The subject of cross-movie cameos has been on my mind for a few weeks… actually it pops up often and I bring it up with friends and they don’t usually cite much nor have anything in mind on the topic outright.
It piques my interest and amuses me when it happens though: A character from a movie shows up at random in another film. It’s just a passing moment for people who don’t know or who haven’t seen many movies. It’s a laugh or amusing for others who know movies and cinema.
Space Force? Why? Is that a progressive attempt by an administration whose actions and deeds are too commonly regressive in ethical, moral, and social standards? No, no… It’s a distraction. Nothing more.
There is a progressive argument for something like this, but the idea of taking warfare off the planet simply amounts to throwing money away and an attempt at shifting focus away from the ethical, moral and social misdeeds by Current Occupant.
That said, the entire concept and the entire direction of this administration has me thinking of a film I saw once and didn’t care for. It’s fictitious circumstances, and yet seems oddly fitting for the picture of society in the film.
There’s one movie from the 1980’s that I still find as an asset, the whole perspective is told in such a way that it builds the protagonist in a comical and entertaining way. It’s a movie that stood as a benchmark to be met or exceeded for teen comedies, not just in the 80’s but in cinema, in general, moving forward from that point forward.
“Ferris Bueller, you’re my heer-oh.”
Yet what leads me to this write up is a negative. One line of dialog from Mister Ferris Bueller jumped into my head this morning, a line which I have long known from a scene I’ve long known… And the current world of politics and the grand motivator for the Dotard in Covfefe, Donald J. Trump, popped into my mind.
Is it fitting I link Ferris, Cameron and Sloan’s altercation at Chez Quis restaurant to Trump? Or is it a contradiction: Some kids who are members of the general masses try to get lunch at a high class restaurant in the Chicagoland area? I’m comparing something for this scene to a sitting President of the United States who is high class and thinks he knows populism while he is totally disconnected to the general populous.
Just to cut to the chase, Ferris’ entire concept of getting lunch at Chez Quis starts with him pretending to be Abe Froman, the Sausage King of Chicago. The idea sets off Cameron and Sloan as the maitre’d is not going along with Ferris’ con attempt.
It’s Ferris’ first-person, direct-to-the-camera reaction response to Cameron and Sloan that just seems to explain Trump’s inspiration for continued carelessness…
“A: You can never go too far. B: If I’m going to get busted, it is not going to be by a guy like that.”
A: Donald Trump is going too far. Regularly. The welfare of America is not what’s driving him as-so-much self-gain. B: The question must be asked if Special Counsel Robert Mueller is the “guy-like-that” or someone else. There’s too much evidence in the Trump-Russia probe to expect Mueller not to end up busting Trump. If it’s not him that does it, it will be Congress in one way or another.
I digress; comparing Trump to Bueller is an insult to Ferris Bueller and the ageless piece of cinema from director John Hughes.
I kvetched recently about one little line of dialog hitting me in a painful way from the 1993 hi, The Fugitive. It was one sign of the on-the-go work that changed the script to the film we know… But one line irked me.
What’s inspired this write up doesn’t irk me in the filmmaking sense as-so-much the curious viewer who is into the movie and the lead character. This isn’t a flaw, but it’s a gargantuan scene that never is seen by the viewers during the build-up to the climax and finale of 1998’s The Truman Show. Continue reading →
You ever love a movie and yet see a glaring error in a scene, be it a gaffe by an actor, dialog failure, or something physically taking place in a scene that marks it as a blunder from one degree to another? I’ve got that hounding me right now with a movie I’ve always held in high regard. It’s a flick that’s had more flaws popping up when I think about it – but that’s opinion on my part and evident mostly due to watching the movie too many times and being exposed to it too much in pop culture or by chance on cable.
And, really, this flaw I note is just opinion. It’s dialog in a passing scene of the 1993 hit, “The Fugitive”. Continue reading →
As far as I know, this could have already played out but…
One scene, out of context, that I find hysterical (in context and as part of the film, it’s still funny but not as serious) is the opening confrontation of Mr. Miyagi and sensei John Kreese in The Karate Kid Part II. Forget Daniel LaRusso, forget the Cobra Kai students – just the fact Miyagi is being bigger in making his physical confrontation. Continue reading →
A man with no political experience finds his way into the Oval Office and becomes President of the United States of America. He’s got to learn more than just the day-to-day job at the office, which is vastly different from the day-to-day world which he’s used to.
