Product Description

Satire on the greed of the 80's. A Wall Street bondsman and his mistress become involved with a scheming journalist when they take a wrong turn one night.
Genre: Feature Film-Comedy
Rating: R
Release Date: 1-JUN-2004
Media Type: DVD

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #12491 in DVD
• Brand: HANKS,TOM
• Released on: 2004-06-01
• Rating: R (Restricted)
• Aspect ratio: 1.85:1
• Formats: Anamorphic, Closed-captioned, Color, Dolby, DVD, Full Screen, Widescreen, NTSC
• Original language: English, French
• Subtitled in: English, French
• Dubbed in: Spanish
• Number of discs: 1
• Dimensions: .25 pounds
• Running time: 125 minutes

Amazon.com
Handle with care--this one's a bomb! Director Brian De Palma seemed an unlikely choice to transfer Tom Wolfe's mammoth bestseller-- a vibrantly satiric story about race, politics, and greed in 1980s New York--to the screen. In this case, the first impression was correct. Made with a tin ear to everything that made the book so real, the movie gets it wrong every time, starting with casting Tom Hanks in the central role (which, as anyone with brains knew, should have been played by William Hurt). Move along to the choice of Bruce Willis for the sneaky British tabloid journalist and, well, need I say more? As stylish as any De Palma film, this story of a Wall Street broker whose extramarital shenanigans trigger a racial incident that becomes front-page news gets no help from Michael Cristofer's tone-deaf script. After watching it, read Julie Salomon's behind-the-scenes book about its making, The Devil's Candy, which is much more entertaining. --Marshall Fine

Customer Reviews

The Critics Were WRONG!
I was only a young teen when this came out, but I vividly remember all of the scandalous press about how bad it supposedly was. Uh-uh, not true. Before watching it this past weekend, I noticed that almost all of the reviewers who hated it had read the book first and were upset it was so different. Well, I haven't read the book yet, and watched the movie this past weekend. It was just great - a very witty comedy/drama/social commentary of the '80s, not unlike one of my other faves, "Six Degrees of Separation". Melanie Griffith is the best one in this and yes, her southern accent does come and go, but maybe it was intentional - to show her character was a fake @$$ b!tch who couldn't even keep her accent going? Also great to see Kim Cattrall, who has obviously had a boob job since this was made. Charming also is "Sabrina The Teenage Witch"'s Beth Broderick.

I'm going to explain my book/movie difference theory using my all-time favorite movie "Valley of the Dolls" (VOTD) as an example. Yes, I know it (and the book for that matter) is considered trash, but it still proves the point. I saw the VOTD movie first and adored it instantly, so I then rushed out and read the book, which was SO different and had so many more subplots, additional characters, attributed different dialogue to different characters, etc. However, this still ADDED to my movie-going experience by giving me "bonus" footage/scenes to enjoy and supplemet the movie. Had I read the book FIRST, upon seeing the movie, I would've probably been disappointed because I already had preconceived expectations. I think the same rule applies to "Bonfire". It just isn't possible to get all of a full-length novel into a 2 hour movie and unfortunately they have to cast within the Hollywood system (who's hot, who's available, wtc.)... Please don't miss this! When Melanie gets her come-uppance, it is triumphant!

