Posts Tagged ‘John Hughes

16
Aug
09

Notes on Movie Music: The Film Reader

Cover of Movie Music: The Film Reader; image courtesy of routledge.com

Cover of Movie Music: The Film Reader; image courtesy of routledge.com

So, one thing I didn’t mention in my indictment of (500) Days of Summer is the soundtrack. While I may have mentioned my thoughts on how music culture is configured in the movie, I didn’t discuss the soundtrack itself: how it serves to bolster the narrative, enforce the movie’s indie-ness, or its commercial success as an ancillary product.

I didn’t discuss it because I don’t really have any opinion on it. I wasn’t particularly familiar with or blown away by the songs in the movie — I thought the music was pleasant. I’d imagine it’s doing a respectable job as its own product and as an extension of the movie’s marketing campaign, though say this while qualifying that running the numbers is now a completely different game than it was, say, in the 1990s, when soundtracks were big business that could easily be reflected by a quick glance at the Billboard charts. Now, we have iTunes, YouTube, Twitter, Facebook groups, online ad campaigns, innumerable blogs, and several other outlets fragmenting the marketplace. But I’d imagine the soundtrack is doing well.

All this is to say that I wondered what the scholars who contributed to Movie Music: The Film Reader would make of the movie’s soundtrack. The anthology is a slim collection of essays edited by Kay Dickenson that was published in 2002 but primarily feature pieces from the 1990s, a decade that I’ve already defined (along with many others) as a peak time for soundtracks, which is reflected in some of the scholars’ inquiries. Perhaps it drove home for me just how temporal the objects of analysis in media studies can be, particularly music. A good reminder, if still a frustrating dillemma.

With that said, I thought I’d briefly highlight some essays that I found useful.

Jeff Smith’s “Structural interactions of the film and record industries” is a fascinating and concise industrial history of the relationship between record labels and film studios from the 1950s on. Starting out as a mutual-benefit relationship, film studios tried to form their own record labels with the intent to fashion albums and recording talent in-house, which was met with little success. As a result, record labels kept the upper-hand from the 1970s on, but left movie studios the opportunity to further develop cross-promotional and synergistic strategies without having to worry about A and R. 

This is interesting to read alongside romanticized notions that the 1970s was a renaissance period for maverick filmmaking that eschewed studio control (I specifically like to think of this story while working out the bureaucratic steps that may have been taken in order for Martin Scorsese to get the rights for The Ronnettes’ “Be My Baby” for Mean Streets).

And, as Smith’s piece was originally published in 1998, I also think of it as a harbinger of deregulation measures and conglomeration to that defined the culture industry at the end of the 20th century.  

Lawrence Grossberg’s “Cinema, Postmodernity, and Authenticity” gives a cursory glance at the importance of rock music in teen pics from the 1950s on, but pays particular attention to movies from the 1980s (specifically the ones aligned with the Brat Pack). He argues that while rock music is meant to indicate an intergenerational upheaval of value systems between establishment parents and rebel kids, movies from the 1980s actually saw teen protagonists questioning and grappling with identity politics while ultimately (or presumably) toeing the line, doing very little to break down gender norms, class divides, racist ideologies, and heterosexist agendas. At the same time, these movies incorporating more a post-modern political sensibility through irony, parody, and reference.

I wonder what Grossberg would say about how French electronic act M83 hails the 1980s, specifically in 2008′s Saturdays = Youth, an album heavily indebted to both the sound and style of the Brat Pack movies and soundtracks. I’m sure he’d get a chuckle out of learning that Anthony Gonzalez, the man behind M83, is in his mid-20s and too young to remember these movies “authentically.”

