Bonfire of the Vanities: A Hilarious Flop or a Quintessential 80s Tale? Let's Dissect This Cinematic Mishap
"The Bonfire of the Vanities." The title brings images of flames and vanities. This 1990 film aimed to adapt Tom Wolfe's satirical novel for the screen. Instead, it felt damp, not fiery. Based on Wolfe's 1987 novel, it sought to comment on 1980s New York City and Wall Street greed. Did it succeed? Critics thought not. History remains unkind too. Let's analyze "Bonfire of the Vanities" and uncover the reasons for its failure.
The Film "Bonfire of the Vanities": A Toxic Waste Dump of Talent?
Directed by Brian De Palma, known for stylish thrillers, "The Bonfire of the Vanities" featured a star cast. Tom Hanks, before becoming America’s Dad, led as Sherman McCoy, a bond trader. Melanie Griffith played his materialistic mistress, Maria Ruskin. Bruce Willis, fresh from "Die Hard," portrayed cynical journalist Peter Fallow. What went wrong with such talent?
Plot Summary: A Wrong Turn, a Hit-and-Run, and a Media Circus
The story opens with Sherman McCoy basking in Manhattan luxury. He has a Park Avenue apartment, a Porsche, and a six-figure income. One night, while driving with Maria, they get lost in the Bronx. Maria hits a young black man with the car. Panic and entitlement lead them to flee without reporting. Enter Peter Fallow, an unlucky, scandal-seeking tabloid reporter. He discovers the hit-and-run and sees a chance to revive his career. Fallow spins the story into a racial incident, igniting outrage. Suddenly, Sherman faces a media storm and legal trouble. The movie depicts his fall from grace as he battles the legal system and relentless media.
Critical Reception: A Bonfire of Critical Pans
Critics did not praise "The Bonfire of the Vanities." The feedback was largely negative. Many agreed it failed to capture the satire and commentary of Wolfe’s novel. A pointed critique described it as "a vapid adaptation of a thoughtful book." Ouch. It’s like calling your mansion a cardboard box in a storm.
Reasons for Failure: Why Did This Bonfire Fizzle?
"Bonfire of the Vanities" epitomizes Hollywood arrogance and failed adaptations. Key factors doomed it, turning a sharp satire into a bland film. First, the casting was questionable at best. Tom Hanks, America's beloved star, played Sherman McCoy, who is arrogant and unsympathetic in the novel. This miscasting derailed the film's message. Instead of critiquing Wall Street excess with a loathsome lead, audiences saw Hanks being mildly anxious. It's like casting a golden retriever to play a snarling Doberman; you won’t get the right type.
The film also faltered in balancing the novel’s complex satire. Wolfe's book dives into New York society issues like class, race, media manipulation, and power. In attempting to fit this into a feature film, it became diluted. The satire lacked edge, characters seemed cartoonish, and the narrative felt confused. It’s like turning fine wine into cheap grape juice; the complexity disappears.
Moreover, the book’s moral ambiguity created challenges for the film. Wolfe’s novel lacks heroes, showcasing morally dubious characters instead. This makes it hard for audiences to connect. Viewers typically want someone to root for, even in satire. "Bonfire" offers no such figure, presenting an array of unlikeable people engaged in unpleasant actions. Imagine a reality show where everyone is a villain – entertaining yet not heartwarming.
Lastly, critics note that De Palma's directorial style conflicted with the novel’s tone. His flamboyant visual flair suits thrillers but felt misplaced in a satire needing subtlety. It’s like using a flamethrower to light a birthday candle – excessive.
Miscasting of Tom Hanks: America's Nice Guy as a Wall Street Jerk?
Let’s focus on the Hanks casting dilemma. It’s key to understanding the film's failure. By 1990, Hanks was rising to stardom, known for his charm in films like "Big." Casting him as Sherman McCoy, a figure of Wall Street arrogance and moral decay, was risky. Hanks tried but couldn’t shake his likability. Audiences found it hard to dislike Sherman as Hanks. It’s like expecting your teddy bear to transform into a bear; it defies nature.
