Bright Lights, Big City

In NYC, Jamie Conway (Michael J. Fox) is drinking and doing drugs until the clubs close. He had lied about being fluent in French and has a fact-checking job on Gotham Magazine. His boss Clara (Frances Sternhagen) has a rush French job expecting him to fail. His co-worker Megan (Swoosie Kurtz) tries to help him. His best friend Tad Allagash (Kiefer Sutherland) is even worst. His model wife Amanda (Phoebe Cates) had left him behind for Paris and he's still struggling with his mother (Dianne Wiest)'s death. He becomes obsessed with a New York Post story about a coma baby. He gets set up on a date with Vicky (Tracy Pollan) by Tad.

It's the last directing effort for James Bridges. It's not nearly as cheesy as Perfect but he's been on a downward slide for awhile. The biggest problem is that Michael J. Fox doesn't fit this role. He doesn't have the required darkness. He has a beautiful lightness that can't be extinguished no matter how hard he tries. Otherwise, the movie has the overall sense of a time and a place. With Kiefer Sutherland in the lead, this could have been something special.

There are two things that went wrong with this film. First and foremost is that Michael J. Fox is totally miscast for his role. I can understand him wanting to break away from the Alex Keaton character on "Family Ties." But, although he tries, he simply isn't right as a coke-addled, anguished writer. And it knocks the whole film off-kilter. Another problem is that the story doesn't translate easily onto film. There are some compensations- great supporting cast, catchy theme song ("Kiss & Tell" by Bryan Ferry), and excellent use of New York City locations. But they weren't enough to make the film a success, and the disappointing returns at the box office bear this out.

I read the original book for a Freshman English class, and was enthralled by a unique character study from a Second Person perspective. Then, the teacher showed us this, and now I understand why "film snobs" always complain "The book was better." In this case, it most certainly IS. There's a major plot point toward the end of the book (which I won't mention here, not so I won't spoil the movie, but the book), that puts all that you read into perspective and makes it all worthwhile. Here, the point is revealed in the first 5 minutes, and it ruins any reason to sit through this motion picture. Instead of reading and wondering "Why is he like this?," which was one of the main reasons the book was such a page-turner, the movie tells you why he does it, and you just sit there and watch him do it, knowing why. Remember how people say they hate people who reveal the endings to things? Well, this movie just up and DOES IT ITSELF! If you still want to see the movie, first read the book, then have some fun with friends picking apart this mish-mosh of a noble failure.

This great film and novel adaptation is obviously underrated.

Although I have not read the book, (and nor should I to be able to personally judge this film), my guess is that probably most people are whining that the book was better. That's like saying that the car was better than the bike. They probably complain that the movie was not a precise enough adaptation. When will people realise that an exact adaptation will usually result in a boring and overly long film?. The movie definitely has the essential qualities for a good film with it's intelligent script, compelling drama, sober realism and superb acting.

This is Michael J Fox's best role and he does a great job. I think he's such an underrated actor, he made Family Ties what it was and will never be forgotten as Marty Mc Fly in Back to the Future, but this is his peak film.

I could very much symphatise and identify with the main character that slowly loses grip on reality, eventually spending most of his time in a drugged state of mind. Drugs are his only joy, until he's finally confronted by his caring brother and becomes at peace with reality in a moderately positive ending (which was criticised by some). His loneliness and desperation are depicted in a very convincing way, with his heartless girlfriend (Phoebe Cates) and harsh boss. My favorite scenes are the ones at work, where his incompetence becomes painfully evident.

Having recently watched Requiem for a Dream (also about drug addiction), I realize this movie's even better. 9 out of 10.

This is a good, although not great, movie that often gets a lower rating than it deserves. All the actors fill their roles perfectly, especially Keifer Sutherland. The problem is it occasionally tries to be funny (or something?), which doesn't mesh with the rest of the film. Two guys getting attacked by a ferret is not very funny anyhow, unless they are Bill Murray and Jim Carrey. Ignore the parts that try to be funny and you will find this movie much more enjoyable.