The Breakfast Club (1985) directed by John Hughes – A Film Review

In the nineteen eighties John Hughes created some of the most definitive films for the teenagers of that decade. Films like Sixteen Candles (1984), Weird Science (1985), Pretty in Pink (1986), Ferris Bueller’s Day Off (1986), and the subject of this film review The Breakfast Club (1986) helped to play out issues of young people and in the end helped to define their very opinions.

Yet I was not born to this generation. In fact I wasn’t born until nineteen ninety one so I never grew up relating to these films in the same way other generations may have done. To reveal more on this, it wasn’t until my twenties that I actually first saw any of these movies. So unlike many others, I don’t have any kind of nostalgic bias to this material. This also means that I don’t really share the same kind of cultural compass that many who viewed these films at the time of their releases would have.

The basic premise of the film involves five pupils who have for varying reasons been put into a special detention class on a Saturday as punishment for their behavior. Each of them fulfills a specific stereotype of teenagers within an American high school (or any social environment for that matter) of the time. One is a jock / tough guy, another is a prom queen / popular girl, another’s a nerd / conformist and there’s also a criminal / rebel and basket case or introvert.

It’s true that like each of them, when we first meet the pupils we view them in these same terms; through the same social stereotypes. Yet as the film progresses and they as characters get to know each other better a strong bond begins to form between them. Each of them has their own social problems and unique perspective based on the experiences they’ve had. They all discuss in this time the relation between their parents and how that has influenced who they are. It’s during this time that you really begin to notice how they all share a bond in the fact that each of their personalities are formed in someway as a form of submission or rejection of what their parents have taught them. And, the way they inherently react to others is to a degree a reflection on this.

In terms of the films presentation it is really well shot with the majority of the action taking place in one location. The cinematography itself is quite minimalistic in terms of camera movement or elaborate setups. In fact for most of the film the camera is static, which allows us to fully engage the subjects and actors being presented before us without being distracted.

There are many standout performances here, well, to be honest; the film is kind of filled with them. All of the young actors completely pull off their characters and there isn’t anything in sight that pulls you out of any of their performances. Also a keynote to be made here is that none of the characters come across as cheesy or clichéd in their presentation to the audience. Instead they come across as genuine people with mixed emotions and engaging backstories that have a real influence on who they are.

In many ways this film is completely unlike any other high school movie ever made. The film at times comes across like a group psychology session in which everyone is discussing his or her problems, and in many ways I think this is one of the reasons why it is so interesting. We begin to see the posturing that each of them does at the start of the movie be slowly chipped away over time, as we begin to see their true raw emotions.

There are no real detriments to the film. Its weakest aspect is that it has a few eighties songs play throughout which to a small extent ages the film. But overall the film feels as fresh today as it would have when it was released. It’s really quite unusual to see such strong writing in a teen drama. As a lot of them often try to sell themselves on a concept of wacky adventures or moving to a new school, where character development on any real endearing level is usually left by the way side. The premise of The Breakfast Club however, forces these kids to talk with one another when they are stuck in a classroom together on a Saturday. They are forced to engage with these other people who they don’t know and through this they learn a lot about each other and some of them learning more about themselves.

For many people this film would have changed how they look at the medium itself. The fact that you could have a whole film based around people just discussing their lives and issues is something that you don’t see that often in American cinema. Aiming for a young audience and not dumbing down the material but talking to them as adults was a smart decision. To many films are created in a way that is too simplistic for younger audiences and this stands as an example of how you can make a smart film for them and have it still be successful. The reason being that this film never tried to talk down to its audience, instead it attempted to genuinely talk to them. Which is something all in itself quite refreshing.

Deck Dogz (2005) directed by Steve Pasvolsky – A Film Review

There has been in recent years a rise in the acceptability and even the enjoyment of bad movies. The term “so bad it’s good” is not a new one and has been used since at least the nineteen nighties but the demand for such films has certainly increased over the past decade. Ironic enjoyment of entertainment has seen a steady rise in recent years as films such as The Room (2003) and Birdemic: Shock and Terror (2010) have come to prominent attention. In fact, it was through a similar recommendation that I came across this strangely fantastical Australian skateboarding / coming of age movie.

Having never heard of it before I had no idea what to expect. After doing some research I discovered that the writer/director had in fact previously been nominated for an academy award for an earlier short film he produced – so how bad could it really be?

Well the film starts with three teenage skater boys who live in Sydney. The three of them have a plan to go to a skate competition so that one of them (Spasm) can show off his skills in an attempt to get sponsored by the special guest judge Tony Hawk. On their journey to the competition they get expelled from school, run away from drug dealers and meet a few girls along the way. Nothing out of the ordinary so far right, just an average coming of age story so far – that is, if you read the plot anyway.

