Molly Ringwald's character in the film is very interesting. Everyone connects John Hughes and Molly Ringwald, especially because in the 80's they made 3 teen films together. "These are exceptional films because it is the figure of a young woman-Ringwald's character in all three- who struggles within or against the class constraints erected within their narratives. In all three films, Molly Ringwald does tend to play somewhat of the same character. In Pretty in Pink, Ringwald's character, Andie, is in a lower class than that of a popular boy, Blane. The two start a cross-class relationship, and Blane struggles with pressure from his jealous friend Steff. While in The Breakfast Club, Ringwald's character Claire is very wealthy and upper-class and she "struggles" with being so popular. Claire's character isn't as willing as Blane's to step outside her social class, and mentions that one of the reasons is because of her friends.
What angers me about The Breakfast Club is that you have faith that these 5 kids have realized something important during their 9 hour detention session together where they reveal a lot about their internal struggles with themselves and their parents. The reading says it perfectly: "The plot of the film is really that simple: after 9 hours of sharing soul-baring dialogue about sex, parents, school, and the future-not to mention dope smoking, spontaneous dancing, and evading and insulting the principal- the five go home." Yet this ambiguous ending is what makes the film somewhat exceptional. You can interpret that they've gone home and that the events of the day didn't alter their lives, and that stereotypes are inescapable, or you can have hope that maybe these kids will be different people on Monday when they walk down the hallway. Or you can realize that years and years into the future, the one day in detention isn't even remember-able (although in the magic of the film I hope this last one isn't true). I like to believe that when the 5 characters leave, they have realized something, yet I still am frustrated by the ending. After the intense circle where most of the secrets and dialogue happens, Claire asks Brian to write 1 paper for all of them-the popular girl asks the brain to do the homework-and then goes off to give Allison a makeover, because they way she looked wasn't good enough. And once Allison has her makeover, Andy seems to finally realize her beauty, while Claire goes and kisses John on the neck because "he wouldn't". At the end, Brian gets to kiss the paper, Andy kisses Allison, Claire kisses John, and you are like what the heck?! 4 of the characters leave in relationships and Brian is still stuck with academics? Frustrating. Just frustrating. Yet it all works.
I love John Bender.
I always wondered why he puts his fist in the air. Yes it is great but what makes him do that haha?
The end of the movie frustrated me as well. After a day long of sharing their lives with each other they just leave. Everyone except the nerd is kissing their polar opposites. I felt bad for the nerd, while everyone is falling for each other, he has to write the paper because he's the "smart one". The last 10 minutes in the movie felt like a mad rush to have the popular girl give a make over to the crazy girl and turn her into something the jock would finally consider going out with.
ReplyDeleteI think it's funny how everyone seems so see Alison's makeover as the only way Andy would see her as pretty. I think that Andy already thought so. You can tell throughout the second half of the movie that Andy is pretty infatuated with Alison. He is constantly staring at her like he's in love, for heaven's sakes! Clare notices this at the end and I feel like she is simply doing Andy and Alison a favor by sort of creating a conversation starter, or giving them the confidence to actually act upon their feelings.
ReplyDeleteSo why does it all work, do you think, or more importantly from a film student perspective, how? The structure of this movie is possibly worth looking at. And the ending, though frustrating, is interesting because it really is ambiguous. You do use the reading here, but not really getting to the argument it makes about class tension and postfeminism.
ReplyDelete