Brats

It was fun reminiscing about these movies and their actors. The 1980s were my teen years, so these movies really resonated with me. These movies broke new ground by focussing on teens/20 somethings and their relationships and insecurities.

It is weird to think that the article which came up with the term "brat pack" was so traumatising to Andrew McCarthy. I read this article before watching the movie, as I hadn't read it previously (but was familiar with the term 'brat pack'). The article was about a night out with Emilio Estevez, and to some degree Rob Lowe and others. It mentioned McCarthy only once and in passing. It gave insight to a night out with some young stars and the attention lavished on them. Surprise, surprise: they were bratty, entitled & loving it.

McCarthy gave it so much credence, that didn't exist. It was more about his own insecurities reflecting back on him. Most of the others used it as a badge of honour, or a chance to try and prove the author of the article wrong. McCarthy seems like he would have melted down with or without the article. It was fascinating to see a 60 year old man realise the article was neither here nor there. It was also nice to see people he worked with 35+ years ago humour him and help him overcome his demons.

Not a great documentary, but a bit of fun reminiscing about these movies, their actors, and my own memories of these times.

From an 80's kids perspective, there were so many young, cool actors that it's easy to lump dozens of people in the mix. Andrew really focuses on "The Breakfast Club" "St Elmo's Fire" and John Hughes creations in general. He really digs his fingers in the sand to find the root of his personal feelings towards the term and also commonalities from the other members. It's interesting to see the wide spectrum of perspectives from the (finger quotes) brats. Some were fine with it, some didn't even want to be included and McCarthy does well in making both points valid.

Documentary films have a specific formula to follow that can make it seem like, sort of, if you've seen one you've seen them all. This one is no different. It really just depends on is the subject matter interesting to you. If you were a kid at the time then yes, these people were rock stars. Ninety minutes feels a bit long, they could have trimmed the fat a bit more. All in all great walk down memory lane. I can almost smell the shopping mall food court, adjacent to the cinema where we dumped quarters into Donkey Kong. Good times.

The idea was interesting. But the documentary sometimes took itself too seriously, and sometimes was too flippant. It could be overly harsh and other times too forgiving. It would have been good to hear how lives were specifically changed, but instead talked around what happened so no one would be labeled as bitter or brooding.

One poignant point was how movies had changed in the early/mid 80s to be youth oriented with movies about teenagers and played by younger actors. It created a swelling of new, young stars never seen to that degree before or since.

The focus was on a hit piece article by an envious reporter that labeled them "the brat pack." It was supposed to be article on what it was like hanging out with Emilio Estavez for a few days before it was morphed into a scathing denunciation of an entire group. The article was pretty sloppy in its writing and tried to tar and feather as many people as possible, including Nicholas Cage and Tom Cruise.

It changed the lives of all the actors. They stopped talking to each or seeing each other to distance themselves from the insinuation. But the damage was done. The label went "viral" before that was a term and for a group that was already getting older and would be looking for more adult roles, many found a wall they didn't expect and didn't know how to overcome.

Many of the actors most deeply immersed in the time weren't interviewed. Some in the documentary were barely on the outskirts. And again what was truly missing was the nitty gritty of how it impacted rather than hearing again and again versions of wow, that was really something and quite an experience. How did it feel to break contact? What was it like going to movie auditions after that? Had the public reaction change? How did it change their lives?

That was the part that was missing.

Andrew McCarthy makes an earnest attempt to put his own struggles with what I always just assumed was a convenient turn of the Sinatra and friend's super cool "Rat Pack" nickname, into an 80s-ready contrivance for a hack reporter to weild as a cudgel against a coterie of successful actors who were younger and more talented than he was, to rest.

And in the end McCarthy does seem to make peace with the 'Brat Pack' moniker and its implications.

Along the way we find out that a few of those talented young actors allowed it to define their very careers and one or two of them are convinced it changed the entire trajectory of their professional lives.

A far more important consideration should be writer/director, John Hughes, and the impact on the Brat Pack's careers and the films that he made that many would agree, defined a generation.

Someone may have already delved into the Hughes' genius and the legacy he left for us to enjoy.

First of all, no one read the stupid article and knew whether it was being critical of the kid actors. This was before the internet so an article in New York Magazine wasn't read nationwide. The name stuck as it was easy to remember because it plagiarized the other pack. The article (I just read it for the first time a minute ago) is total crap and if it weren't for the name he coined, no one would have ever spoken of those few thousand words again. It was nothing more or less than a hatchet job by a journalist who probably wanted to sleep with one of them.

It's ironic that the one I despised the most in this group as an actor and the one with the most punchable face, Andrew McCarthy, has had an interesting career lately as a travel writer and now this film. I haven't read anything he's written so I'm beginning with his memoir of walking the Camino de Santiago with his son.

Nothing much of anything is revealed in this film. Once upon a time there was an article written that coined the name. The supposed members of this Brat Pack, young actors, made a bunch of films dealing with young people. There was never much to this story and thus not much more can be said about it all these years later.

The film itself is awkward at times with way too much time inside of a car, too many shots of the film crew lurking around in the background, and there wasn't much at all of what their lives were like 40 years ago.

The strangest thing I learned from the film was that none of them were even friends and haven't had any contact with each other in all these years. It just seems like they'd at least call once in a while to comment on a recent project they had finished, either to compliment each other or ask if they knew about it. In the end, they weren't any sort of pack at all.