None the less she was the only character who showed any kind of growth.
Terrible movie, however, I’m old enough to have watched it when it came out. In its time it’s bad on purpose. It’s the epitome of 80’s rich, white, spoiled children culture. If you would have watched it in the 85 you would have said what despicable people, yep, this is the world we live in.
I think the reason why so many people like it is because it tests your tolerance level by watching people struggling with the early years of adulthood. It's not an easy adjustment and I would have liked to have seen these characters 5 or 10 years down the road.
You are too young to know the movie The Big Chill. St. Elmo’s Fire is a “in your 20’s minus the Vietnam War” version of The Big Chill. So, if you saw The Big Chill, a far superior movie, at 16, then saw St Elmo’s two years later, you’d love it. “90210/Gossip Girl”/Dawsons Creek” was formed in the mold of SEF. Our real life relationships were awful and messy back then. “I can see a new horizon in St. Elmo’s Fire!!!” PS not to make light of SA but a lot of my oldest closet male friends put moves on me in my 20’s. We were drunk a lot or high a lot and we usually ended up in a heap in someone’s bed or on the floor. I still love my old college friends. We’re still friends to this day. Thank goodness we didn’t have social media so all the bullsh-t we did and lived through are just memories. Watch the documentary “Freak Nic” if you wanna see how crazy the 80’s-90’s were.
I agree, its quite a droll film... it was supposed to be the younger, cooler, hipper version of The Big Chill... but misfired big time.... it only got traction because of the brat pack hotness at the time - its got vibes.... but its empty and soulless
Let's face it, they're spoiled Yuppies. What else did you expect? Most of the actors came up working class but were expected to play these middle class, self-obsessed young adults. And to think Joel Schumacher co-wrote this movie with the producer of teen comedies Saved By The Bell, Hang Time and USA High!
Exactly, I like the movie even with its flaws and all the characters are a$$holes but to your point, these are spoiled rich kids that went to Georgetown and most of them really do act like these characters in real life. I never felt like the movie was trying to get me to like these people.
Not sure what you mean about working-class actors? Do you mean the "St.Elmo's " cast??? Because you have Rob Lowe, son of an attorney, who went to I believe South Santa Monica High School with the likes of Emilio Estevez (and his brother Charlie Sheen) and various other children of Hollywood celebs and actors such as actress Holly Robinson-Peete, and I think, Sean and Chris Penn and so on. Emilio Estevez is the son of Hollywood star Martin Sheen. Although in his early childhood Emilio didn't grow up with wealth, by the time Emilio was in high school, Martin Sheen was a very successful actor who'd earned a lot of money. Martin Sheen himself came from a more working class background but not Emilio and Charlie. Judd Nelson? Also the son of a successful attorney. Ally Sheedy? The daughter of a writer and press agent, and a Manhattan ad exec. She attended prep schools in New York City. Certainly not working class. Andrew McCarthy also attended a prep school: Pingry School. His father was involved in investments and stocks whilst his mother worked for a newspaper (so it's not surprising that Andrew became a writer). I wouldn't call that background working class. I'm pretty sure that Lowe, Estevez, McCarthy, Nelson, and Sheedy at least, had a fairly good understanding of the environment of their characters, the schools they went to, the social set etc. Probably Mare Winningham too: her mother was an English teacher and college counsellor, whilst her father became the chairman of the Department of Physical Education at California State University, Northridge. James Spader, who isn't in the film but who acted with a number of those actors and who has appeared in films classified as "Brat Pack", comes from a similar education family background to Winningham, and although not as well-off as the likes of Nelson, Estevez etc., he did attent a famous and prestigious prep school because his parents worked there. So he has said that he did meet many rich kid types like "Steff" in "Pretty in Pink". Andie MacDowell isn't in the film much, but she wasn't working class either, with a lumber executive father and a music teacher mother. Only Demi Moore is from that background.
Rob Lowe's Dad was a lawyer, Emilio Estevez's parents were an actor and an artist, Ally Sheedy's parents were in advertising, Judd Nelson's father was a state senator and the president of an orchestra, Andrew McCarthy's dad was a stock broker, Andie McDowell's parents were a lumber company executive and a teacher, and Mare Winningham was the daughter of a NFL player. Demi Moore had a tough childhood but it wasn't working class. They were basically playing themselves.
@@paulberry2884 According to Wikipedia anyway, Winningham's father was a coach and later the chairman of the department of Physical Education at California State University. It doesn't say he was actually an NFL player. Sounds like he was more in the senior management side of things. But yeah, what a strange comment to make, saying that the cast of St. Elmo's were mostly working class and had a hard task ahead of them to protray middle and upper-middle class kids. I suppose the hard part was playing uni grads who were confused about career options since few of them actually graduated from university and were already established in their acting careers.
Absolutely agree! I had always just assumed SEF was a John Hughes production, so relieved to learn it wasn’t….because of the 10 times i’ve watched the movie, I have never once come away thinking ‘what a great movie’ or ‘Wow! Those characters were genuinely likable!’ The exact opposite in fact. Always wonder who I can go see to get the two hours of my life back that I (inadvisably) invested in a rewatching. I guess I just assumed it was a John Hughes because of the involvement of several Brat Packers. Great music though, I’ll give it that!
Having re-watched this, it's very of its time and I guess it got by mainly on style (80s music, cool looks, a stylish look) but agree the irredeemable qualities of the main characters undoes it's positives overall. Compared to a much better written and acted About Last Night with Moore, Lowe and Jim Belushi a year later it's night and day. That movie had snappy dialogue, good acting and was a much more relatable effort. Also, check out Bad Influence with Lowe and Spader from 90 for a neo noirish thriller that has style and good acting and a disturbing tone that played to fewer fans as the Brat Pack craze had passed as the 90s took hold. This is kind of the Rocky V of Brat Pack movies in a way.
St Elmo's fire describe an area.....People In the 80's were ambitious. They graduate from university, had a great job in Finance. They were yuppies.......now these values are bad so it's a bad movie. For myself, I love this movie. It's optimistic and full of good vibe. It shows the life of young people than everyone wanted to have at this time.
I agree completely. I just rewatched it for the first time in 30 years, and though I never liked it, this time I hated it. The whole thing is just “off,” and I think you highlighting its insincerity and presumption is right on. It asks us to take seriously and like people it gives us no reason to take seriously or like. But that’s Joel Schumacher at his worst. Lost Boys, Falling Down, Phone Booth, and maybe Tigerland are Schumacher at his best. One of the most wildly inconsistent directors ever.
The best thing to come out of this movie was the music video for "Man in Motion" especially the way the Judd Nelson knocks out McCarthy in sync with that vocal peak.
New subscriber!! Love your take on this! I loved this movie as a kid. But rewatching it as an adult was a different story lol. Also: Watch falling down! It’s an incredible film!
There is a certain comfort gotten from watching other people who are human train wrecks, particularly those who appear from afar to "have it all", and show they don't know what to do with it.
This movie is a guilty pleasure for me. I know it's bad, yet somehow end up watching it at least once a year. There are the extremely irritating characters, the stalker-like aspect of Emilio Estevez's character (can't remember the name), the OTT 80's styles, Rob Lowe's annoying man child, that ridiculous theme song (look at the music video and watch how uninterested the cast members are to be there).I always think of this film as The Anti-Breakfast Club. Maybe the only good thing that came from this, is that Joel Schumacher got to do The Lost Boys.
I think too much is made about the unlikability of the characters. It’s not a great movie, but it is a slice of life from that era for a certain demographic of people. I’m not sure we’re supposed to like immature rich early-20-somethings. And, of course they don’t develop - few people do at that age. I think anyone who wasn’t around that age at that time can appreciate it. Heck, even those of us who were didn’t think it was great, but it certainly transports me back to that time and that stage of life. I was an unlikable character back then too.