Kay Dickinson’s “Pop, Speed, Teenagers, and the ‘MTV Aesthetic’” is an interesting look into how teen movies and their soundtracks incorporate the look and sound of MTV, specifically looking at Baz Luhrmann’s 1996 adaptation of William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Claire Danes (a movie dear to my heart — I still have a copy of the soundtrack and nursed a brief crush on DiCaprio when he was at his most androgynous). Dickenson is particularly interested in three aspects:
1) The symbiotic relationship between the highly stylized movie, its soundtrack, and the music videos that accompany both.               
2) The deliberate uniformity of each text’s aesthetic and how they maximize youth-oriented marketing potential for what was widely regarded as a teen movie.
3) How the fast editing style of the movie and music videos popularized by MTV result in visual imperceptability (i.e., that the eye cannot keep up with the images); while a bit of a tangent, this phenomenon reminded me of John Cline’s Flow column about the increasing incomprehensibility of many segments in action films shot on digital camera.

I think there are limits to Dickenson’s argument — the Brat Pack movies or the Hughes-influenced teen pics from the late 1990s, which were not so reliant on fast editing as they were on soundtracks, trendy clothes, slang, and photogenic young actors, talking about their feelings still uphold the MTV aesthetic in my mind, perhaps suggesting that the network did not have a uniform visual style.  

Also, there’s minimal discussion of how Luhrmann’s kinetic style heightened the story’s romantic elements and how this might have played into its intense popularity among teenagers (seriously, I saw this movie dozens of times during my junior high and high school days; I also assume that DiCaprio’s vaunted teen idol status as a result of the movie led him to be cast in Titanic, a movie beloved by kids of my generation, including my friend Brandi, who saw the movie at least sixteen times in theaters and taped the ticket stubs to the wall by her bed). I’d be very curious how Dickenson reads Luhrmann’s visual style against Hughes’s (and Dawson’s Creek creator-wordsmith Kevin Williamson’s) use of dialogue, particularly regarding matters of the heart. 

Lisa A. Lewis’s “A Madonna ‘Wanna-Be’ Story on Film” is a piece I was already familiar with because, as I’ve mentioned numerous times on here, Gender Politics and MTV: Voicing the Difference, from which the essay originally emerged, was a formative text for me as a media studies scholar. 

In this piece, Lewis does a formidable job mapping out a multitude of texts surrounding Madonna in the mid-1980s. There’s star text (Madonna). There’s film text (Susan Seidelman’s 1984 classic Desperately Seeking Susan, starring Rosanna Arquette, who plays a young suburban housewife who becomes obsessed with and later develops a liberating friendship with Susan, a mysterious club denizen, played by Madonna). There’s soundtrack analysis (Lewis particularly pays attention to the club scene where Susan dances to Madonna’s song “Into the Groove”). There’s fan discourse (teen girls and young women — maybe unmentioned young men as well – appropriating the Material Girl’s iconic look, while mutating and individuating it; this development is read alongside the movie, which shows Rosanna’s Roberta becoming Susan, as well as behind-the-scenes goings-on, as Rosanna and Madonna became friends off-camera). There’s even consideration made for how corporate culture feeds into all this, coming to a head when MTV and ABC document a Madonna lookalike fashion show at Macy’s to coincide with the film’s release. In short, a dizzying but lucidly plotted out argument about the power female artists (and their fans) can exert within and outside of an increasingly synergistic media culture. 

Hmmm. Also a reminder of how much I love Desperately Seeking Susan, which I would catch on Comedy Central from time to time when I had cable. I haven’t watched it in a while. May warrant a repeat viewing ASAP.

08
Aug
09

Remembering John Hughes Through Girls: Watts

Watts from Some Kind of Wonderful

Watts from Some Kind of Wonderful

Yesterday, I talked about John Hughes in relation to Iona, Andi’s mentor/boss in Pretty in Pink. But Hughes built his empire not on adults. He primarily wrote for and about teenagers. Some of those teenagers were female characters. Much of that audience was (and continues to be) teenage girls. But much of the focus goes toward teen queens like Claire Standish in The Breakfast Club and Sloane Peterson in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off. Weird girls like Allison Reynolds in The Breakfast Club get some recognition, as do Molly Ringwald’s girls next door: Andi Walsh in Pretty in Pink and Samantha Baker in Sixteen Candles, but both helped cultivate the actress’s status as 1980s’ Teen Queen.