You see what separates this from other coming of age movies is the fact that none of this comes across as believable. The film is presented in such a bizarre fantasist way that it ends up coming across as wish fulfillment of the fantasies of the director. Nothing makes sense. The attempts at characters are caricatures from the one-dimensional police officers, to the authoritarian teachers or even the love interest that is only there to be stared at and have a short conversation with before the protagonists turn in the competition.

The problem is that the kids don’t have any personalities outside of their stereotypes. Blue (the Asian guy) talks and acts like he’s an African American inner city kid. The protagonist Spasm is the shy but secretly talented every day one and his other friend Poker is an orphan with a drug addict brother. There is really nothing more to them outside of these personality traits.

Acting over all in the film isn’t to bad considering the script. The cinematography also isn’t that bad but the soundtrack is pretty terrible. Animated sequences are also incorporated into certain points in the film but it doesn’t really fit and is quite off putting when it appears.

At the end of the day, the film isn’t really anything special. It isn’t particularly funny in it’s ineptness and is not really sporadic enough in its random moments of bizarre humor to recommend as a “so bad it’s good” movie. You can tell that the filmmakers really set out to make a fantasy fulfillment skateboarder film that reminded them of their younger years and, in a way, they did that. But in honesty they didn’t achieve much more than this. It’s a decent flick for what it is – it’s not great but not terrible. It has its moments but there really isn’t much more to recommend it. 

The Master directed by Paul Thomas Anderson – A Film Review

In The Master (2012) the story follows a young former soldier named Freddie Quill played by Joaquin Phoenix, who is struggling to settle into a normal routine life after the torments of war. Because of this he has become a kind of vagabond, a drifter and loner unable to settle in any one place. That is of course until he comes across the mysterious stranger Lancaster Dodd played by Phillip Seymour Hoffman. Dodd is a leader of a small group of quirky fundamentalists that feed Quill when they find him after he had drunkenly stowed himself away on their cruise ship the night before.

Dodd soon befriends Freddie and allows him to stay for his daughter’s wedding. After a while Quill and Dodd have a heart to heart and Freddie is forced to confront his recent problems. In doing so Freddie becomes reinvigorated and joins the cult of Dodd within which he finds a stable place for himself and a channel for his displaced emotions.

Yet Freddie is still haunted by his past. His past regrets and mistakes make him galvanize his loyalty to his newly found family. But with his unpredictable behavior and because of the way he violently acts out he remains an outsider to many.

What’s strange here is that Phoenix chooses to play the role so open. From the subtlest facial expressions to the larger emotional scenes, you can see this pain in every frame featuring the hurt and broken man.

Hoffman also stands out in his portrayal of Lancaster Dodd. Through out the film he remains charismatically drawing whilst being experientially hard to read. He seems to remain calculatedly in control of situations and yet is still able to come across as genuinely endearing. There is something quite mystical about him really as he is able to lie to cult members and somehow still give the impression of being a loving figure to his cult subjects.

In a way, through out the film the audience themselves can become endeared by this character’s cult of personality. There is a definite similarity between this character and real figures like L. Ron Hubbard or Joseph Smith. Just like these real life leaders, Dodd’s followers observe his teachings in a way to deal with or understand problems that they lack the knowledge or ability to understand. In his claim to the knowledge they seek, he provides a charismatic leadership and a murky, somewhat logistical guide to others.

In terms of the script here the story is masterfully crafted. Sequences (although on occasions surreal) never feel unnecessary or forced into the narrative. In a way the film follows a quite loose and novelistic structure that really gives the audience (and the story in general) room to breathe.

To be really truthful, the craft of the movie in general is wholly well handled. From the cinematography, to the acting, to the direction, there isn’t any part of the film that is really a let down in a craftsmanship sense. In fact through out the entire viewing of the film there isn’t one particular example of any faults I had with it. That’s not to say the film is perfect, it was enjoyable and well put together of course but it isn’t a movie I would come back to on repeated viewings. Ok maybe that is a little hypocritical, as I have viewed it twice to this date - but what I believe I’m trying to say is that, once you feel you have fully grasped the story there isn’t really any enduring factors that will bring you back to viewing this film on a consistent basis.

In summary, The Master attempts to profile how someone may become involved in a cult and how they would react to it’s positives and negatives. With the final conflict coming from a confrontation between the ideas of submissive conformity in hope of the possibility redemption, and the freedom for someone to choose what is best for them - no matter how rational or irrational that person may be. It successfully examines and confronts all of these things, however, I don’t believe that this is the sort of film that will keep viewers coming back for more after full comprehension of the story aspects of this work. 