I hate this movie. I agree with you that the big problem is the characters are terrible people but the movie tries to frame them as sympathetic. The best example of this is I was legitimately hoping that Jules (only know her name because you mentioned it) would actually die because then there would be some consequences for their awful behavior. When Rob Lowe (BTW not just 80s Rob Lowe is incredibly good-looking, as McCarthy's Brats demonstrates) saves her I was like I'm done. This movie is hopeless. Completely unearned "happy ending" ugh. I completely forgot that Judd Nelson and Ally Sheedy are in this one, too. Just bad all around.
Only one of the characters, Alek, could become a Maga guy, not a magatard but a cynic politician who even knowing that tRump is a fraudster p.o.s. , inept for the POTUS job, even knowing that he would accomodate to get a good profitable position to do graft, sell influence, and stuff like that.
It says it right in the name. This isn’t about character development… the character is the bar, st Elmo’s fire. It’s the only thing that develops throughout the film.
i adore absolutely everything about this movie.. it's realistic because folks of every generation come out of their youth, just as horrible as these kids.
The 80s was a decade where Rated R meant gore and/or sex. It was expected, otherwise it was a bad movie. St. Elmo's Fire is this soap opera type Rated R movie that wanted to get in enough sex scenes so they can get enough butts in theater seats. That's it. It's a bad soap with actual sex scenes. Nothing more.
This movie is basically an episode of Friends. Kinda funny, and just hanging out. Interesting that Rob Lowe said that without the Brat pack there would be no Friends.
Can't say I remember the episode of Friends where Monica had a cocaine problem or Phoebe tried to kill herself by opening up all the windows in her apartment...
I’m a fan of this movie more for nostalgic reasons but I will say its beautifully shot and scored. That all being said, I can’t argue with any of your problems with it. Like I said…nostalgic reasons.
I think this movie was made in reverse. Get the whos who of the time, put them in expensive clothes and get some shorts of them in various backdrops. Now we need to connect the shorts with some kind of script.
I have hated this movie since I sat with some friends and watched it in...probably '88. I remember a couple laughing at how bad it really is. Good video, man. Worth a Sub'
When saw the title of this my first thought was yeah it is lol. That’s probably because I rewatched it fairly recently (maybe a year ago) and it fell kinda flat. Having said that, I was in my mid 20s when this came out and I loved it lol. Your review does make me question why because I honestly can’t argue with much that you said. I guess it was because I was already a fan of most of the actors and I enjoyed them together and I thought the dialogue was hilarious. I did notice the characters were flawed but I didn’t care. I’m still that way tbh. Flawed characters are more interesting than perfect ones and I don’t necessarily look for life lessons in my entertainment. If one happens, cool. Even in my rewatch I didn’t think my god what horrible people! How could I have liked this? It was more like, this isn’t as good as I remembered. At my age now I still don’t really judge the characters though. Mostly because they were so young. Also btw what Rob Lowe’s character did wasn’t called sexual assault back then. It was considered an unwanted pass. Very unacceptable of course and such behavior earned what Demi Moore did which was beat him down lol but that’s a generational thing so I get it. But that’s another reason I didn’t judge too harshly. Most of us dealt with unwanted passes but didn’t consider it a crime. Anyway great review! Not harsh just honest and very thorough 👍
I do have comments to make but it would be a paragraph or two on how much subtext you missed...some so glaringly obvious I was shocked that you did not see it... while it is not the greatest movie made,,,it is a strong character-driven snapshot of that time in your life when you are in the middle of the immaturity of youth and the maturity of adulthood. So, I guess we can agree to disagree that this is a really good movie.
Agree with you 100%. Leave it to a millennial to give a know it all review about a movie not from his time. We're not supposed to like the characters, that's the point. Looking back on this film, now that I'm 52, I appreciate the acting and the flaws of the characters even more. No 20-something has self-awareness and the hard work of life is maturing from that place. The whole movie took place over a span of a few weeks. Of course they aren't going to change, but they were starting to discover who they were trying to become or not become. And they would likely learn in the next 20 years how wrong they were about those paths. Your review is equally as annoying and arrogant in that you are looking for the film to please you as opposed to putting it on its proper context.
@taraphillips4291 exactly.. I do take umbrage of him saying that Billy was trying to SA Jules..its obvious that they have had intimacy before and he thought it was another night as usual - he was too drunk and self involved to notice that she needed his friendship now not his body
Among the many things I detest about this film: - Demi Moore, observing Andrew McCarthy's failures with the ladies and concluding he must be gay, tries to fix him up with her flamboyantly gay neighbor; - liberal Judd Nelson takes a job with a right-wing Republican senator for career advancement, and the whole group finds his abandonment of his values cute and funny; - the insipid spontaneous group cheer they keep doing.
I have to assume it's iconic simply because of the casts roster There's sooo many big actors in it but no the movie's not great. Linklater is the man, on the other hand!
Agreed, with all of your points. It reminds me of a similar 80’s "hang out" film with completely unlikable characters: Diner. Best thing about St. Elmo’s Fire is its theme song, which has absolutely nothing to do with the film, thematically speaking.
When I was a teen this movie was huge, but I only saw it for the first time a few months ago. There are things I like and can relate to, but some things are just plain stupid. Emilio Estevez's story arc mainly. I kept waiting for him to end up in jail and wondered what happened to his character after the end of the film.
He had to have a "drug minder" at one point because he had no impulse control whatsoever. But yes, I'm glad he exited the other side. He made the Sweet Tooth adaption on Netflix with his wife. I think it is brilliant. I also enjoyed his Sherlock Holmes films. I can think of a lot of 80s talent that was lost through drugs, glad he wasn't one of them. It gives people hope if they see ex addicts turn it around.
@@jackochainsaw Yep, a lot of good people have died young due to addition. John Belushi, Philip Seymour-Hoffman, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, the list goes on.
Just recently discovered your channel. Great stuff. I saw this as a young teen when it came out. Awful then and awful still. You're critc is a lot more articulate but I wholeheartedly agree
Thoughtful review. Yes, “hangout movie” fits this. it reads like an attempt to slot a hangout movie between Breakfast Club and the Big Chill in terms of life stages, but without the soul of either. With the better examples of the art form the writer must have a certain affection, sympathy, or respect for the characters. There’s no sense of any of that here. St Elmo’s Fire felt like a project the Brat Pack actors all agreed to make time for but no one nabbed a good script for them. The end result was an extended Michelob commercial. In some ways this was a quintessential Schumacher film. Until his Batman movies I don’t recall people having any strong opinions about his movies but I thought most of his were polished, but not great. Just good enough. With a few exceptions he made the kind of movie you’d expect to see during your flight.
THANK YOU, you described my feelings on this movie perfectly and I am a John Hughes/Brat Pack/80's movies fan. No one is likable and a few as you mentioned are creepy.
I was very young when this movie originally saw release, but I remember that the theme song was played constantly on the radio. Strangely, I never I actually watched the film in its entirety until yesterday. It was televised often, but I'd always catch it at the 3/4 mark or so... alas, I didn't miss anything. I'm pretty much in complete agreement with the review here. As I watched the film, I kept thinking to myself, "Can we get away from these terrible characters now?" The most interesting characters in the film were limited to very minor side roles (blink and you miss them... the prostitute that perpetually stands outside the bar and the gay neighbor of Jules). Storylines centered on those two characters and how they have to suffer through these entitled upper middle class people... now there is a movie! In hindsight I think this was meant to be a coming of age film, especially after the many high school centric movies that came before it which featured many of the same actors. It looks beautiful, captures the aesthetic of Georgetown in the 1980s, and functions as a time capsule for that decade, but other than that, the plot is essentially nonexistent and none of the characters behave in a logical way. It almost seems like it's written by someone who thinks this is capturing what life is like post-college, as opposed to being written by a writer who has actually had the experience... So, in the end, the movie just comes across as a hollow first draft that could've been so much more after some much needed revisions and editing. Aside from capturing the "feel" of the 1980s, I couldn't identify with it.
