Rating: 
Summary: Vanity...Everyone's Favorite Sin
Review: 'Bonfire of the Vanities' has always had me curious. I heard so many terrible things about it, but I could never figure out how it could be so bad with all the star power involved. I finally caught it on cable and gave it a shot. Honestly, it wasn't that bad and it could have been a lot worse.
Tom Hanks plays Sherman, a wealthy man at the top of his game who's having an affair with a known starlett (Griffith). When they are taking a car ride from the airport one night, Sherman takes a wrong turn and ends up in the Bronx, and all hell breaks loose. Two gang members try to mug them, but one gets run over by our hero's mistress as they make their escape. Soon everyone and their sister's brother gets involved in the case when one of the thugs claims hit and run and that he himself was innocent. Enter writer Peter Fallow (Bruce Willis), who gets involved in the case and later plans to make a book out of the whole thing.
I have never read the original novel that this was based off of, but on its own the movie's decent. The story plays out seriously, but the characters are somewhat oddball-like, kind of like exaggerated versions of themselves (which ends up being ok, since the movie is a satire). Don't expect something utterly amazing, but it's worth a look, especially at this price.
Rating: 
Summary: It Should Have Worked, In Theory...
Review: .... but, even with all the great names associated with this one, it could have been much, much better. For one, it felt too intimate for Noo Yawk. I mean, when things happen there, it seems like it is written large, you know? (When Sting gives a free concert in Central Park, well, that's massive, you know?)...and Tom Wolfe's book did have that feel, but it lost it in the translation. The film could have more excessive moments...I didn't get the feel that there was much of a rallying to have this Master of the Universe's head on a platter. Crowd scenes were skimpy and controlled. The DA just did not seem to be oily enough to me. To their credit, Melanie Griffith and Morgan Freeman played their respective roles well, but what was up with Hanks and Willis? They sleepwalked through the entire thing. I expected more from the two. Read Tom Wolfe's sweeping novel instead. It is truly great...
Rating:
Summary: A fine satire
Review: A lighthearted, overtly comedic adaptation of a much more profound literary source, this film is not very bad if one considers it in its own right. The characters are well cast, and some scenes (like the judges climatic courtroom speech)are clearly a mockery that shouldn't be taken seriously. The movie has a fine soundtrack, and the locations are occasionally great. No masterpiece, but no bottom of the barrel, either.
Rating: 
Summary: Much better than I expected.
Review: After all the horrible reviews when this film first came out, I steered clear of it. I recently watched it and I can see where some of the criticisms are well deserved. Hanks and Willis were really miscast. Melanie Griffith got some good notices and she fares the best as Maria. I guess I'm lucky that I didn't read the book, as my review would be cut by two stars or more. Maybe with time this film will come off a little better than it did when it was first released.
Rating: 
Summary: A complete disappointment
Review: After reading the book for an English independent reading project, I decided to check the movie out. The movie is so different from the book, and if you have read the book, you must pass over the movie. I ended up sticking out the two hours of this bomb, even though I wanted to shut it off after the first five minutes and go back to the video store to demand my $1.99 back. I would bet Tom Wolfe would be embarassed to say he wrote the book if he saw the movie. Whoever played assistant D.A. Kramer was the worst actor I have ever seen. DO NOT SEE THIS MOVIE, especially if you have read the book, which is terrific.
Rating:
Summary: This is certainly a comedy
Review: After reading the book, I knew that there was no way the movie could fill its shoes. But I was interested in the movie nonetheless. I can now say that this was one of the worst movies I have ever seen. I can not think of a single performance that I would call adequate. Kim Cattrall and Melanie Griffith were laughably bad. Hanks and Willis were horribly miscast. And the "message" behind the story is treated in such a heavy handed manner as to make the movie unbearable. I had trouble understanding how someone who made a film this bad could continue to get work directing. If you don't believe how bad this film really is; rent it. At least you you'll have something to complain about.
Rating:
Summary: An Underrated Guilty Pleasure
Review: Although critically slashed upon its release it's actually a broad, very entertaining comedy with many funny sequences and performances. Tom Hanks and Bruce Willis are strangely miscast but are by no means bad. De Palma's direction is as stylish as ever and the cinematography is quite beautiful. Worth seeing for the eye-popping camerawork in opening five minutes alone. Had this been an original adaption the critical concensus would have been far better.The DVD offers a nice anamorphic widescreen transfer and no other extras but for the low price it's great.
Rating:
Summary: An ambitious effort
Review: but come on... name me 2 other films that have attempted social criticism and commentary to anywhere near the extent that this one does. It's rough to name many. In my mind this film got panned because people didn't want to look at how banal and superficial their lives REALLY are. Is it flawed... certainly but I really enjoyed it. It has enough comedy to keep you entertained while taking a hard look at some very serious yet unpleasant issues. Plus I just have to add that I don't think i've ever seen a Melanie Griffith film that to me would rate less than 4 stars. But by the same token I don't own any of her films because neither are any of them 5 star films but they're all good.
Rating:
Summary: The worst book-to-movie movie ever made!
Review: Do not bother with this movie--it is so bad, it defies description. Those who have given it anything more than one star (and the "system" won't let you give a movie NO stars--which is what this one deserves) obviously did not read the book. (Melanie Griffith can't act when she's type-cast, so how is she suppose to pull off a seductive Latina?) ORDER THE BOOK instead (the book rates FIVE ***** stars!)
Rating:
Summary: This Bonfire Burns Bright
Review: Great movie: it is funny and tragic at the same time. All of the bad reviews stem from one fact only, and that is, the brutal, unvarnished portrayal of liberal race politics. The argument that the movie is not an accurate adaptation of the book cannot be taken seriously, since Hollywood almost never aims at accurate an adaptation of any book. Movies and books are two different things. And they have to be judged on their own merits. No other movie has been so viciously attacked for not being true to the book as this one. And no other movie has been so vigorously and unconscionably criticized for "miscasting" otherwise very beloved actors--Tom Hanks and Melanie Griffith. In reality, this movie is guilty of one major "sin" which the critics and other guardians of culture cannot forgive: its honest exposition of exploitative and divisive politics of race which, instead of reconciliation, mutual respect, and love, preaches division and destroys people's lives in order to feed distrust and resentment, which could otherwise weaken, and even wither away.
|
