1986 comedy fantasy movieRating: 13/20
Plot: The titular charismatic rascal malingers masterfully, convincing his parents to let him miss his 9th school day of the semester. His sister knows what's up, and so does Principal Rooney who wants nothing more but to catch him. Ferris convinces his pal Cameron, a kid who is actually sick, and his girlfriend Sloane to take Cameron's dad's Ferrari up to see the sights of Chicago--Sears Tower, Wrigley Field, an art museum, an inexplicable parade. It's all fun and games until some odometer problems.
So here's an interesting theory I stumbled upon: interesting theory.
Essentially, it's a theory that Ferris Bueller doesn't actually exist and the whole thing is a Fight Club-esque delusion in the mind of Cameron. Despite the fact that I think Cameron is a far more interesting character than Ferris and there are moments when you do question the boy's sanity, I don't buy this at all. Heck, even Carl Fredricksen thinks this is a bunch of hooey. (And no, I'm not bringing that up [pun intended?] again!) It would add a bit of depth to a movie that isn't nearly as much fun in 2012 as I remember it being in the late-1980s. It would also make the scene where Cameron ponders pointillism a little more than the waste of time it is now.
I don't think this movie holds up all that well. It's a lot of fun right up to the point when they hit the Windy City. The characters are colorful. Stein and Del Close make dull and lifeless into something humorous as Bueller's teachers, Jeffrey Jones overdoes it just the right amount as the principal, and Edie McClurg is hilarious as the secretary. The way she says "dickheads" in this movie should have won her some kind of award. The breaking-of-the-fourth-wall early in this still seems fresh, responsibly for more than a few television sitcom imitations. This just begins to wear thin after a while and lines like "The man could squash my nuts into oblivion" don't exactly make it seem timeless. And what kid, even in the mid-80s, wore freakin' berets? Another issue--Ferris Bueller must have the same gift that Jack Bauer has. There's no way these kids had enough time to do all of these things in Chicago. Maybe that lends credence to the above theory, too. This movie should be better although Broderick is charming, so charming that his character's the kind of miscreant housewives wouldn't mind their teenage boys aspiring to be. And Mia Sara--almost as cute as a button--should have had more of a career after this.
The more I think about it, the more that "Ferris Bueller doesn't exist" theory makes this movie more enjoyable. What do you think?
3 comments:
I still like this more than a 13.....about a 15 these days for me. There are still enough clever, fun scenes to make this an enjoyable movie experience for me. Every scene with Charlie Sheen, the bit with Rooney and Jennifer Grey in the house, the weird parking attendant and his joy ride. I even enjoy the parade. Its the only John Hughes movie I can watch these days and not feel vaguely ill while doing so.
As for the Ferris is not real idea? It would work, except too much of the movie happens away from Cameron, with bits that a person would not be imagining. The beginning and ending of the film are completely devoid of anything to do with Cameron. Its an interesting concept to think about when watching the movie though.
You want to know the thing that really irritates me about this film? Its the names of the three main characters.
There are very few characters with first names in this movie. You get names like Ferris and Sloane.....where the hell did that come from? Even Cameron is a bit odd, but Sloane? Has anyone ever met anyone with the names Ferris or Sloane? The principal is Ed, the sister is Jeanie, the secretary is Grace. And we get Ferris and Sloane? Always irritated me for no legitimate reason.
I've taught a few Camerons. No Ferrises or Sloanes though.
Yeah, if Ferris is in Cameron's head, he sure spends a lot of time imagining a backstory and happy ending for him. I've had a lot of imaginary friends in my day (one was named Cameron), but I never had them doing all sorts of things without me and none of them had their own homes.
I get the whole "It's in Cameron's head thing." I could see how Cameron just sits and lives his life vicariously through Ferris (which is how we would get the beginning before we meet Cameron, and the end where Cameron's narrative is done). I just don't think it holds up, though. Hughes was good, but that good? I don't think he was going for all that.
There are some smart scenes in the film. Charlie Sheen's bit, Jennifer Grey's scenes are engaging, and Alan Ruck's Cameron is welcomed mess.
My absolute favorite parts in this movie go to Jeffrey Jones and Edie McClurg. Grace had to be written for McClurg. No one could have played that so perfectly with her obliviousness, innocence, and high-pitched Chicagoan dialect. Jones always plays a great villain, but this was his chance to make you love his scenes almost more than the protagonist's. It could have been a fine line of chewing scenery and overreacting like a Tommy Lee Jones's Two-Face. But, he chose to just play a caricature. For me, those are the funniest parts of the film today. That's the only thing that crossed over for me from seeing this as a kid to seeing it with adult's eyes.
Post a Comment