This Bonfire Burns Eternal!
Having read the novel by Tom Wolfe right before the movie came out, I tossed the da*n thing across the room when I finished the last page, for the ending was horrendous! There was no ending! It just stopped, leaving loose ends dangling everywhere, and the reader in a mess of mass confusion with no resolution of any kind. Don't get me wrong, there were parts of the novel that I adored, it was definetly a masterpiece of modern literature, no doubt! Especially the old, Jewish judge who should have been played by Ray Walston, or the guy that played the judge in the horrible "Presumed Innocent". The character of the judge was the funniest character in the story. However, I have come to accept Morgan Freeman in that role, for his version of The Judge ranks among his best, like that of "The Shawshank Redemption" and "Driving Miss Daisy". There are moments that he is extremely hilarious in a vicious way, to bringing the house down with his brilliantly acted "speech scene" at the film's climax.
Now, about the film: This movie was killed by critics before it ever hit theaters. Things like "Bad casting", "Not faithful to the novel", etc, etc. kept popping up in article after article, and/or mentioned on talk shows before the film was even completed. So, you tell me who killed this film at the box office?! It sure as heck wasn't director Brian DePalma's fault! He served up a super satire that was very faithful to the book (except for the already mentioned judge character, and not detailing a lot of description about some of the character's backgrounds and/or motives, especially that of assistant DA Jed Krandall, perfectly played by comedic actor Saul Rubinec, who was last seen in a recurring role on tv's "Frasier" as Daphne's jilted fiance, and attorney -wonder where the idea for casting him as an attorney in a comedy came from???), and turning Peter Fallow from a Brit into an American, which I had no problem with what so ever. As a matter of fact, if you'll notice, that works perfectly since there are so many other British characters in the story, like Fallow's publishing boss, and especially the brilliant Beth Broderick as a bitter socialite whose Italian lover has been stolen away from her by the Devilshly femme fatale cunning b**ch Maria Ruskin, who is obviously a socialite wannabe phony, sleeping her way among the idle rich (think A.N.S.), whose accent is supposed to change back and forth because she's such a phony person, who doesn't have any problem being a "black widow", or setting up Sherman for a crime he never committed, so wonderfully played by Melanie Griffith; her best work next to that of DePalma's 1984 classic thriller "Body Double" and Mike Nicholl's excellent 1987 film "Working Girl". And, DePalma gave it a very nice ending that wrapped everything up. (Not that I feel that every story has to tie itself up all neat and tidy, but this is one of those stories that needed that kind of closure.)
And about the casting of Tom Hanks, well, I, too had my reservations about that since the only decent film he had made was Penny Marshall's "Big", which was still somewhat of a juvenile film, but still one that I love. This is THE film that started Tom Hanks onto the Award winning actor trail (and I'm so surprised, even all these years later, especially looking back on how his career evolved after this film that he didn't recieve better accolades for his performance), because the next roles Tom got offered, which I'm sure was due in large part to his awesome job in this film, were films like Jonathan Demme's "Philadelphia", Robert Szmeckis' "Forrest Gump", Speilberg's "Saving Private Ryan", Ron Howard's "Apollo 13", and Frank Darabont's "The Green Mile", all GREAT films, roles that I don't think that he would have been offered had it not been for this film giving him the chance to showcase what a mature, talented actor that he really was and still is. His films before this were duds like "The Burbs", "Bachelor Party", "Volunteers", "Turner & Hooch", "Joe Versus The Volcano", and the godawful "Dragnet". And let's not forget Kim Catrall's performance of Sherman's socialite b**ch of a wife, who until then was among the ranks of Tom Hanks' earlier work (except her great work in John Carpenter's comic classic "Big Trouble In Little China"), but went on from this to success in several great films and onto HBO's "Sex And The City". And a seven year old Kirsten Dunst who comes off like a modern day Shirley Temple in her scenes (she showed signs of her awesome talent for acting in this film), who went on to stealing the scenes in a lot of great movies, be it "Interview With The Vampire" or "Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind" (an AWESOME film!). And Rita Wilson (Tom Hanks' wife) had a great small part in the awesome tracking shop openening of the film, purposely playing a nerve-shattering socialite who comes across as meek and stuttery, shy and jiterry, naive and unnerving all in a 5 minute scene. Plus, the opening steadicam shot and the unnerving feeling that's created is on purpose because DePalma is bringing us into a world of chaos that's just smoltering away, just like today's eroding communities.
And the list of cameo's by "top" name people is endless: George Plimpton, comedic genius Alan King as Maria Ruskin's MUCH older husband, Arthur Ruskin, Geraldo Rivera (playing a fictional version of himself, which was dead on perfect since Rivera was the ultimate media sl*t - and I mean that in deep respect to Geraldo, for he in and of himself helped expose what trash the media can sink to - during the entire 1980's, as well as the '90's). And for Bruce Willis, well, it's a shame that a lot of people can't except him unless he's in a "Die Hard" movie, but has shown such extreme degree's to acting, whether it be on the TV or on The Big Screen, Willis has done some awesome acting, as in Terry Gilliam's brilliant "12 Monkey's", Rob Reiner's criminally bashed "North", and "The Sixth Sense". His interpretation of Peter Fallow is pitch perfect, looking like a modern day Cary Grant.
As other reviewers on here who like this film and know the story, are so right, this film was killed by critics for political reasons. And, that's a da*n shame, for this is one of the funniest satires to ever come out of Hollywood, and also because DePalma has sworn that he'll never make another comedy because people don't get his sense of humor. And, for anyone who's seen "Greetings", "Hi, Mom!", "The Wedding Party", "Phantom of the Paradise", "Home Movies", or "Wise Guys" will also agree that that's just flat out tragic, for his comedies are side-splitting hilarious! As for the rest of the cast, everyone did an awesome job bringing such loathsome characters to life in celluloid.
Everyone I knew back in 1990 agreed that this was an awesome movie, and they too had read the book. As for Tom Hanks' Sherman McCoy, I couldn't picture anyone else in this role. He offers the depth and pathos to make you feel for his plight as the man who's falsely accussed, whose life is shattered by one simple little accident and will never be the same again, a common theme often used in Hitchcock films. Another ploy often used in Hitchcock classics was to use star power instead of unknown actors. And, I think this ploy serves to benefit both directors for the films that they choose to use it for. This was definetly a film ahead of its time (remember the race riots in L.A. in 1995?), for it still stands out as a masterpiece of cinema even today. Even Kubrick's masterpiece "The Shining" didn't take such a beating for "not being faithful to the source novel", and I can't think of a better example of a film that stripped the source material down to the bare bones to be rebuilt into the classic it is today. And, "The Shining" was a far superior best selling novel than Tom Wolfe's one hit wonder ever was! So, again, it begs to question, why did critics, even before they even saw a single print of this masterpiece, decide to trash it, calling it a bomb BEFORE it was even released?!?!
That has always puzzled me. Either way, it hurt the film's box office performance (which I was lucky enough to see it in the theater within the two weeks that it played, and I remember a huge audience roaring with laughter throughout the entire film). I was hoping that word of mouth would help people overcome the prejudices set by the critics, but that just never happened, at least during its theatrical run. Who knows, it may have actually been a box office hit, but the media won't ever allow that to be known; because anyone I've ever known and/or encountered that has seen the film all agree that it was great. But, either way, it's nice to see on amazon that it has gained a growing audience of viewers like myself over the years. Just think, Hitchcock's final film, the hilarious classic "Family Plot" flopped upon release, but is now concidered one of his best films ever. Hopefully time will be as kind to DePalma's adaptation of Wolfe's novel, which was just as great as his adaptations of "Carrie", "The Fury", "Casualties Of War", "Carlito's Way", and "The Black Dahlia".
Either way, I will continue to enjoy it every time I get the chance, for I feel it ranks up there with some of the best comic classics ever made, along with Hitch's best classic comedies, like "Mr. And Mrs. Smith", "The Trouble With Harry", and "Family Plot". And for those that do like the film, always think of Beth Broderick's character on that zerox machine, saying to Peter Fallow "And when you find them, tell them this is from the tw*t that turned them in" whenever you need a laugh. If you haven't seen it, then it's worth viewing for that scene alone. Just remember this is a satire, NOT slapstick.