The novel portrays Sherman as cold and self-important, dismissing anyone outside his circle. Hanks’ performance softened these traits, making McCoy seem like a guy who made bad choices. This weakened the satire. Sympathy for McCoy diluted the critique of greed and injustice. It’s like showing a puppy that ate too many treats; it’s cute but not a real warning.
Unbalanced Adaptation: Too Much Novel, Too Little Film?
Adapting a sprawling novel like "The Bonfire of the Vanities" into a film is hard. The movie tries to squeeze many characters and stories into two hours, leading to rush and confusion. Key plot points are cut or oversimplified, losing the book's nuanced social commentary. It’s like packing your whole house into a suitcase; some things will be left behind.
The film also struggles with tone. It shifts between comedy, social satire, and courtroom drama without settling on one style. This tonal inconsistency adds to the confusion and disappointment. It’s like listening to a radio that changes genres every five minutes – jarring.
Lack of Relatable Characters: Nobody to Root For?
"Bonfire of the Vanities" offers few sympathetic characters as we noted earlier. Sherman is self-absorbed; Maria is greedy; Peter is opportunistic; even otherwise
"Victims" in the story come off as less than virtuous. This moral ambiguity is key to Wolfe's vision. It creates a challenge for mainstream films. Viewers need a relatable character. "Bonfire" provides no such anchor. It presents a cynical view of humanity. This can turn off viewers wanting escapism. It's like attending a party alone. Everyone is complaining. That’s not fun.
Directorial Choices: De Palma's Style Mismatch?
Brian De Palma is a visually distinctive director. He is known for his camera movements and suspense techniques. While these elements can be effective, they often clash with the satirical tone of "Bonfire of the Vanities." De Palma's visual excess often undermines the intended satire. It's like wearing a tuxedo to a backyard barbecue.
Is it Worth Watching?: A Hilarious Disaster or Just a Disaster?
Despite poor reviews, is "The Bonfire of the Vanities" worth watching? The DVD cover says it is "hilarious" and "the quintessential story of the '80s." Let’s pause on "quintessential." "Hilarious"? Maybe not. But parts are entertaining. It's a film that is flawed yet interesting. It’s like a car crash – compelling but hard to look away.
For film buffs interested in Hollywood disasters, "The Bonfire of the Vanities" is a fascinating watch. Just don’t expect a good adaptation of Wolfe’s novel. Think of it more as a bonfire than a masterpiece.
Hypothetical Casting: What Could Have Been?
Hindsight in Hollywood is 20/20. Tom Wolfe wanted Chevy Chase for Sherman McCoy. Imagine that! After this film flopped, De Palma suggested John Lithgow instead. Lithgow could portray McCoy’s complexity well. He can be both charming and menacing. Just changing a bit of casting could change everything.
Rating: A Heaping Helping of 80s Excess
The film earns its R rating mainly from adult content. It includes 78 obscenities and 25 profanities. There are also scenes of adultery and brief nudity. Expect violence, drunkenness, and racial slurs. It portrays a typical Wall Street party, but on film. Parental guidance is suggested. Or wait until the kids are asleep to watch.
Filming Location: Justice is Served (in Queens)
Curious about the courthouse scenes? They were filmed at the Queens County Courthouse, 88-11 Sutphin Boulevard, Jamaica, Queens. Movie Locations confirms this. If in Queens, try reenacting a courtroom scene. Just avoid real perjury while method acting.
Adaptation: Lost in Translation?
The film struggled to capture Wolfe’s complex satire. The result was diluted and confusing. Audiences and critics did not respond positively. Some books are too rich for successful adaptation. "Bonfire of the Vanities" may be one of those cases. It’s like condensing a symphony into a jingle. You lose the complexity and grandeur.
The Novel "Bonfire of the Vanities": The Source of the Flame
To understand the film's flaws, revisit Tom Wolfe's 1987 novel, "The Bonfire of the Vanities." This lengthy book offers a panoramic view of 1980s New York City. It's a satire of Wall Street greed, racial tensions, and media sensationalism. Think of it as a Molotov cocktail thrown at the "Me Decade."
