The Bonfire of the Vanities

Starring:Tom Hanks, Bruce Willis, Melanie Griffith, Kim Cattrall, Saul Rubinek, Morgan Freeman, John Hancock, Kevin Dunn, Clifton James, Louis Giambalvo, Barton Heyman, Norman Parker, Donald Moffat, Alan King, Beth Broderick, Kurt Fuller, Adam LeFevre, Richard Libertini, Andre Gregory, Mary Alice
Director: Brian De Palma
Studio: Warner Home Video
Product Type: DVD

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:

Classic book, average movie.......2007-05-04

Inspired by but with a story and ending distinct from Tom Wolfe's novel by the same title - The Bonfire of the Vanities - fails to attain the heights scaled by the book. This shortfall in quality is by no means a reflection on the quality of acting or script but a glaring manifestation of the fact that it is next to impossible to communicate in cinematic form the details that a book can capture. The audience that has not read the book is likely to find the movie more engrossing but the overwhelming reaction is of less than fulfilled expectations.

Tom Hanks and Bruce Willis play their parts with candor but their characterization does not attain glory because of the limitations implicit in the attempt to convert a masterpiece into a movie. The protagonist of The Bonfire of the Vanities is a hero and a mere mortal and a villain in curious measures, a character so contrived that even an actor of Tom Hank's caliber fails to portray the complexity in an effective manner. Bruce Willis though has an easier task of enacting a drunkard, sometimes incompetent but finally lucky journalist and he plays his part with usual flair but no distinction.

The script has been modified from the novel to provide an ending more becoming of a Hollywood production, with the hero not ending in the predicament where he found himself in the book. However while the novel had the readers dulled into realization of the death of the vanities, the movie lets the audience feel flattered by a Hollywood finish. The book's ending is too hard hitting, the movie's merely filmy. The eternal challenge of conforming reality to art while conforming art to reality again gets the better of both the artists - the director as well as the writer.

either barely watchable or almost unwatchable.......2007-04-29

adapted from a book that the main character and its author both got an overblown self-important, self-centered pump-up ego as large as a 4-wheel bigfoot pickup truck; those 4 biggest off-road rugged tires only made the truck itself on top look like a matchbox model from toys-r-us.
both of the book and the film were among the worst i've ever encountered. tom wolfe is like tom clancy, both trying so hard to put their own images into their books, making their main characters to either become rich and famous celebrities or become the president of the united states. dream on, man, if that's your american dream.

This Bonfire Burns Eternal!.......2007-01-25

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.

Unjustly criticized by insane fans of the novel.......2006-08-29

It happens every time that a novel is turned into a mainstream film. Fans of the book just go crazy if the screenplay and execution of the film aren't an exact replica of the written novel. I've never made or written a film in my lifetime, but I am guessing that it would be tough to fit a 600 page book into a 2-hour film without taking some shortcuts. Even I fall into this category sometimes, and I can understand that if you really loved a book, you would hate to see the film version turn out to be a complete horror-show. But even I have come to realize that to enjoy the film version of a novel, you must go into the movie with absolutely no preconceived notions of what to expect. Film and literature are just too different from each other to make a smooth transition.

Having said that, almost everyone knows the plot of the book/movie. Sherman McCoy and his mistress, Maria, are lost in the Bronx one night. Avoiding details, Sherman and Maria get caught up in a sticky situation with a couple of youths, and in the scuffle, one of them gets hit by the car while Maria is driving. This incident turns into a city-wide scandal. Al Sharpton-inspired Reverend Bacon starts appealing to the black community. District Attorney and mayorial candidate Weiss decides to use the incident for political advantage. Journalist Peter Fallow sees an opportunity to remove his career from the gutter by having "exclusive rights" to the story. From there, the story revolves around Sherman's battle with the courts, media, and community.

The film's pacing is a little off at some points, but the acting ensemble pulls the film through all the moments that feel like they might be getting boring. Morgan Freeman stands out in an unfortunately small role as the judge presiding over Sherman's case. His speech at the end of the movie is one of the best acting moments in his career, in my opinion. Tom Hanks and Bruce Willis don't exactly give the best performances of their career, but they do an adequate job of presenting the characters for what they are. A lot of the fans of the book criticize the film because they think that the movie's characters aren't as selfish, greedy, and manipulative as they are in the book. I simply believe that the filmmakers didn't think that the movie's humor would come across as much if the viewer was inclined to absolutely despise each and every character of interest.