...a truly unappreciated social commentary take on a dysfunctional system
The Bonfire Of The Vanities is an underrated gem directed by Brian DePalma (Scarface), and featuring an all-star cast including Academy Award winners Tom Hanks (Big, Forrest Gump), Morgan Freeman (Million Dollar Baby, Driving Miss Daisy), F Murray Abraham (Amadeus), and a supporting cast including Bruce Willis (Die Hard), Melanie Griffith (Shining Through), and Kim Cattrall (Turk 182).

The story depicts a decaying society infested with racism, greed, hypocrisy, and corruption. The particular society in focus here is New York City, where an incident that signifies a major clash between the white upper class and the black lower class becomes media dinner. Hanks plays Sherman McCoy, a wealthy businessman who cheats on his wife, played by Cattrall, with another rich man's wife Maria Ruskin, played by Griffith.

On one of their nights on the town, McCoy and Ruskin find themselves in the slums of New York, where they are jumped by two black youths, and end up committing a hit and run as they run over one of the kids as they flee in McCoy's car. This goes straight to headline news. The African American community are not pleased, the mayor of the city, played hysterically by Abraham, wants to gain Black support by taking a rich 'white' turkey to court and reprimending him; in this case, the turkey is McCoy, a religious man who's only after money, and a drunken down-on-his-luck reporter Peter Fallow, played by Willis, who's hot on McCoy's tracks for this could be the story that will bring him to the top of his game, and in the longer run, make him a star of the moment.

Everybody's in for a surprise, however, to find out that Ruskin was the one driving the car, not McCoy, but the entire city wants McCoy's neck anyways. McCoy, on the other hand, must play a dirty game to clear his name even if it means that he should break the law.

The Bonfire Of the Vanities has no heroes. All the characters in the movie symbolize very dirty and corrupt people. The only voice of wisdom in the film is the judge, played by Freeman, hot off his Oscar nominated performance in Driving Miss Daisy, who gives a convincing speech at the end of the movie.

Even though the movie flopped in 1990 when it was released and today is considered one of the worst films ever made, I find Bonfire a truly unappreciated social commentary take on a dysfunctional system with ordinary people working as organizers of the system. It's a bittersweet slice of American realism that many people tend to walk away from.

Recommended

B