The Class directed by Ilmar Raag – A Film Review

In drama, it is very rare for myself to come across a piece that attempts to tell a story in the social realist manner that seems to go too far, The Class (2007) went too far. Although it is important to be free to discuss the issues and social injustices in our society, (especially when children are concerned) if a subject is pushed beyond even the most extreme cases of reality it inherently takes away any emotional impact or serious message a work of this sort may wish to convey.

As I have said, the film goes too far. It is a story about teenage bullying in a high school but comes across as a group of sociopaths partaking in or at the least tolerating the events that go far beyond that of which any mentally stable person would allow to happen.

The story begins with a boy Joosep playing basketball with the rest of the class. As the story progresses we discover that he is actually being bullied by the rest of the pupils – not just some of his class members, but practically all of them. Some of them are violent, others are verbally abusive and the rest remain socially intolerant to Joosep. Yet one day, one of the others (Kaspar) thinks that things might be going to far and interferes. Rather than causing the others to reflect on their behaviour however, this instead adversely splits the group hatred between Joosep and Kasper. Unlike before, the group bullying fitfully intensifies to an unbelievable degree.

It is easy to see that the film is an attempt to examine the group behaviour surrounding an incident of school bullying. It's an exercise of sorts, a kind of deconstruction of what kind of behaviour may cause a couple of students to go on a school shooting. The problem is though that the events that lead up to Kasper and Joosep reaching their breaking point seems too unrealistic and extreme to have ever been reached by a group of students. As you watch the events unfold one after the other it just becomes to fantastical for these events to have possibly happened in the time the film pretends they preceded one another. Why would none of the student’s question what is going on? Why is it that only Kasper attempts to stop what is going on? And why is it that none of the teachers are informed of what is really happening?

The only way these events would happen as the film states is if the students were a large combination of psycho and sociopaths who were mentally unstable and apathetic to the bullying and subsequent torture of others before their very eyes. The point being that the events as they are portrayed are unbelievable; taking away from much of the emotional impact that such a film could potentially have had.

That is not to say that the film doesn’t have its strengths. The acting is astonishing considering the young age of much of the cast and the subject matter. Direction in the film is also well handled, with a really intense progression in the atmosphere building throughout. It is through these aspects I believe that many other critics have misread the film as one that is intensely gritty and truthful to its subject matter. However for a film to be any of these things it must refrain from exaggeration or over enveloping the actions of its characters. The Class unfortunately doesn’t have enough restraint in these areas to be any of these things.

If you were to compare it to the likes of Gus Van Sant’s Elephant (2003) with it’s loose narrative around a similar school shooting in the US, you will see how it never attempts to explain the actions of the shooters. Instead of this it focuses on numerous characters in the school during the day of the shootings. Because of this, we as an audience are left to speculate what has happened and why. Like The Class, Elephant questions what has happened and why such shootings would occur. Yet, unlike The Class this is achieved without resulting to tabloid like speculation and to an extent, exploitation of the real tragedies that have occurred.

Nevertheless the film does have heart. Although the antagonistic class are often left under developed, the characters of Joosep and Kasper do by the end of the film feel like real people. In scenes between the two of them you get to learn of their lives, their dreams and more importantly their sense of the situation. Throughout the film they’re constantly thinking over the actions of the others and the way they react to them. In the process you really get a sense of who they are as people and what the future could hold for them if things were better for them. But even as this happens and things take a turn for the worst, even at the point of deciding to go on a killing spree against those who have effectively tortured them, you almost agree with them and their choice of action. The problem is that if the antagonistic bullies were developed on any kind of realistic level (as opposed to being varied combinations of apathetic, psychotic and sociopathic beings) then we would never agree as an audience member to the killing of children in a mass shooting. The truth is that these characters don’t come across as real people; instead they’re evil caricatures.

It’s quite ironic in a way really, as the film is almost a complete twist on the right wing tabloid portrayals of such events. Instead it is the victims of a mass shooting that are demonised and the killers themselves who are presented as the humanised victims.

Nonetheless, even with these faults I still believe the film is worth a watch. It is rare to see a film take a subject such as this and attempt to examine how the situation of a school shooting may come about. Although it does come across as eccentric in it’s presentation of these developing events, the actual protagonists character development takes a rather subtle tone. I don’t believe that the film was successful under the merits that it aimed for in it’s extention towards realism, however I do think that what it failed at shouldn’t be a deterrent to anyone thinking about viewing the film for the first time. My criticism here would most likely split opinion – so don't allow my biasis to sway your opinion and give this film a watch for yourself.