The film has not aged well. And yes it is stupid and does hit one note. The couple lives together and the man wants to marry her. Then she dumbs him and wants to be alone and it’s s as ok fine.
I saw this in the theater in the 80s. I had been really hyped up to see it but you are right... I HATED It. On every level I was like, huh? Most teen girls I saw this with clapped on the Andrew McCarthy character.
I think things were a little different back in 1985. So, from my perspective- living during that time as a young adult- I can remember those times. The movie just accentuates that stuff. This was the beginning of the bubble economy which started the beginning of the Yuppie. So, these are things you may not relate to unless you were living during that time. It ficuses on a group of young adults navigating through the turbulence that come with entering into real adulthood (during those times) and having your group of friends remain friends even after all the bullshit. I think that is the gist of this movie
I went to see this movie when it came out, because these actors were so popular at the time. It was the big movie of the moment. I wanted to love this movie, but it was a big disappointment. I remember what a jerk Rob Lowe's character was, how creepy Emilio Estevez was. The only time I laughed was when Rob Lowe says "Do you believe in premarital sax?"
Per the video title here, yes, It's a BAD Movie, but as an old Gen X guy I still have kind of a soft spot in my heart for it because it takes me back to my teenage years. And I think it does capture something of the spirit of the age back then (sadly, LOL). As you pointed out, the characters are awful, self-absorbed, unsympathetic people who learn nothing from their mistakes. Well, the 80s were full of people like that IRL: insider-trading Wall Street pricks, self-dealing politicians, coked-up celebrities. The 80s were the beginning of the income-inequality state that we find ourselves in now--we have Reagan's re-ordering of the tax codes to thank for that--and that's reflected, very slightly, in the movie when Judd Nelson's character decides to work for a Republican politician because it pays better. It's kind of a throwaway bit of dialogue, but it does show a little bit of awareness of the me-me-me tenor of those times: make as much money as possible, as quickly as possible, and WGAF how you made it, as long as it appears legal. It's basically lifestyle porn, two hours of very upscale, very good-looking young people behaving very badly; IMO, kind of a forerunner of a lot of reality TV shows today, LOL.
All points earned, but that's kinda the point. They were really awful friends, but that's more real than everybody getting along great. I hate that it's cliche to say it was a different time. Estevez does absolutely look like a psychotic stalker. I couldn't stand Jules character personally. But things felt different 30/40 years ago. A realistic view of remaining friends for life after school or college. And the truths they hide from each other. It's the most brat pack of 'em next to the Breakfast Club. Going down this road, I highly recommend Less Than Zero. Some of Robert Downey's best work. Probably McCarthy's too.
Im over 60 yrs old and saw this in the theater. I didn't "get it" like all my friends seemed to, so over the years, I've rewatched several times. I still don't get it. I didn't like any of the characters, much less have a connection to any of their lives. I dislike Weird Science, too.
good luck with your channel. As someone with over one billion hours of youtube watched I recommend tweaking the framing/lighting/background of your face cam. Audio and editing are pretty good!
I love the movies because the it’s full of flawed characters. I like stories with flawed characters because reality is the same way. Also, I feel like this movie is prime example of everything that was wrong about the 1980’s. Decadence, entitlement, vices, narcissism, and no love for your fellow man.
One of my favorite movies of all time is Goodfellas. Talk about flawed characters. But it's not just that the characters are flawed in St. Elmo's Fire, it's that, in my opinion, they're all incredibly surface level with little to no depth. Then you add the fact that they're all terrible people but yet, the movie wants you to sympathize with them. In Goodfellas, Scorsese doesn't want you to sympathize with those characters. He wants to expose the mob for the monsters that they are. That makes a big difference.
@@nathanmoore5435 Not sure I agree with this either. For most of the running time of Goodfellas the gangster lifestyle is glamorized to the point of exhilaration. Scorsese’s style is almost giddy. But let’s step back and look at the fact that you are comparing just-out-of-college, spoiled, floundering twentysomethings with guys who actually kill people. Again, St. Elmo’s Fire is a slick but trashy little paperback of a movie, nothing more, nothing less, but your indignant reaction is way out of proportion.
Well said
@@benskelly8892 Well I disagree. Scorsese shows all the facets of the gangster lifestyle. Yes he shows the glamor, but he also shows the genuine horrors of the lifestyle too. And the reason I made the comparison to St. Elmo's Fire is because I wanna make it clear that I have no problems with movies focusing on flawed characters, just as long as there is a sincerity to them or genuine substance, and I feel St. Elmo's Fire has absolutely none of that.
Sounds a lot like today tbh.
Full of "First World" problems. I laughed so hard when Rob Lowe yelled out "Let's Rock," claps, and then starts playing the saxophone erratically.
It's the only "Brat Pack" movie I've only seen once.
I certainly never plan on watching it again lol
I couldn't even get through it once.
As a Gen Xer I despise this movie for perpetuating the worst stereotypes of our generation.
This movie is best thought of as Less Than Zero without Bret Easton Ellis's sense of self-awareness.
I hated it so much.
That is a perfect description
Me too. I re-watch it every couple of years trying to like it, but I really just can't. It's an awful movie with awful characters. I love the actors in the movie but the movie is just crap.
SEF is an awful movie that I love but I’m still waiting to meet the people who inhabited the world of Less Than Zero. Never ever met any cool, rich, incredibly fashionable drugged up, sexy 20 something’s in my day. I knew lots of messy, annoying yuppies in my 20’s.
Oh wait. I was an annoying, messy yuppie in the late 80’s. 😂
I couldn’t stand Demi Moore’s character. So conceited. She felt entitled to do whatever because she was pretty. She thought taking drugs was a joke. She thought she was so cool and interesting, not realizing what she really was, was a junkie 304.
St. Elmo’s Fire is a movie about a bunch of self absorbed yuppies who learn absolutely nothing from their irresponsible behavior. A much better film with a similar premise is Less Than Zero, where unlike St. Elmo’s Fire, does NOT have a happy ending.
I love Less Than Zero. Robert Downey Jr. and James Spader at their best, but as a Gen Xer, St Elmo’s is more realistic the LTZ. We went to college, coupled up while having sex with each other and stayed friends until we drifted apart in our 30’s. I knew lots of people who did drug. I saw friends who are doctors, lawyers and dentist today over dose. All of these people got their shit together and are alive today. So LTZ is a better movie but 99% of us didn’t die of drugs or AIDs. We’re dying now from cancer, heart disease and in car accidents.
It was still an interesting and fun movie and lots of eye candy!!
The book Less Than Zero by Brett Easton Ellis is a pure distillation of nihilism. Worth a read but it makes you feel bad to have read it. See also American Psycho by the same author. The movies are totally tame by comparison.
SEF was a repulsive and condescending piece of nonsense. The characters ranged from annoying to revolting and insulting to the audience. Terrible script and complete lack of believability. The one character I did not hate as much was the one played by Mare Winningham (Wendy) I love her as an actress and I was constantly irritated by the people surrounding her from her dope friends to her misogynistic father (played by Martin Balsam- another fine actor) who kept insisting she get married and have kids. I saw this movie once on VHS and could barely finish it. I am not a Georgetown grad, but I know the place very well and while there are some stereotypes like that on campus, most are not and the movie would seem to imply otherwise. In short, a tasteless piece of cinematic dreck populated by actors who have done much better work
What you said about the movie is accurate. It is well directed and looks great on the surface, and the cast are great actors. However, the story and characters never develop.