If you haven't read the novel, I would highly recommend this film to any movie fan. It's funny, interesting, and has some very good social commentary along the way. If you've read the book, however, stay away unless you have an open mind and an understanding of what the words "film adaptation" mean when you put them together...

Maybe this was the less convincing film in the career of De Palma!.......2006-06-20

The bestseller of Tom Wolfe well deserved a better treatment, much more incisive and caustic gaze. Maybe Robert Altman seemed to be the most indicated filmmaker to direct it, due the secondary plots demanded to emerge with major firmness.

Something was wrong with De Palma; perhaps he did not feel comfortable with this material. There is very stylized approach and the character definitively strand in the mere anecdote.

Consider for instance, the level of the cast: Tom Hanks, Morgan Freeman two future Oscar winners) Melanie Griffith and Bruce Willis; the script possessed enough force to ignite the screen, but...

I really hope someday when De Palma decides to make his personal self biography, we know about what was going on behind stage.

Average customer rating:

Bonfire of the Vanities
Starring: Tom Hanks
Manufacturer: Warner Home Video
ProductGroup: DVD
Binding: DVD

General | Comedy | Genres | DVD | Video

4-for-3 Comedy | 4-for-3 DVD | Stores | DVD | Video

4-for-3 All DVDs | 4-for-3 DVD | Stores | DVD | Video

DVDs Under $7.49 | Today's Deals in DVD | Special Features | DVD | Video

( B ) | Titles | Features | DVD | Video
ASIN: B000GAKBPS
Release Date: 2005-11-29

Average customer rating:

Classic book, average movie
either barely watchable or almost unwatchable
This Bonfire Burns Eternal!
Unjustly criticized by insane fans of the novel
Maybe this was the less convincing film in the career of De Palma!

The Bonfire of the Vanities [Region 2]
Starring: Tom Hanks , Bruce Willis , Melanie Griffith , Kim Cattrall , and Saul Rubinek
Director: Brian De Palma
ProductGroup: DVD
Binding: DVD

General | Comedy | Genres | DVD | Video

( B ) | Titles | Features | DVD | Video
Similar Items:

Barbarians at the Gate
Nothing in Common
Volunteers
Punchline
The Man with One Red Shoe

ASIN: B00004RYZP

Amazon.com

Customer Reviews:

Classic book, average movie.......2007-05-04

either barely watchable or almost unwatchable.......2007-04-29

This Bonfire Burns Eternal!.......2007-01-25

Unjustly criticized by insane fans of the novel.......2006-08-29

Maybe this was the less convincing film in the career of De Palma!.......2006-06-20

Average customer rating:

The Bonfire of the Vanities [Region 2]
Starring: Tom Hanks , Bruce Willis , Melanie Griffith , Kim Cattrall , and Saul Rubinek
Director: Brian De Palma
ProductGroup: DVD
Binding: DVD

General | Comedy | Genres | DVD | Video

( B ) | Titles | Features | DVD | Video
ASIN: B00004SPVI

60 Minutes - The Man in the White Suit (November 22, 1998)

Average customer rating:

60 Minutes - The Man in the White Suit (November 22, 1998)

Manufacturer: CBS
ProductGroup: DVD
Binding: DVD

Description

Airdate: 11/22/98 Morley Safer profiles the great American author Tom Wolfe, known as much for his white suits and dapper demeanor as he is for his satirical, mega-novels, some of which have been made into major movies such as "The Right Stuff" and "Bonfire of the Vanities."

Average customer rating:

The Bonfire of the Vanities [Region 2]
Starring: Tom Hanks , Bruce Willis , Melanie Griffith , Kim Cattrall , and Saul Rubinek
Director: Brian De Palma
ProductGroup: DVD
Binding: DVD

General | Comedy | Genres | DVD | Video

( B ) | Titles | Features | DVD | Video
ASIN: B00004VYLV

DVD:

DVD

DVD

DVD

Write and Unite

Meeting of the Spirits : DVD

Cambridge Spies [2003]

DVD: I Confess

Winnie Puuh - Spaß im Frühling