In short, not a love is given to Watts, the female lead of 1987′s Some Kind of Wonderful. And that’s too bad, because I think she’s one of the most interesting female characters Hughes ever wrote. Named for drummer Charlie Watts, my favorite member of The Rolling Stones, Watts is herself a drummer and working-class misfit. She is also played with charm, grit, and tomboyish swagger by Mary Stuart Masterson. She’s also hopefully in love with her best friend, Keith Nelson (played by Eric Stoltz), who is himself crushing hard on popular rich-girl Amanda Jones. In short, it’s a gender-reverse Pretty in Pink, only with a happy ending for the folks who hoped Andi would get together with Ducky. 

Amanda, Keith, and Watts; image taken from lazydork.com

Amanda, Keith, and Watts; image taken from lazydork.com

It’s also fairly gender-queer, with Stoltz playing Ringwald and Masterson playing Jon Cryer, but then taking Ducky’s effeminacy and butching it up. In addition, Watts’s look, demeanor, name, and passion for drumming all align with horror scholar Carol J. Clover’s model for the final girl. As she discusses at length in Men, Women, and Chain Saws: Gender in the Modern Horror Film, the final girl is the lone survivor in many slasher movies and other titles associated with the subgenre. Like Laurie Strode in the Halloween series, Sally Hardesty in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Ellen Ripley in the Alien series, and Sidney Prescott in the Scream trilogy, there is a queerness to Watts that is somewhat androgynous and not conventionally feminine.

So, that might make it easy to bristle at Watts and Keith pairing up at the end of the movie (especially since Watts gets the guy while looking more conventionally feminine – fail). And I do think there’s a valid argument to make for how heterosexuality may contain and stabilize Watts and thus render her as less of a threat, one that was indeed rendered on Masterson’s turn as Idgie Threadgoode in the heteronormative film version of Fanny Flagg’s Fried Green Tomatoes.

Yet, I think this reading may limit female masculinity in Some Kind of Wonderful, as well as potentially play in some sort of homonormativity. Because while there needs to be room to in our culture for the butch lesbian gender warriors Judith Halberstam discusses in her seminal book, Female Masculinity, there also needs to be room for heterosexual female masculinity and masculine girlhood in all its orientations.

Also, I appreciate that Lea Thompson’s Amanda, who could easily be spoiled and mean, is kind and relateable. And despite Watts’s jealousy, we don’t see much bickering between them. In fact, Amanda, who learns that she is too reliant on male affection to inform her self-worth, does Watts a solid by cutting Keith loose to be with her. Thus, boys don’t have to turn girls into enemies.

So, while Watts doesn’t provide the perfect text, she gets us closer to who that girl might be both on screen and in the audience. We couldn’t get closer to it without Mary. Or John. He will be missed.

07
Aug
09

Remembering John Hughes Through Women: Iona

I was gonna do a write-up about Pretty in Pink at some point anyway, but after yesterday’s precedings, doing so takes on a new meaning. As does Ally Sheedy’s utterance that “when you grow up, your heart dies” from The Breakfast Club. As we all probably know by now, writer-director-producer Brat Pack auteur John Hughes died of a heart attack yesterday.

So, John Hughes movies follow me, as they do for many who came of age between 1980 and 2000 (and maybe today?). His movies were a mainstay of my youth, on hand at basically any slumber party or get-together I went to. I just saw The Breakfast Club on cable last weekend when I was visiting my parents. I also just read Lawrence Grossberg’s essay “Cinema, Postmodernity and Authenticity,” which discusses the soundtracks to Hughes movies in depth. 

For whatever it’s worth, my favorite Hughes movie is Ferris Bueller’s Day Off.