Films that deserves a bigger audience: One Crazy Summer, The Dream Team, The Last Starfighter and Enemy Mine.
The Dream Team is a superb movie. I'm amazed it doesn't get more recognition.
Dream Team and Last Starfighter are great
Great list. I always thought White Water Summer was really underrated as well.
The Last Starfighter is a classic.
Add Electric Dreams to this list and The Boy Who Could Fly.
Why do I like this movie?
I was 14 and I truly thought this is what adulthood would be like.
I wanted to own a jeep. Cruise the streets with my friends none of which wear seatbelts. It reminds me of my more naive days of
being a 20 something who drinks daily (without harming my liver), smoke and have little bills to pay.
Oh yea.....play the saxophone seductively.
What a life that would have been. Yes I probably wouldn't have made it out of my 20s but I'd have awesome big hair.
That's why I've always liked this film. It's never been deep but it's good looking.
I was 16 when this came out, and I’m glad I didn’t see at the time because if I thought this was what adulthood was like I never would’ve grown up…
I appreciate the effort you put into your review of St. Elmo's Fire, Nate. It is far from a perfect movie, let alone a great one, but I challenge you to reconsider its purpose. St. Elmo's is about the difficult transition a circle of friends experiences shortly after graduating college. The cap and gown ceremony forces the characters to end their childhood and begin their adulthood whether they are ready or not. They aren't, and they cling to their circle of college friends and keep congregating at St. Elmo's Bar, their favorite college hang-out. All the characters are flawed and there is no hero in the film. Even so, their circle of friendship remains intact despite their misadventures and poor judgment. There is also a sense of closure at the end in which the main characters are as ready as they can be to embrace adulthood and move on with their lives.
The Billy character is a prime example. He struts around in the movie wearing his fraternity blazer, and he goes back to campus to play football with his fraternity brothers. Billy is nostalgic about the college party life and he yearns to find his way back to it. He is impossibly attractive, and his promiscuous prowess leads to an unplanned pregnancy and a marriage to a young woman he doesn't love. Billy's a mess and the only thing the guy has going for him beyond his good looks is his talent as a musician and his circle of loyal friends. In the end, Billy gives up on finding a way back to campus, he divorces his wife who wants to leave him, musters up the courage to leave his circle of friends, and heads to New York to pursue his passion for music. Will he succeed? Who knows? He has the talent and the looks, and at least he is going for it. The circle of friends watches Billy depart from the bus station together, and I think it is a touching scene.
The Kirby character, your favorite, is obsessed with an older student who already graduated and now works as a resident at a local hospital. Kirby is obsessed with her, and his obsession crosses the line from romantic pursuit to stalking, no doubt about it. Even so, Kirby ultimately realizes the ridiculousness of his behavior and sees the humanity of the young doctor he had put on a pedestal. He doesn't even keep the Polaroid photo taken of the two of them together. Kirby just drives away and lets go of his college dream girl. The next stop for him is moving on to law school.
The Wendy character loves Billy, but there is much more to her story. She has domineering wealthy parents who want to marry her off now that she is properly educated. Wendy doesn't want that for her future, and she doesn't really want Billy despite her feelings for him. Wendy wants to be independent and self-sufficient. She wants to be on her own, and she chooses to give her virginity to Billy near the end of the film because she is ready to become a woman.
The film has many flaws. It never lets the viewers see what the characters' lives were like together before graduation, and the closure provided at the end isn't strong enough. Have the characters truly learned their lessons or not? Is St. Elmo's a BAD film? It's not that bad Watch it again in six months.
Great comment
@@jimclarke9036 You did a great job with all that you said. I adore St Elmo’s Fire and know every line by heart. I was 19 when the movie came out and watched all of the Brat Pack movies. This one is my favorite even though I agree with what Nathan said. I still watch it several times a year.I think this movie really brought the 80’s alive and what was going on then. Your analysis of the characters is great.
St. Elmo’s Fire is a movie that is of its generation. Is it a great movie? No, but it wasn’t trying to be. It’s just a movie made for entertainment and, as a 80s kid, it was entertaining. That’s what people who weren’t there don’t get. Movies used to be entertaining. Let’s look at a “hit” movie today. You’re telling me that Anyone But You is anything but a cut and copy piece of shit? I wouldn’t expect anyone that was alive when St. Elmo’s Fire was released to get it. It’s just a movie of its time. Now que all the comments of “I was alive and I hate it!”
the breakfast club is also one of its generation but it is good and is and will continue to be relevant and identifiable
Yes everybody wanted to be one of the character of this movie
I agree with you for I have never liked St. Elmo's Fire only thing I enjoyed was the score and the song. I was 13 in 1985 and remember how huge this movie was at the time. I will give this movie credit for being a nice time capsule of the eighties with the clothes, hairstyles, cars and interiors.
This is one of those movies that you needed to be alive in the 80’s to maybe understand the cultural impact it had. I think the soundtrack and the songs were more impactful than the movie I think people liked the theme songs, and looking and attractive actors who weee popular at the time. But the movie, as a stand alone film, is bad. And it’s bad because the character are all self centered a-holes.
I was coming of age in 1985 and had no desire to watch it.
@@katemaloney4296 that’s something to be proud of.
The movie somewhat announced and represented the definite end of the end of any left trace of the Youth of 1960s, the symbolism was concretized when Rob Lowe´s character took the bus and got away from the bunch. John Travolta had injured mortally the 1960s in 1975-76; before him, in 1973, the disco-music and fashions showed up in New York, and took quite a while to invade the rest of the USA, but while spreading it was murdering the 60´s ethos. Saint Elm´s yelled that other Youth, very different and opposed, had taken over "The Youth Torch" and all the "Love and Peace" BS was gone with the wind.
Nate, you raised some excellent arguments. I truly had forgotten about this film for some time. The Room was a bad film that did not pretend to be anything else. SEF was a terrible movie that was striving to be socially relevant using beautiful, hip actors to explain preppie angst in the 1980s. I am sort of joking because these kids seem to be a bunch of entitled, self absorbed arrogant bubbleheads and the audience is supposed to like them because they dress nice, make sanctimonious speeches, and engage in misconduct. The film is loathsome because the creators believe they have something sublime when this would not make it on an ABC After School Special
I am not sure the characters have to be likable. I think if the setting is that the characters are not and the audience is with them on that, it makes for a better movie. Thinking of Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia. Not ostensibly likable characters but we love watching them. These are unlikable characters but not by design
You're right. Just as long as the characters are interesting or have depth, then their likability isn't as important. But all of the characters in this movie are about as surface level as it gets haha and on top of that they're terrible people.
My favorite part of the Demi Moore suicide scene was that it directly follows the repossession of all her stuff but they let her keep that porcelain clown. I just imagine the crew being like, "Yeah, you can keep that creepy thing."
Falling Down is amazing. I do not like a lot of Schumacher’s films but this one is great
That's what I've heard!
It's one of my favorite films but I am 48. My teens did not get it either. I think a lot of the appeal of these movies is based (often) on the time period they were made in.
It's not a deep film but for my generation, it's a staple!
I think it's more accurate than they want😅😂😅.
That’s pretty much what I said, too! Lol. 👍🏼
There are some films that capture the zeitgeist for the good and the bad. This film epitomises that. It won't make sense to this generation. I think it influenced things like Friends.