Author: Tom Wolfe, Master of "New Journalism"
Tom Wolfe (1930-2018) was a literary icon. He pioneered "New Journalism" with his bold style. His narratives blend reporting and stylization. Wolfe's prose features vivid descriptions and exclamation points. He keenly observed American culture, exposing its contradictions with sharpness. To grasp the *source*, one must know Wolfe. Wikipedia has more on the film.
Genre: Satire, Pure and Unfiltered
"The Bonfire of the Vanities" is pure satire. It does not realistically portray New York or its people. Instead, it provides a distorted reflection to expose absurdities. The humor is dark, and the characters are caricatures. If you want uplifting or heartwarming, look elsewhere. This satire provokes rather than comforts.
Themes: Power, Greed, and Social Climbing in the 80s
The novel highlights themes centered on power. It explores financial, political, and social power. Greed drives many characters’ actions. Social climbing and status are also key themes. Wolfe shows a society obsessed with appearances over substance. It's a jungle where moral compromises occur frequently. Picture "Wall Street" meets "Mean Girls" with more commentary.
Point of the Book: A Scathing Critique of 1980s Excess
The main aim of "The Bonfire of the Vanities" is critique. It examines the hypocrisy and corruption in 1980s New York and America. Wolfe dissects the era with precise wit, revealing ugly truths behind wealth. He cautions against ambition and inequality. It’s like a morality play with BMWs and no angels.
Lack of Likable Characters: Satire Needs Villains (and Fools)
As noted earlier, the novel avoids likable characters entirely. This choice underscores the satire’s purpose, exposing moral failings.
its satirical strategy. Wolfe presents morally flawed individuals. This compels the reader to examine issues and forces that drive their behavior. The absence of heroes is intentional. It enhances the satire, making it powerful and disturbing. It's akin to a political cartoon – you see the flaws, not the caricatures.
Satire: The Weapon of Choice
Satire is vital in "The Bonfire of the Vanities." It's the lens used by Wolfe for his subject matter. It provides humor and critical insight. The satire broadens, targeting institutions and individual behaviors. It's exaggerated, pushing reality to reveal absurdities, like the works of Swift or Waugh. This is laughter as a vehicle for social critique.
Historical Bonfire of the Vanities: Burning the "Vanities" for Real
The title "The Bonfire of the Vanities" references a real event in Florence, Italy. This event occurred in the late 15th century. Orchestrated by friar Girolamo Savonarola, it provides context for Wolfe's novel. The themes of vanity and moral decay are timeless. History often repeats itself, at times literally igniting.
Origin: Florence, 1497 – A City Under the Spell of a Monk
The bonfire took place in Florence during 1497 and 1498’s tumultuous years. The city was under Girolamo Savonarola's influence. He became known as a passionate Dominican priest. Savonarola condemned Church corruption and urged reform. He called for repentance and rejection of worldly vanities, acting as a 15th-century moral crusader.
Leader: Girolamo Savonarola – The Fiery Friar
Girolamo Savonarola (1452-1498) spearheaded the historical bonfire. He divided public opinion. Some viewed him as a prophet; others called him a fanatic. His passionate sermons were filled with warnings of judgment. He attracted many followers, mainly from lower classes, due to his message of social justice.
Purpose: Burning Sinful Objects – Cosmetics, Art, and Books!
Savonarola's bonfires served as acts of purification. They were aimed at removing sinful vanities from society. Collectively, followers burned items deemed objectionable. These included cosmetics, mirrors, playing cards, and secular books considered too sensual. Smithsonian Magazine covers this fiery cultural purge. It symbolized a cleansing of Florence from worldly sins, akin to a medieval Marie Kondo event.
Location: Piazza della Signoria – Center Stage for the Flames
The bonfires were staged in the Piazza della Signoria in Florence. This setting bore profound symbolic weight. Savonarola captured public attention by taking center stage in the city. It represented religious authority and political power. Imagine Times Square, but with a giant bonfire of forbidden objects attracting different crowds.
Savonarola's Actions and Fate: From Power to Pyre
Savonarola's fervor led to his demise. His attacks on the Church alienated powerful rivals. In 1497, he was excommunicated for heresy. Ironically, he was executed in 1498 at the same location where he held his bonfires. The fiery friar became fuel for the very flames he condemned. A classic example of hubris leading to nemesis, living by fire can result in burning.
