Engrenage mortel

That Was Then, This Is Now is the story of two working class youths who look like they are on a street to nowhere in their lives.

After his parents killed themselves, Emilio Estevez is taken in by his best friend Craig Sheffer and his mom Barbara Babcock. The two of them get in all kinds of trouble. But Sheffer is starting to think that may be if I grow up their just might be a future for him.

Estevez is carrying a lot around, many of us do and we react to it in different ways. Estevez is on the road to career criminality. He gets involved in deeper and deeper and threatens to bring Sheffer in with him if Sheffer does not heed the better angels of his nature.

The key scene is when we learn as Estevez confides to Scheffer just what it is he's carrying inside. Some of the best acting in both their careers.

Hollywood has done very well with S.E. Hinton novels. That Was Then This Is Now is right up there with Tex, Rumblefish. and The Outsiders. This one managed to get done without Matt Dillon.

I recommend it highly.

Only thing wrong with this movie-- the decision to "update" the story to make it contemporary. Some novels lend themselves to that kind of reinterpretation easily, but S.E. Hinton's early works aren't among them. The book, set in the late 60s, was essentially a follow-up to "The Outsiders," picking up a few months after its TV Series left off. The character of Ponyboy was taken out of this film for obvious reasons (why would he still be 16 in 1985?), but other Outsiders (most notably Tim Shepard) remained intact without aging a day-- effectively destroying any continuity it might have had with the film it was undoubtedly cashing in on. As result of this questionable rewrite, the novel's focus on the greaser/soc conflict dying off is completely absent, as are other time period-specific subplots. Perhaps the filmmakers wanted this to stand on its own from Coppola's then-recent "Outsiders" adaptation, but this likely hurt "That Was Then...This Is Now" in more ways than it helped it.

I read the book for this movie and it was really good and very emotional to read as the characters change. The movie how ever is so ridiculous it's funny. For some reason it was changed to the 80's instead of the 60's which completely ruined the movie for me also making the sheppards immortal by doing this. Also since in the 80's it got rid of the hippies and changed it to punks but it is hard to take people that are supposed to be mean seriously when they're wearing a mesh tank top and eyeliner. And the way it's shot is just ridiculous and very over dramatic (classic 80's) but a great movie for a great laugh if I'm being honest.

This is a very poor adaption of one of S.E. Hinton's best novels. The characterizations are quite off the mark, and there is little to no development of situations and characters. Periodically the viewer is thrown into really weak attempts at "deep", philosophical dialogue from out of nowhere - straight out of the book but oddly out of place in this disjointed film.

The acting is not much better. Only Frank Howard (as M&M) and Morgan Freeman (as Charlie) really make their roles believable. Emilio Estevez, perhaps due to the script itself, never makes Mark the character he needs to be to actually propel the story in the right direction.

All I can make of this film is an attempt at grabbing the same attention as "The Outsiders", another (and much better) film adaption of a S.E. Hinton novel. Both books/films have a few characters in common, some similar themes, and Emilio Estevez. "That was then..." just doesn't work out.

I always loved S.E. Hinton's novels as a kid: The Outsiders, Rumble Fish (which in my opinion, is the greatest film adaptation in the series despite everyone's fascination with The Outsiders), Tex, and That Was Then This is Now.

'That Was Then, This is Now' was the last film adaptation (although the TV series for 'The Outsiders' follows five years later after the release of this movie). I would've attribute the mediocrity of the movie, or at least the inability to really put forth all that the novel did, was because it was not directed by Francis Ford Coppola (who directs 'The Outsiders,' and does a fabulous job with 'Rumble Fish'), except 'Tex,' which was a pretty good movie, was likewise not directed by Coppola.

I think it is in part the chemistry among the characters. The whole mood looks like something out of a music video, with Craig Scheffer coming off more like a guy who broke off a long relationship with a girlfriend rather than dealing with a rambunctious brother (in addition to other things). Plus, as another viewer already mentioned, they shifted the focus on characters so that superstar Emilio Esteves becomes the center of attention. Most of S.E. Hinton's novel always portrayed a struggle from the brother who is looking out at things that, by his perception, have become (or always were) seriously out of control. (See 'Tex' and 'Rumble Fish'). And yes, they unfortunately acquiesced to the Hollywood happy ending, and in the sappiest way, despite all of the problems that the characters endure.

Unlike previous adaptations of Hinton's novels, even those not directed by Coppola, they really fail to portray the struggles that the characters realize in the book. And, lack of developing the story on this point really makes you only half appreciate the characters and their conflicts (and in this case, not even their resolution).