@@sg24336 It undeniably tap into the times had clever writing and brought comfort, laughs and aspirations to millions… even billions of people. It was starting to lose it’s way towards the end, but that can happen to any show running relentlessly that long and was also a product of its times.
Child of the 80’s and new subscriber here. I related much more to 1973’s American Graffiti for its characters and their development over a single night. You genuinely care about them and the last scene hits you in the feels. Highly recommended if you haven’t seen it. Keep up the great work!
Totally agree. American Graffiti was a great movie.
I asked my father once about how were the 50's really like, and he said watch American Graffiti.
OMG i couldn't agree more.... I'm a genxer and i hated the characters in this film...... I will say one thing about the 'stalking' scenario and they way it was dealt with.....'Times have changed' and for the better, as far as things like this go and i don't think someone as young as you can truly understand just how much the world is different to what it was like in the 80's.... I mean all you need to do is watch 'Revenge of the Nerds' to see what was considered actually funny back then is outright rape nowadays
I like St Elmo's fire overall, I would give it like a 7/10, I think the biggest problem is that there were too many storylines in a movie that isn't very long and most of them have a weak ending. I never had a problem with all the characters being pricks because these are mostly spoiled rich kids that went to Georgetown, and this is how many of them do act in real life.
I am 46 years old and I used to like this movie. You made some great points about the nasty characters. I think “St. Elmo’s Fire” was supposed to be a “coming of age” movie like 1983’ s “The Big Chill”.
Exactly, it's about being floored and making mistakes and coming to terms with how life is compared to how you hoped it would by the time you were in your 20s. Now everybody acts holier than thou and floorless but that's not the reality. We are all floored human beings with shortcomings. Is anyone fully cooked in their 20s?
As someone who was 9 years old when it came out and saw it in endless runs on cable, what I can say is that we knew it was trash when it came out, but it was our trash. It is gloriously terrible.
dunno. I felt very connected to this film, seeing it after I graduated from college. PLUS I love Weird Science.
St. Elmo’s Fire walked so Rules of Attraction could run.
That’s a top comparison. I definitely feel the way SEF was filmed and produced and the actors made the awful characters more watchable. I found the people in Rules Of Attraction and the film more unbearable. The FaarkQuu scene at the dinner table was funny though, but otherwise, it just doesn’t have the fond cult appeal of the former. That and its early 2000’s fashion doesn’t help much either.
@@VanielDeeform I absolutely love Rules of Attraction. I think it perfectly balances the dark stuff with humor. And reminds me a lot of my college experience, albeit a bit more extreme and dramatized
You're not wrong. Im going to add something. I was 20 and this was my erra. This movie is sadly acceptable as to how things went. 😅😂. We did fool around and get along afterwards. Sport sex was not uncommon. Overspending and all the drinking and stalking etc. That happened. I can't tell you how far we have come. It was, unfortunately, far more real than you want. Rob Lowe's character is pretty true to how some guys act. Im not giving Hyperbole. I wish i waz. Those 80s were crazy
Got to agree. Grew up in the same era with a big group of friends who met in highschool and went through college together. There were unfulfilled crushes on idiots, falling for one another's boyfriends/ girlfriends, being hung up on our virginity, drunken kisses and car fumbles with friends, disastrous attempts at marriage and parenting. We acted on all of our impulses. It was messy and effed up, yet none of it really changed our affection for each other.
My kids are appalled at the movies I loved at their age. Not only by St Elmo's Fire, but Sixteen Candles (racist and SA), Pretty in Pink (Duckie and Blane are emotionally manipulative) Breakfast Club (Clare and Bender are toxic/the pretty girl makeover trope). So I guess it's a generational value thing.
Professor of Rock youtube channel did a video about the theme song from this movie. Basically the writer of the iconic "Man in Motion (St. Elmo's Fire)" song wrote the song about a Canadian athlete named Rick Hansen who had been paralyzed in an accident and went on a wheelchair world tour. There was a book written about Rick Hansen called *Man in Motion*.
So the writer of the St. Elmo's song got hired to write a song for the movie. And he had this song he wrote but hadn't released about Rick Hansen. So he literally just rewrote the hook to add "And St, Elmo's Firrrrreeeee" to tie it into the movie.
He didn't even bother to change the lyrics about the wheelchair (Gonna be a man in motion, all I need is a pair of wheels).
And it seems like it has nothing to do with the movie. Nobody is in a wheelchair. Nobody is overcoming adversity.
The same guy wrote some other big hit songs from some 1980s/1990s movies. He just really phoned this one in. It sounds like the whole thing was just a low effort cash grab at the end of the Brat Pack movie wave.
LoL!! Ok so none of this is true. Just bc a UA-camr said it - doesn’t make it so. In reality David foster - huge producer who also wrote the love theme - contact parr to cowrite the song. Parr couldn’t come up with lyrics and foster showed him a news clip of Hansen who was steering his man in moon wheelchair tour. Back then it was only known up here in Canada. These things were all the rage here with Terry fox, Steve dingo and Rick Hansen. This inspired parr and he decided he wanted to help Hansen with fundraising so he wrote the lyrics on purpose to suit both. So there are many like that apply to both vaguely. “Wheels” is of course a direct reference to Hansen but parr also said he intended it to be a possible reference to Demi’s jeep. And of course with or out the jeep, the lyrics suit young people in the 80’s - “wheels” being a car.
And of course a few lines “moving straight ahead you knew it all” suit the movie more than Rick Hansen lol.
So the lyrics were written with both purposes in mind.
For anyone in their 20's who had a hard time finding their way in life, you can take that story from it. But otherwise, yeah it's not realistic. Those seven characters would never be friends in life. Maybe two or three at the most
I watched St. Elmo's Fire for the first time a few months ago.
I had a similar reaction to what your thoughts were. The entire time I found myself asking whether I was supposed to intentionally hate everyone in this movie.
I also read that Joel Schumacher based Emilio Estevez's character on his own experience in college. He apparently was relentlessly obsessed with someone in his college classes and used that as the inspiration for Emilio Estevez's role. That is truly disturbing stuff, and I wonder if the object of Schumacher's eye knew what was going on.
We don't love Hitler, yet movies about him are very popular.
@@mezzbMare Winningham was 34 when filming this.😂
@@visaman Hitler wasn't the protagonist in any movie featuring him though.
@@lightsabermetricsDownfall (2004) has entered the chat… Followed by Hitler: The Last Ten Days (1973).
@@visamanShe was also preggers.
Just found you channel because of your BRATS video, and my wife and I are digging your style dude.
Keep up the great work, can't wait till you can make this your full time gig.
For whatever reason, probably because of the recent Brat Pack doc, St. Elmo's Fire is being talked about again - but honestly, it was a sort of packed away movie - not forgotten necessarily, but definitely packed away. Over the years, until now, this movie did not become canonized or revered or gain cult status the same way a lot of its contemporaries did - The Breakfast Club, Sixteen Candles. St Elmo was a popular movie of its time - but it just didn't stay in the public consciousness the way a lot of the other films did. St. Elmo's Fire suddenly being talked about alongside the "classics," has surprising to me.
As someone who came of age when this came out, I couldn't figure out why I didn't like this film. I wanted to like it because like you said, it looks good and it had major stars of that time. If there was one redeemable character it would have saved it. Good thoughtful review.
Yeah..i was a teen at the time. I feel the same way. Now I even hear the song in the supermarket I've in a while and it sounds cheesy..
it was over-hyped...there's no way a guy would stalk a girl like that and then be invited in to sleep over when his car has issues.