Savonarola strongly opposed books he deemed disgraceful. Notably, he burned works by Dante and Boccaccio. Book burning illustrated the dangers of religious extremism and censorship. It serves as a chilling reminder of cultural heritage's fragility. Today, these literary works hold revered status in Western literature.
Themes and Symbolism: Vanity and Bonfire – More Than Just Words
The words "vanity" and "bonfire" carry rich symbolic meanings. Both resonate within Savonarola's historical context and Wolfe's narrative. Understanding symbols reveals deeper story layers. It's akin to decoding a language where every word carries significance.
Vanity: More Than Just Looking in the Mirror
Vanity denotes excessive pride in appearance or abilities. Beyond this, it reflects superficial concerns, lacking true value. The biblical book of Ecclesiastes states, "Vanity of vanities, all is vanity." This highlights that material pursuits bear no true meaning against eternity. True value lies in spiritual connections and higher truths.
In "The Bonfire of the Vanities," vanity permeates every layer. Sherman McCoy builds his world on vanity – wealth, status, and self-image define him. Other characters display various forms of vanity too, whether social ambition or media attention. The novel exposes these vanities' emptiness and destructiveness. It's a warning against building fragile foundations on appearances.
Bonfire: Transformation, Renewal, or Just Destruction?
Bonfires symbolize transformation and renewal across cultures. They often mark seasonal changes or community celebrations. Fire can cleanse, destroy, and usher in new beginnings. It symbolizes duality – endings alongside renewals, destruction mixed with creation.
Savonarola intended his bonfires to symbolize spiritual renewal. He aimed to cleanse Florence’s moral decay. However, they also became symbols of fanaticism and cultural loss. They exemplified extremism and suppression of dissenting voices across time. It’s a complex symbol with noble aspirations and dangerous impulses.
In Wolfe's work, the title suggests a symbolic burning of 1980s New York’s vanities. Unlike Savonarola’s action, this "bonfire" signifies social and cultural chaos. Media sensationalism fuels many unintended consequences. Vanity's flames consume reputations and lives alike, leaving devastation behind.
behind ashes and regret.
Tom Wolfe: The Man in the White Suit, Unmasked
Tom Wolfe, author of "The Bonfire of the Vanities," was a complex figure. His white suit and vivid prose drew attention. He keenly observed American society. He excelled in social satire. Wolfe was more than a writer; he was a cultural critic and literary showman.
Known For: "New Journalism" and Poetic Prose
Wolfe was a pioneer of "New Journalism." This movement blurred journalism and fiction. He combined reporting with literary techniques. He used scene-setting and character development. His distinctive style thrived on energy and vividness. Wolfe's prose featured unconventional punctuation and typography. His writing was original, poetic, and impressionistic. It melded journalistic facts with artistic flair, making him a literary force.
Residence: From Brooklyn to the Chelsea Hotel
Wolfe's life took him from Richmond, Virginia, to New York City. He started in Brooklyn, then moved to Manhattan. He lived at the famous Chelsea Hotel for a time. The hotel was a hub for artists and writers. These New York experiences influenced his view of the city. They fueled his satire in "The Bonfire of the Vanities." He observed the city’s quirks and contradictions closely.
Not Related to Thomas Wolfe (the Other Wolfe)
Tom Wolfe is not related to Thomas Wolfe. They share a surname and literary interests. However, they are different individuals. Thomas Wolfe wrote "Look Homeward, Angel." This common confusion arises from their overlapping spheres. They remain distinct figures in American literature, like literary doppelgangers.
Conservative in Many Ways: A Surprising Contradiction?
Tom Wolfe was a conservative figure despite 1960s counterculture ties. He often critiqued liberal trends. He expressed skepticism about social change. Wolfe claimed to have avoided LSD and tried marijuana only once. This conservative side adds complexity to his work. It creates tension between his satire and personal beliefs.
Height: Towering Figure, Literally
Tom Wolfe stood over six feet six inches tall. His height made him a standout figure. It presented challenges; his hands were too large for standard typewriters. This characteristic and his white suits shaped his persona. He was a man who turned heads in a crowd.
Responses (0 )