quote:

---

Originally posted by Devolution:
Helen Slater is totally the worst in this.

---

"There is no right or wrong.. Only opinion.."
 

---

Posted by Valley (Member # 1322) on :
 
I actually saw "Bright Lights, Big City" at the theater and the while the cast was stellar, but I struggled to watch Marty McFly as an addict. It just didn't sit well for me at the time and while the story was suppose to be serious, it fell short on plotline and was rather boring in my opinion.
 

---

Posted by mamamiasweetpeaches (Member # 1715) on :
 
I watched this movie about 20 years ago (Kiefer was in it! Hello?! What choice did I have?!) and even I didnt make it to the end!
And like most people have started- Kiefer, Phoebe and Michael J are all very likable people....you KNOW a movie is a dud when they are in it and it STILL manages to stink! Hahaha
I heard the book is good though.
 

---

Posted by logan5 (Member # 1467) on :
 
I'm in the minority then. I hated it when it came out, saw it again a couple of years later and found myself liking it. There's no question Fox was miscast, but he tries hard. It isn't a 'fun' film, but it has its plus points.

I often think of Bright Lights and 'Less Than Zero' as being very similar: They were both based on bestselling (fashionable) books, they were both about excess in the 80's, they both had miscast actors in the lead, and they were both flawed films that failed commercially. But even so... they both have their merits.
 

---

Posted by JAYLEE (Member # 6345) on :
 
Less than zero had miscast actors in the lead?????

Explain yourself, young man!
 

---

Posted by xchazx (Member # 7158) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by logan5:
I'm in the minority then. I hated it when it came out, saw it again a couple of years later and found myself liking it. There's no question Fox was miscast, but he tries hard. It isn't a 'fun' film, but it has its plus points.

I often think of Bright Lights and 'Less Than Zero' as being very similar: They were both based on bestselling (fashionable) books, they were both about excess in the 80's, they both had miscast actors in the lead, and they were both flawed films that failed commercially. But even so... they both have their merits.

---

i don't think Less Than Zero had any characters miscast. i would love to know who you thought was miscast. maybe it wasn't a commercial success, but no doubt it's one of my favorite 80's movies about the 80's.

Bright Lights, Big City was an ok movie. i haven't seen it in so long i don't remember much about it. sometimes i think i mix it up with The Secret of My Success, another movie i need to check out again.
 

---

Posted by mamamiasweetpeaches (Member # 1715) on :
 
Andrew MacCarthy and Jamie Gertz are both attractive but GREAT ACTORS??? No. (ducks)
 

---

Posted by logan5 (Member # 1467) on :
 
I think Robert Downey was perfect. Spader was right for his part. Gertz (as mamamia said) isn't a great actress, but then she's playing a pretty, not-too-bright rich girl, so I guess it was fair casting (not that she isn't bright in real life - I wouldn't know - but she seems that way onscreen).

It was McCarthy I think was miscast (Just like Fox). Now don't get me wrong - I like Andrew McCarthy, and as I said, I like Less Than Zero - but with Robert Downey acting up a storm, Clay needed to be someone with real gravitas who showed a lot by doing a little, he was also meant to be one step away from the Robert Downey character in terms of type. If anything, I can see James Spader as Clay, but McCarthy came across as a clean cut goody-two-shoes, which he wasn't meant to be.

But as I said, I like the film. I just think that the lead was miscast, and as with Bright Lights it wasn't their performance that was the problem as much as the type of personality they projected onscreen.

Let's put it this way: I didn't believe Robert Downey would've partied with Andrew McCarthy, nor did I believe that Jami Gertz would've dated him.
 

---

Posted by mamamiasweetpeaches (Member # 1715) on :
 
Thats very interesting: James Spader in the Clay role. That could have worked!

Whenever people say Robert Downey Jr was great in this movie I have to question if he was really "acting"? I know thats mean, but looking back on some of the strories we've heard about him over the years....


yeah, he acts rings around McCarthy and Gertz which REALLY brings to light how much they under-act? Maybe thats it.

Also....I always find people who didnt read the book enjoy LESS THAN ZERO more than people who read it....cuz like you say....Since when is Clay such a Good Guy anyway????
 

---

Posted by JAYLEE (Member # 6345) on :
 
You got it right mamamia... McCarthy was an under-actor, he used his eyes and body language to convey what his character was thinking and feeling! Jami Gertz might not have had the acting chops to fill the role of Blair at this time, but I thought that inexperience kinda worked to her advantage, and she came off as slightly naive and insecure, which was what the character was anyway!
 

---

Posted by Burnett (Member # 9924) on :
 
I kinda liked this movie. I thought Michael did well in the main lead. The movie is meant seriously, but I always looked at it as a fast and fun ride.
 

---

Posted by aTomiK (Member # 6575) on :
 
Ok, i´m gonna watch this tonight, never seen it before.

I wonder how can it have so many great actors and get so much hate here
 

---

Posted by aTomiK (Member # 6575) on :
 
Well, i watched this last night and it was decent little time waster.
Michael J. Fox was ok and it was nice to see Charlie Schlatter.

But why is Phoebe Cates even mentioned on the cover because she wasn´t even a co-star
with her 2 minutes screentime. Major disappointment.

Double vodka, Columbia´s finest, coma baby...
I´ll probably never going to watch this again
 

---

Posted by Leo Logan (Member # 9206) on :
 
This movie was helmed by James Bridges, who also made "Urban Cowboy" and "Perfect", both with John Travolta in the 80's. It also turned out to be the last film he directed before he died in 1993.
 

---

UBB.classic™ 6.7.0