I could not agree w/you more. I grew up with these movies but just saw this one only recently and wish I hadn't. I thought the same: the story structure was terrible and the character development was shallow and completely unrealistic. What could have been an examination of entering "the real world" as the sobering experience it can be, the film instead assigns the characters trivial issues/problems and milks the crap out of it (mostly by relying on more outlandish behavior.) I don't blame the actors: they have the burden of bringing these unrealistic, unlikable, and/or vapid characters to life let alone attempting to make them likable. But, while the Breakfast Club was absolutely rooted in the reality it faced making it a pithy project, St. Elmo's delivers the opposite. Deep as a puddle.
It was a movie about yuppies for yuppies. You had to be there.
Just subscribed to your channel. You are great! You do such a good job dissecting movies. I am a 59 year old woman so was definitely around the same age as the Brat pack. I absolutely love St Elmo’s Fire and know every line by heart but I do agree with everything you said. I think I love it because it is so 1980’s so it takes me back to those days with the hair styles and clothes, and of course pre internet and smart phones. But your assessment is spot on. I listened to Joel Schumacher’s commentary while I was watching the movie and he said the 80’s was a time where a lot of these young rich kids were graduating college and getting these big jobs but definitely not ready for the responsibility. Many of them got big heads like Judd Nelson’s character and Emilio’s character. And the whole thing with all of the 7 friends doing everything together and sticking together through Billy and Jules acting the way they did would never happen.
I don't think it is possible to be harsh enough. This is the epitome of a movie being far less than the sum of it's parts. Just excruciating from beginning to end to the point where I had to remind myself that everyone in this film did something else that I actually enjoyed.
I watched this movie two times (years apart). This first time I was largely unimpressed and bored. I watched again hoping to see something I missed. Nope missed nothing. The only character I had any respect for was Wendy because she didn't fall for the family pressure and join the family business and/or marry a man her family approved of. Instead she worked in a job she wanted despite her family seeing it as beneath her (and them). The only thing that got in the way of my appreciation of her was sleeping with Billy. Maybe at some level that was also Wendy saying no to her family as well. None the less she was the only character who showed any kind of growth.
Terrible movie, however, I’m old enough to have watched it when it came out. In its time it’s bad on purpose. It’s the epitome of 80’s rich, white, spoiled children culture. If you would have watched it in the 85 you would have said what despicable people, yep, this is the world we live in.
Where Jason shows up and “puts in some work” 😂
SEF was trash when it came out, and it is still trash today.
I think the reason why so many people like it is because it tests your tolerance level by watching people struggling with the early years of adulthood. It's not an easy adjustment and I would have liked to have seen these characters 5 or 10 years down the road.
You bring up a number of valid criticisms. I was born in 1963. In theory these are the people I grew up with.
You are too young to know the movie The Big Chill. St. Elmo’s Fire is a “in your 20’s minus the Vietnam War” version of The Big Chill. So, if you saw The Big Chill, a far superior movie, at 16, then saw St Elmo’s two years later, you’d love it. “90210/Gossip Girl”/Dawsons Creek” was formed in the mold of SEF. Our real life relationships were awful and messy back then. “I can see a new horizon in St. Elmo’s Fire!!!” PS not to make light of SA but a lot of my oldest closet male friends put moves on me in my 20’s. We were drunk a lot or high a lot and we usually ended up in a heap in someone’s bed or on the floor. I still love my old college friends. We’re still friends to this day. Thank goodness we didn’t have social media so all the bullsh-t we did and lived through are just memories. Watch the documentary “Freak Nic” if you wanna see how crazy the 80’s-90’s were.
I've seen the Big Chill, and I saw it well before I watched St. Elmo's Fire.
I agree, its quite a droll film... it was supposed to be the younger, cooler, hipper version of The Big Chill... but misfired big time.... it only got traction because of the brat pack hotness at the time - its got vibes.... but its empty and soulless
Let's face it, they're spoiled Yuppies. What else did you expect? Most of the actors came up working class but were expected to play these middle class, self-obsessed young adults. And to think Joel Schumacher co-wrote this movie with the producer of teen comedies Saved By The Bell, Hang Time and USA High!
Exactly, I like the movie even with its flaws and all the characters are a$$holes but to your point, these are spoiled rich kids that went to Georgetown and most of them really do act like these characters in real life. I never felt like the movie was trying to get me to like these people.
Zach Morris is trash!
Not sure what you mean about working-class actors? Do you mean the "St.Elmo's " cast???
Because you have Rob Lowe, son of an attorney, who went to I believe South Santa Monica High School with the likes of Emilio Estevez (and his brother Charlie Sheen) and various other children of Hollywood celebs and actors such as actress Holly Robinson-Peete, and I think, Sean and Chris Penn and so on. Emilio Estevez is the son of Hollywood star Martin Sheen. Although in his early childhood Emilio didn't grow up with wealth, by the time Emilio was in high school, Martin Sheen was a very successful actor who'd earned a lot of money. Martin Sheen himself came from a more working class background but not Emilio and Charlie.
Judd Nelson? Also the son of a successful attorney.
Ally Sheedy? The daughter of a writer and press agent, and a Manhattan ad exec. She attended prep schools in New York City. Certainly not working class.
Andrew McCarthy also attended a prep school: Pingry School.
His father was involved in investments and stocks whilst his mother worked for a newspaper (so it's not surprising that Andrew became a writer). I wouldn't call that background working class.
I'm pretty sure that Lowe, Estevez, McCarthy, Nelson, and Sheedy at least, had a fairly good understanding of the environment of their characters, the schools they went to, the social set etc.
Probably Mare Winningham too: her mother was an English teacher and college counsellor, whilst her father became the chairman of the Department of Physical Education at California State University, Northridge.
James Spader, who isn't in the film but who acted with a number of those actors and who has appeared in films classified as "Brat Pack", comes from a similar education family background to Winningham, and although not as well-off as the likes of Nelson, Estevez etc., he did attent a famous and prestigious prep school because his parents worked there. So he has said that he did meet many rich kid types like "Steff" in "Pretty in Pink".
Andie MacDowell isn't in the film much, but she wasn't working class either, with a lumber executive father and a music teacher mother.
Only Demi Moore is from that background.
Rob Lowe's Dad was a lawyer, Emilio Estevez's parents were an actor and an artist, Ally Sheedy's parents were in advertising, Judd Nelson's father was a state senator and the president of an orchestra, Andrew McCarthy's dad was a stock broker, Andie McDowell's parents were a lumber company executive and a teacher, and Mare Winningham was the daughter of a NFL player.
Demi Moore had a tough childhood but it wasn't working class.
They were basically playing themselves.
@@paulberry2884 According to Wikipedia anyway, Winningham's father was a coach and later the chairman of the department of Physical Education at California State University. It doesn't say he was actually an NFL player. Sounds like he was more in the senior management side of things.
But yeah, what a strange comment to make, saying that the cast of St. Elmo's were mostly working class and had a hard task ahead of them to protray middle and upper-middle class kids. I suppose the hard part was playing uni grads who were confused about career options since few of them actually graduated from university and were already established in their acting careers.
Absolutely agree! I had always just assumed SEF was a John Hughes production, so relieved to learn it wasn’t….because of the 10 times i’ve watched the movie, I have never once come away thinking ‘what a great movie’ or ‘Wow! Those characters were genuinely likable!’ The exact opposite in fact. Always wonder who I can go see to get the two hours of my life back that I (inadvisably) invested in a rewatching. I guess I just assumed it was a John Hughes because of the involvement of several Brat Packers. Great music though, I’ll give it that!
Oh, I did see the documentary about the "Brat Pack" and I genuinely felt bad for them... that writer was SUCH A JERK to McCarthy even today!!
