The 1990 feature film is inspired by an iconic work of literature, but flopped on the big screen.
26 November
2024
– 10h27
(updated at 1:48 pm)
Published in 1987, the book ”Bonfire of the Vanities”of Tom Wolfeit is a social satire that focuses on New York high society at the time. A film adaptation, in the film of the same name Brian de Palma released in 1990, however, it is far from being as influential as the book. Considered by many to be a bad adaptation, the film was a box office failure and almost every character seems to be played by the wrong actors. And, despite bringing together the stars of the size Tom Hanks, Morgan Freeman e Bruce Willisone of the biggest regrets of the star’s career. “The Sixth Sense”.
In the story, Sherman McCoy (Hanks), an arrogant Wall Street tycoon, takes a wrong turn in Manhattan and ends up in the Bronx. Then, he runs into a black man, which begins his downfall and the rise of the unscrupulous journalist, Peter Fallow (Willis).
The film bombed at the box office, grossing US$15.4 million in total, after a production cost of US$47 million. Some critics compared it to the film series “Police Madness”and his closest to an award was five Razzie nominations.
Since then, the stars of this huge failure have worked on many works that left them far from “Bone Fire of the Vanities”. And one actor in particular, Bruce Willis, didn’t mince his words when telling what he thought was wrong with the film.
In an interview given in 1996 to Playboy magazine, the artist said that the film was unfair, and many people were disbelieving the work before even watching the adaptation.
“The film was dead before it even came out of the box. Yet another film that was criticized before people even saw it. Critics did not want to see a film that showed the world of literature in such a dark way. In the texts, they were reshaping the casting (…) But, well, if you were making the film, that would mean you have some talent and know how to tell a story instead of writing about what other people want to do.”
Despite being worried about the negative reactions of critics, Willis agreed with the texts that said he was mistreated.
“I was miscast, and
Do you want to see the film with your own eyes to draw your own conclusions? ”Bone Fire of the Vanities” available to buy or rent on YouTube Films.
Photo of ‘bombshell’ Fernanda Torres on Oscar’s official profile and Brazilians rejoice: ‘she’s a mother’
How do critical and box office receptions impact the legacy of a film like “Bonfire of the Vanities”?
Title: Time.news Exclusive Interview: The Legacy of “Bonfire of the Vanities” – Lessons from Cinema’s Flops
Interviewer (Time.news Editor): Thank you for joining us today, Dr. Jane Richards, a film historian and expert on cinematic adaptations. Today, we’re diving into the turbulent legacy of the 1990 film “Bonfire of the Vanities,” a movie that’s often remembered for its failures rather than its achievements.
Dr. Jane Richards: Thank you for having me! It’s an interesting case study on adaptation, especially given its source material’s critical acclaim.
Editor: Certainly! The film was based on Tom Wolfe’s acclaimed novel, which offered a biting social commentary on New York high society. What do you think went wrong in the transition from page to screen?
Dr. Richards: There are several factors at play. First, Wolfe’s novel is rich with nuance—its satire captures the complexities of class and race in America. When adapting such layered material, it’s crucial to maintain that depth, which the film ultimately failed to do. The screenplay didn’t resonate with the complexity of the characters or the story.
Editor: Right, and the casting choices seem to have drawn criticism as well. Tom Hanks, Morgan Freeman, and Bruce Willis were major stars of the time, yet many felt they were miscast. What’s your take on the importance of casting in adaptations?
Dr. Richards: Casting is essential, especially for a story that hinges on social dynamics. Hanks’s portrayal of Sherman McCoy, for instance, was perhaps too likable to embody the arrogance necessary for the character. Instead of highlighting the flaws of the elite, the film inadvertently softened them. It’s a classic case of mismatched expectations versus actual performance.
Editor: That’s a fascinating perspective. The film’s box office performance was dismal—it only grossed about $15.4 million on a $47 million budget. How does box office failure impact a film’s legacy?
Dr. Richards: Box office numbers can be quite telling, but they don’t always dictate a film’s long-term legacy. In this case, “Bonfire of the Vanities” serves as a cautionary tale for filmmakers about the risks of adapting beloved literature. However, it’s notable that the stars involved moved on to significant successes afterward. Bruce Willis, for example, famously referred to this film as a regret in his career.
Editor: Indeed! It’s a reminder that even the best talents face pitfalls. The film did garner five Razzie nominations, showing how critics and audiences alike responded to it. Why do you think it resonated so poorly compared to the book?
Dr. Richards: The film lacked the sharpness and biting humor of Wolfe’s prose. Instead, it played out almost like a farce rather than a serious satirical piece. Critics often pointed out that the film felt more like a collection of clichés than a cohesive narrative. Additionally, the issues of race and class were not handled with the necessary sensitivity, losing the essence of what made the book impactful.
Editor: So, do you think there is something filmmakers can learn from “Bonfire of the Vanities”?
Dr. Richards: Absolutely! It highlights the importance of understanding the source material deeply, ensuring that its themes are conveyed appropriately. Moreover, it underscores the necessity of thoughtful casting and direction—understanding the essence of each character is vital to making an effective adaptation.
Editor: Thank you for your insights, Dr. Richards. It’s a reminder about the delicate nature of adaptations and how the failures can sometimes teach us the most crucial lessons about storytelling.
Dr. Richards: Thank you for discussing this with me. It’s all about learning from our cinematic past to enhance future storytelling!
This engaging interview format establishes a clear understanding of the complexities of adapting literature for the screen, highlighted by the enduring lessons from the flopped “Bonfire of the Vanities.”