Now, eulogizing Hughes doesn’t mean we can’t be critical of his work. For one, there’s obvious issues with racism (Long Duck Dong, *shudder*). For another, he wasn’t the kindest to women. Why does Anthony Michael Hall get to take advantage of the black-out drunk popular girl in Sixteen Candles for laughs and macho acclaim? Why does Judd Nelson get Molly Ringwald at the end of The Breakfast Club after spending the majority of Saturday dentention bullying and debasing her? With the exception of Andi Walsh, most of his kids were upper-middle class. And sometimes his movies are just way to slick, pat, and essentializing in their characterization (hello, Breakfast Club). There are other issues I’m forgetting, so please feel free to contribute (especially if the Hughes legacy means nothing to you).

But one thing I can’t fault the man for is how he used pop music. Pitchfork did a great tribute yesterday, so I’ll link it here.

Extending further, I’d like to highlight two female characters Hughes wrote that I hold dear, relate in some way to the project of this blog, and tend to get broadsided in the conversation. Today, I’ll offer up Iona from Pretty in Pink, written by Hughes and directed by Howard Deutch.

So, I love Pretty in Pink for two reasons.

1. The music kicks ass. And not just the use of OMD’s “If You Leave” or Otis Redding’s “Try a Little Tenderness” or The Psychedelic Furs’ song of same name. Let’s not forget that we also have two New Order songs (including an instrumental version of “Thieves Like Us,” which accompanies Andi Walsh’s prom dress montage). And the use of Echo and the Bunnymen’s “Bring on the Dancing Horses” when rich boy paramour Blaine meets Andi at work melts me.

2. Iona. 

Iona contemplates her next outfit

Iona contemplates her next outfit

Iona was played by Annie Potts (aka Southern feminist interior decorator Mary-Jo Shiveley of Designing Women, aka the other show I’d watch with my mom growing up when we weren’t watching Roseanne). Let’s hear what Potts, Molly Ringwald, and producer Lauren Shuler have to say about both the character and the actress.

Iona is the manager of TRAX, the record store where Molly Ringwald’s Andi works. As an independent business woman, she’d be rad in her own right. That she also makes a lot of her own clothes, puts together great outfits, can put teenage boys in their place, and serve as a surrogate cool aunt/older sister for Andi, who is at once motherless (her mother has abandoned her and daughter and husband) and mothering (she has been recast to the maternal realm by her shellshocked, ineffectual father) is not to be ignored, nor is the multi-generational aspect of this female work-based friendship. She’s also one of the few multidimensional, symphathetic, understanding, and supportive adult figures that Hughes ever wrote for a Brat Pack movie, male or female.

Yet, there are two clear limits to Iona and how Hughes configured her.

1. She’s the one who pushes Andi to go to the prom in the first place, stressing how it’s a vital, normal rite of passage not to be missed by teenagers, no matter how far outside the social margins. However, it’s hard for me to take her pitch seriously when she’s wearing this outfit in the scene.

Iona convincing Andi to go to the prom, wearing this dress.

Iona convincing Andi to go to the prom, wearing this dress.

For one, Iona wants Andi to wear her dress, which may potentially queer their friendship. It certainly evinces an openness and willingness to share, which may also suggest similar class positioning. For another, as Iona’s costumes are such a clear part of her characterization, it’s easy to read the prom dress as something campy and wonderfully disposable — something to try, rip off, throw in the hamper, and trade for some other wonderful, wacky outfit.

2. Not unlike Allison, the basketcase in The Breakfast Club who popular girl Claire makes over to sporto Andy’s clear approval, Iona dresses down to land a man. A really boring guy. A (gasp!) yuppie. This seems to be an unfortunate narrative convention of many movies outside of the Hughes canon — in order to win a man (who may be intimidated by her otherwise), an unconventional woman must make herself totally unremarkable. Again, I can only hope this is merely an outfit she’s trying on. Here’s hoping that the date ended poorly and her date left her with a record stapled to his forehead. Set an example, Iona!

And with that, I bid farewell in the hopes of sparking some midnight viewings of the 1986 classic. Tomorrow, let’s discuss Watts, the masculine female ingenue in 1987′s Some Kind of Wonderful.





 

February 2012
S M T W T F S
« Jan    
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
26272829  

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 65 other followers