Having re-watched this, it's very of its time and I guess it got by mainly on style (80s music, cool looks, a stylish look) but agree the irredeemable qualities of the main characters undoes it's positives overall. Compared to a much better written and acted About Last Night with Moore, Lowe and Jim Belushi a year later it's night and day. That movie had snappy dialogue, good acting and was a much more relatable effort. Also, check out Bad Influence with Lowe and Spader from 90 for a neo noirish thriller that has style and good acting and a disturbing tone that played to fewer fans as the Brat Pack craze had passed as the 90s took hold. This is kind of the Rocky V of Brat Pack movies in a way.
St Elmo's fire describe an area.....People In the 80's were ambitious. They graduate from university, had a great job in Finance. They were yuppies.......now these values are bad so it's a bad movie. For myself, I love this movie. It's optimistic and full of good vibe. It shows the life of young people than everyone wanted to have at this time.
I agree completely. I just rewatched it for the first time in 30 years, and though I never liked it, this time I hated it. The whole thing is just “off,” and I think you highlighting its insincerity and presumption is right on. It asks us to take seriously and like people it gives us no reason to take seriously or like.
But that’s Joel Schumacher at his worst. Lost Boys, Falling Down, Phone Booth, and maybe Tigerland are Schumacher at his best. One of the most wildly inconsistent directors ever.
The best thing to come out of this movie was the music video for "Man in Motion" especially the way the Judd Nelson knocks out McCarthy in sync with that vocal peak.
New subscriber!! Love your take on this! I loved this movie as a kid. But rewatching it as an adult was a different story lol. Also: Watch falling down! It’s an incredible film!
There is a certain comfort gotten from watching other people who are human train wrecks, particularly those who appear from afar to "have it all", and show they don't know what to do with it.
This movie is a guilty pleasure for me. I know it's bad, yet somehow end up watching it at least once a year. There are the extremely irritating characters, the stalker-like aspect of Emilio Estevez's character (can't remember the name), the OTT 80's styles, Rob Lowe's annoying man child, that ridiculous theme song (look at the music video and watch how uninterested the cast members are to be there).I always think of this film as The Anti-Breakfast Club. Maybe the only good thing that came from this, is that Joel Schumacher got to do The Lost Boys.
I think too much is made about the unlikability of the characters. It’s not a great movie, but it is a slice of life from that era for a certain demographic of people. I’m not sure we’re supposed to like immature rich early-20-somethings. And, of course they don’t develop - few people do at that age. I think anyone who wasn’t around that age at that time can appreciate it. Heck, even those of us who were didn’t think it was great, but it certainly transports me back to that time and that stage of life. I was an unlikable character back then too.
I hate this movie. I agree with you that the big problem is the characters are terrible people but the movie tries to frame them as sympathetic. The best example of this is I was legitimately hoping that Jules (only know her name because you mentioned it) would actually die because then there would be some consequences for their awful behavior. When Rob Lowe (BTW not just 80s Rob Lowe is incredibly good-looking, as McCarthy's Brats demonstrates) saves her I was like I'm done. This movie is hopeless. Completely unearned "happy ending" ugh.
I completely forgot that Judd Nelson and Ally Sheedy are in this one, too. Just bad all around.
This movie was a self-indulgent narcissistic glorification of the Reagan era yuppies who would eventually grow up to become MAGA red hats.
Only one of the characters, Alek, could become a Maga guy, not a magatard but a cynic politician who even knowing that tRump is a fraudster p.o.s. , inept for the POTUS job, even knowing that he would accomodate to get a good profitable position to do graft, sell influence, and stuff like that.
I just sub'd! I like how you dive into the history of the movies! I'm looking forward to what other movies you review!
Nice shirt of Peter Weller👍🏽 also, St. Elmo’s Fire is one big ego-massaging shallow 80s drama.
It says it right in the name. This isn’t about character development… the character is the bar, st Elmo’s fire. It’s the only thing that develops throughout the film.
I saw this at 12 yrs. old in the '90's. My biggest takeaway was "damn, coach Gordon Bombay is a nutcase."
i adore absolutely everything about this movie.. it's realistic because folks of every generation come out of their youth, just as horrible as these kids.
I just remember wishing it was over 30 minutes in
The 80s was a decade where Rated R meant gore and/or sex. It was expected, otherwise it was a bad movie. St. Elmo's Fire is this soap opera type Rated R movie that wanted to get in enough sex scenes so they can get enough butts in theater seats. That's it. It's a bad soap with actual sex scenes. Nothing more.
This movie is basically an episode of Friends. Kinda funny, and just hanging out. Interesting that Rob Lowe said that without the Brat pack there would be no Friends.
Can't say I remember the episode of Friends where Monica had a cocaine problem or Phoebe tried to kill herself by opening up all the windows in her apartment...
If you want to look it up it's called "The one where Monica had a cocaine problem and Phoebe tried to kill herself"
I’m a fan of this movie more for nostalgic reasons but I will say its beautifully shot and scored. That all being said, I can’t argue with any of your problems with it. Like I said…nostalgic reasons.
I think this movie was made in reverse. Get the whos who of the time, put them in expensive clothes and get some shorts of them in various backdrops. Now we need to connect the shorts with some kind of script.
I have hated this movie since I sat with some friends and watched it in...probably '88.
I remember a couple laughing at how bad it really is.
Good video, man. Worth a Sub'
When saw the title of this my first thought was yeah it is lol. That’s probably because I rewatched it fairly recently (maybe a year ago) and it fell kinda flat. Having said that, I was in my mid 20s when this came out and I loved it lol. Your review does make me question why because I honestly can’t argue with much that you said. I guess it was because I was already a fan of most of the actors and I enjoyed them together and I thought the dialogue was hilarious. I did notice the characters were flawed but I didn’t care. I’m still that way tbh. Flawed characters are more interesting than perfect ones and I don’t necessarily look for life lessons in my entertainment. If one happens, cool. Even in my rewatch I didn’t think my god what horrible people! How could I have liked this? It was more like, this isn’t as good as I remembered. At my age now I still don’t really judge the characters though. Mostly because they were so young. Also btw what Rob Lowe’s character did wasn’t called sexual assault back then. It was considered an unwanted pass. Very unacceptable of course and such behavior earned what Demi Moore did which was beat him down lol but that’s a generational thing so I get it. But that’s another reason I didn’t judge too harshly. Most of us dealt with unwanted passes but didn’t consider it a crime. Anyway great review! Not harsh just honest and very thorough 👍
Thank you. I needed this affirmation.
I do have comments to make but it would be a paragraph or two on how much subtext you missed...some so glaringly obvious I was shocked that you did not see it... while it is not the greatest movie made,,,it is a strong character-driven snapshot of that time in your life when you are in the middle of the immaturity of youth and the maturity of adulthood. So, I guess we can agree to disagree that this is a really good movie.
Agree with you 100%. Leave it to a millennial to give a know it all review about a movie not from his time. We're not supposed to like the characters, that's the point. Looking back on this film, now that I'm 52, I appreciate the acting and the flaws of the characters even more. No 20-something has self-awareness and the hard work of life is maturing from that place. The whole movie took place over a span of a few weeks. Of course they aren't going to change, but they were starting to discover who they were trying to become or not become. And they would likely learn in the next 20 years how wrong they were about those paths. Your review is equally as annoying and arrogant in that you are looking for the film to please you as opposed to putting it on its proper context.