Yeah, that sounds awfully familiar and vastly understated for the moment, doesn’t it? Perhaps it’s the previous version of the above summary that help some people give Donald Trump so much leeway to be so out-of-character and non-traditional as President? The problem with that is how the previous version wasn’t egotistical and profit driven, nor was he so ideological or politically driven that he alienated so many.
After 114 words, you should be wonder who the hell I’m making reference to with this “previous version” stuff… Continue reading →
Some movies end with what you see as a clean ending. Some movies end with aspects of the story still open for speculation when you care about the characters involved. I usually end up thinking of 1993’s The Fugitive and wondering what happens next with Dr. Richard Kimble and Deputy Sam Gerard. Yeah, they drive off and it looks like Kimble will be freed, but that’s a story unto itself (due process) as well as the story of Kimble vs. Gerard playing out directly in a non-hunt fashion.
But a 24 year old movie isn’t the focus of this post… No, no, I’m going back further into film history with a teen classic. It’s comedy goodness and teen angst mixed into one utopian ball of Chicagoland adventure and hilarity.
You ever seen Ferris Bueller’s Day Off? Of course you have… or at least you damned well better consider it in the immediate future. The 1986 film is dated but the basic point is teens skipping school.
While Ferris is the focus, there is another storyline that is not resolved on screen with the movie’s end (“Life moves pretty, if you don’t stop and look around once in a while you could miss it.” Repeated by Bueller to end the flick… Well, at least the main movie. It’s actually Ferris telling you, post credits, the film is over and you should go home now). Ferris’ best friend, Cameron Frye, has a mess to deal with: A 1961 Ferrari GT, the love and passion of his father Morris Frye.
It’s Cameron who epitomizes teen angst mostly in the film. He holds strong contempt toward his father to say the least. In fact, it’s the climax of the film where Cameron explodes and it results in the demolition of the Ferrari:
And while Ferris vows to take the blame (and the disaster that would come with it for his personal life), Cameron accepts responsibility himself. It’s his confrontation to have and he’ll deal with the consequences. (Side note: Sloan, Ferris’ girlfriend, thinks this was part of Ferris’ scheme for the day off from start to finish. I’ll leave it to you to judge if that’s what the deal was or not).
So, Ferris and Sloan leave, everyone’s returning home… And what happens with Cameron Frye in his confrontation with his father???
The first conclusion someone could draw from this is, “whatever it was, it wasn’t film worthy or John Hughes would have put it in the flick.” That is a good way to dismiss the confrontation but it doesn’t tell you the story of that evening for Cameron. It’s too loaded and too baited in the climax to truly be something to just brush off.
Yet, I think about the confrontation of Cameron and his father (I picture Morris Frye as actor Terry Kiser who you may know better as Bernie Lomaxamong other roles – no, I don’t imagine he’s dead) and what I see is an unexpected reaction. Cameron is in the garage, stern, strong willed, ready for war, and a suited Morris Frye, fresh home from work, has walked in on the open garage.
“What are you doing in here? I thought you were sick?” He’s walking in and doesn’t see the car… but sees the smashed rear window. He slows down and approaches without saying a word. He looks down and sees his beloved, classic automobile smoldering in the hilly ravine behind the garage and starts a mix of crying and laughing.
I can see Cameron stepping up immediately and taking responsibility in one way or another – perhaps by attacking over love for the car by dad; loving the car and generally hating the family… And yet, Morris’ reaction isn’t out of heartbreak, anger and disgust, it’s that cracking up aspect. He stops Cameron not by yelling, but by putting his arm around him while keeping up his hysterics. The incident rings Morris Frye just as much as it scares and stings Cameron… But I see it as a message that Cameron has grown up. I see it as a message for Morris that his material dream is done and it’s back to reality.
Does Cameron get in trouble? Oh, yeah, yeah, but it’s a whole different situation than what you’d expect. It’s not a war between the Frye family members. I just can’t picture how that goes. I can’t picture how Cameron’s mom (who is in Decatur, Illinois during the movie) plays into things.
Maybe I’m dead wrong, but I just see everything twisting at this critical non-film climactic moment. What’s built up as hate and angst in the movie deflates with Morris’ reaction to the end of his love affair. Cameron’s not the sickly boy any more, and my car isn’t where I can invest myself in full.
That’s drawing conclusions on my part, and the point is that there are times in cinema where things are left to have that happen. What happens with Cameron Frye is a big angle as he is a big angle.