Why the Bonfire of the Vanities Flopped - Essay Example

Why the Bonfire of the Vanities Flopped Brian De Palma’s film The Bonfire of the Vanities is notorious for being a box office blunder. It is so well known for this fact that there is still growing speculation as to the cause of the film’s tragic failure. With all of the positive factors that the film had going for it, like an excellent cast in securing Bruce Willis and Tom Hanks, and a screenplay based on a bestselling novel, as well as Christmas day opening, it is undeniable that the film had garnered the necessary anticipation. The only real explanation for the film’s outcome is the unsatisfactory direction of Brian De Palma, and it’s the most believable considering his track record in Hollywood. The only way to truly narrow down all of the possibilities of why this film was such a flop at the Box office is to rationally view all of the contributing factors and then make a sound judgment as to which one is most likely the cause of the film’s failure. In most cases, because the entertainment industry is so fickle, it could be argued that any number of possibilities could have contributed to the cause and that it couldn’t have just been one. But, this particular case is infamous for the very reason that all of the contributing factors have had an excellent track record entering into the conditions of this film production highly recommended (Belton, 1994). The contributing factors being the plot line was highly respected due to the fact that is was based on a bestselling novel, all of the cast was A list, so the only thing working against the film is actually the director. De Palma’s reputation in Hollywood is that of a loner and it stems from his ability to flop due to completely disregarding appealing subject matter. The first two decades of De Palma’s career consisted of films dominated with voyeuristic themes, vulgarity, pornography and violence. He was even nominated for five “Razzie Awards” which are recognized as the worst films ever in Hollywood. While the average person being awarded with this dishonorable achievement might see their career ended, De Palma has managed to maintain his studio support, despite the fact that he is globally viewed by millions of film fans as undeserving and out of place in Hollywood (Belton, 1994). De Palma’s few successes have come through his films either bringing in a decent box office revenue or achieving cult status. These films are Carrie (1976), Scarface (1983), Carlito’s Way (1993), The Untouchables (1987), and Mission: Impossible (1996). This success was deemed to be due to the fact that De Palma had strayed away from his more violent and pornographic film models. The cult success of these films, specifically Scarface combined with what is perceived to be an advanced talent in technical visual skills has led many to believe that it is his choice of subject matter that denies him critical acclaim as a director. But, like previously noted, in the case of The Bonfire Vanities the storyline was already a critically acclaimed novel. For a filmmaker of De Palma’s caliber, it is really on him to make or break the film. In her novel The Devils Candy: The Bonfire of the Vanities Goes to Hollywood, author Julie Salamon does a through recount as to what when on during the filming of De Palma’s blunder. In the opening of the book she notes during the first meeting between De Palma and Tom Hanks that “ …De Palma hadn’t called Hanks downtown to discuss his hair. Warner Bros. had plans to release “The Bonfire of the Vanities” by Christmas and as of January 12 the movie didn’t have a starting date for production and many crucial parts hadn’t been cast. Perhaps the most critical of these parts was that of Maria Ruskin, the Mistress of bond trader Sherman McCoy (Salamon, 1992).” The opening of Salamon’s book implies very clearly that the film’s success was doomed from the very start. De Palma’s original pick for the Ruskin role is Michelle Pfeiffer, but eventually passes on the part and he settles for Melanie Griffith after courting Uma Therman for the part fails. This could also have slightly contributed to the films failure in that many critics have argued Melanie Griffith’s performance in the film is plastic and unbelievable. In De Palma’s defense, there are critiques of the film which argue that the failure of the production is largely due to the subject matter of the film being a major contradiction to Hollywood life. One commenter in Salamon’s interviews noted that “It was a predictable disaster. “Well, perhaps not quite a disaster, if youve never read the book, but a major disappointment if you have. Predictable, because the central point of the book is a scathing indictment of contemporary urban liberalism--and who is Hollywood full of, but contemporary urban liberals? They just couldnt bring themselves to play it straight, and instead softened every blow by turning each complex, vivid character from the book into a caricature, a mere cartoon. The result is no biting satire, just pathetic farce (Salamon, 1992).” While this argument is far reaching, it does pose a potential argument that in relating to the plight of the decadence and corrupt nature of the main characters the actors as well as the director alike would be exercising a form of very real self condemnation. It is believable to think that this would be a very demanding task to ask of the cast, but it is more reasonable to assume like Salamon argues that the film was behind schedule from the start. In the end even the lack luster acting of Tom Hanks, Bruce Willis and Mellanie Griffith falls on the blame of De Palma because he has final cut. The problem is his extensive use of vulgar and violent subject matter has handicapped him from creating a work with any credible human or emotional perspective. He is directing a film with a sensitive subject matter but lacks all form of sensitivity, and all of his films suggest this. In sum, De Palma’s flop at the box office with The Bonfire of the Vanities is entirely due to his own unsatisfactory directing. He has never been nominated for an Academy Award, or for a Golden Globe, despite the fact that he has had unprecedented studio support, in that they allow for all of his failures. In assessing what made The Bonfire of the Vanities flop at the box office, it must be recognized that all of the necessary tools were available, the actors, storyline, studio support, even anticipation, but Brian De Palma just didn’t deliver. There is much speculation as to why this film wasn’t a success, but the truth is the formula of the situation speaks for itself. De Palma has such a negative influence, his contribution to this film weighs down its progress so much that it can’t even be balanced out by the acting of Tom Hanks and Bruce Willis, two guaranteed Box Office draws who also happen to be in the prime of their careers. Work Cited Belton, John (1994). American Cinema/American Culture. New York: The Corporation for Public Broadcasting and New York Center for Visual History. Chion, M. (1994). Audio - Vision: Sound on Screen. New York: Columbia University Press. Kassabian, A. (2001). Hearing Film: Tracking Identifications in Contemporary Hollywood Film Music. New York And London: Routledge. Salamon, Julie (1992). The Devils Candy: The Bonfire of the Vanities Goes to Hollywood Delta. Read More