@taraphillips4291 exactly.. I do take umbrage of him saying that Billy was trying to SA Jules..its obvious that they have had intimacy before and he thought it was another night as usual - he was too drunk and self involved to notice that she needed his friendship now not his body
Among the many things I detest about this film:
- Demi Moore, observing Andrew McCarthy's failures with the ladies and concluding he must be gay, tries to fix him up with her flamboyantly gay neighbor;
- liberal Judd Nelson takes a job with a right-wing Republican senator for career advancement, and the whole group finds his abandonment of his values cute and funny;
- the insipid spontaneous group cheer they keep doing.
just found your channel, I just subbed, great review🙂
Awesome, thank you!
I have to assume it's iconic simply because of the casts roster There's sooo many big actors in it but no the movie's not great. Linklater is the man, on the other hand!
Agreed, with all of your points. It reminds me of a similar 80’s "hang out" film with completely unlikable characters: Diner. Best thing about St. Elmo’s Fire is its theme song, which has absolutely nothing to do with the film, thematically speaking.
I hated Diner too 😂
When I was a teen this movie was huge, but I only saw it for the first time a few months ago. There are things I like and can relate to, but some things are just plain stupid. Emilio Estevez's story arc mainly. I kept waiting for him to end up in jail and wondered what happened to his character after the end of the film.
yep
I know this is technically a bad movie... I know most of it's characters are a bit vile... I still love it.
I forgot Iron Man was in this movie. I'm so glad his life didn't end young due to drugs and alcohol. He turned himself around.
He had to have a "drug minder" at one point because he had no impulse control whatsoever. But yes, I'm glad he exited the other side. He made the Sweet Tooth adaption on Netflix with his wife. I think it is brilliant. I also enjoyed his Sherlock Holmes films. I can think of a lot of 80s talent that was lost through drugs, glad he wasn't one of them. It gives people hope if they see ex addicts turn it around.
@@jackochainsaw Yep, a lot of good people have died young due to addition. John Belushi, Philip Seymour-Hoffman, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, the list goes on.
Just recently discovered your channel. Great stuff.
I saw this as a young teen when it came out. Awful then and awful still. You're critc is a lot more articulate but I wholeheartedly agree
Thoughtful review. Yes, “hangout movie” fits this. it reads like an attempt to slot a hangout movie between Breakfast Club and the Big Chill in terms of life stages, but without the soul of either. With the better examples of the art form the writer must have a certain affection, sympathy, or respect for the characters. There’s no sense of any of that here.
St Elmo’s Fire felt like a project the Brat Pack actors all agreed to make time for but no one nabbed a good script for them. The end result was an extended Michelob commercial.
In some ways this was a quintessential Schumacher film. Until his Batman movies I don’t recall people having any strong opinions about his movies but I thought most of his were polished, but not great. Just good enough. With a few exceptions he made the kind of movie you’d expect to see during your flight.
Rob Lowe was the only person I could not stand. Emilio’s subplot made me laugh really hard.
THANK YOU, you described my feelings on this movie perfectly and I am a John Hughes/Brat Pack/80's movies fan. No one is likable and a few as you mentioned are creepy.
"Falling Down" is not to be missed.
I was very young when this movie originally saw release, but I remember that the theme song was played constantly on the radio. Strangely, I never I actually watched the film in its entirety until yesterday. It was televised often, but I'd always catch it at the 3/4 mark or so... alas, I didn't miss anything. I'm pretty much in complete agreement with the review here. As I watched the film, I kept thinking to myself, "Can we get away from these terrible characters now?" The most interesting characters in the film were limited to very minor side roles (blink and you miss them... the prostitute that perpetually stands outside the bar and the gay neighbor of Jules). Storylines centered on those two characters and how they have to suffer through these entitled upper middle class people... now there is a movie! In hindsight I think this was meant to be a coming of age film, especially after the many high school centric movies that came before it which featured many of the same actors. It looks beautiful, captures the aesthetic of Georgetown in the 1980s, and functions as a time capsule for that decade, but other than that, the plot is essentially nonexistent and none of the characters behave in a logical way. It almost seems like it's written by someone who thinks this is capturing what life is like post-college, as opposed to being written by a writer who has actually had the experience... So, in the end, the movie just comes across as a hollow first draft that could've been so much more after some much needed revisions and editing. Aside from capturing the "feel" of the 1980s, I couldn't identify with it.
The film has not aged well. And yes it is stupid and does hit one note. The couple lives together and the man wants to marry her. Then she dumbs him and wants to be alone and it’s s as ok fine.
No matter how bad a movie is, as objectively as possible, there will always be someone saying “How dare you…It’s my favourite!” 😄😄😄
For someone who grew up watching brat pack movies on their TV. It blows my mind that I never once came across St Elmo's fire..
I love your Aliens poster. Im guessing youre a fan...?? Are you going to do a review?
I saw this in the theater in the 80s. I had been really hyped up to see it but you are right... I HATED It. On every level I was like, huh? Most teen girls I saw this with clapped on the Andrew McCarthy character.
Gen-X here. I haven't even watched this yet and I just want to say "YES!!!, IT IS BAAAAD!"
Movie sucks.
Pretty in Pink as well. Everyone except Harry Dean Stanton is a horrible person.
Welcome to rich white folks in the Reagan era. 😊. Love the song tho.
I think things were a little different back in 1985. So, from my perspective- living during that time as a young adult- I can remember those times. The movie just accentuates that stuff. This was the beginning of the bubble economy which started the beginning of the Yuppie. So, these are things you may not relate to unless you were living during that time. It ficuses on a group of young adults navigating through the turbulence that come with entering into real adulthood (during those times) and having your group of friends remain friends even after all the bullshit. I think that is the gist of this movie
I went to see this movie when it came out, because these actors were so popular at the time. It was the big movie of the moment. I wanted to love this movie, but it was a big disappointment. I remember what a jerk Rob Lowe's character was, how creepy Emilio Estevez was. The only time I laughed was when Rob Lowe says "Do you believe in premarital sax?"
Per the video title here, yes, It's a BAD Movie, but as an old Gen X guy I still have kind of a soft spot in my heart for it because it takes me back to my teenage years. And I think it does capture something of the spirit of the age back then (sadly, LOL). As you pointed out, the characters are awful, self-absorbed, unsympathetic people who learn nothing from their mistakes. Well, the 80s were full of people like that IRL: insider-trading Wall Street pricks, self-dealing politicians, coked-up celebrities. The 80s were the beginning of the income-inequality state that we find ourselves in now--we have Reagan's re-ordering of the tax codes to thank for that--and that's reflected, very slightly, in the movie when Judd Nelson's character decides to work for a Republican politician because it pays better. It's kind of a throwaway bit of dialogue, but it does show a little bit of awareness of the me-me-me tenor of those times: make as much money as possible, as quickly as possible, and WGAF how you made it, as long as it appears legal. It's basically lifestyle porn, two hours of very upscale, very good-looking young people behaving very badly; IMO, kind of a forerunner of a lot of reality TV shows today, LOL.
All points earned, but that's kinda the point.
They were really awful friends, but that's more real than everybody getting along great. I hate that it's cliche to say it was a different time. Estevez does absolutely look like a psychotic stalker. I couldn't stand Jules character personally. But things felt different 30/40 years ago. A realistic view of remaining friends for life after school or college. And the truths they hide from each other. It's the most brat pack of 'em next to the Breakfast Club. Going down this road, I highly recommend Less Than Zero. Some of Robert Downey's best work. Probably McCarthy's too.
David Foster’s score is great
Im over 60 yrs old and saw this in the theater. I didn't "get it" like all my friends seemed to, so over the years, I've rewatched several times. I still don't get it. I didn't like any of the characters, much less have a connection to any of their lives.
I dislike Weird Science, too.
good luck with your channel. As someone with over one billion hours of youtube watched I recommend tweaking the framing/lighting/background of your face cam. Audio and editing are pretty good!