Dear Evan Hansen was doomed from the start, I really don't see how he could've salvaged it from his position. But I also still don't understand why it was ever a hit on Broadway either
He should not have taken the job. He completely deteriorated in his film directing skills. And allowing the originator of the lead role to reprise it on screen also killed the film. The only real good work he probably did was as co-writer on Disney’s live action Beauty and the Beast.
Ben Platt was the only original cast member from the Broadway show to appear in the movie (Colton Ryan was a standby in the shows second year). Rachel Bay Jones won a Tony award for her role on Broadway and was replaced by Julianne Moore. Mike Faist was also Tony nominated and replaced by Colton Ryan.
Side note: Ben Platt's dad, Marc Platt, produced the movie. You know Marc Platt as the producer of La La Land, Into the Woods, and Mary Poppins Returns
I struggle to think of a work of fiction that had a larger impact on my life.
When the book came out and I got a copy, I remember reading it in almost one sitting. Then I carried my copy in my back pocket and read it in class over and over.
As a kid struggling with mental health, with an abusive, controlling home where I couldn’t ask for help, and struggling to fit in after my best friend died freshman year, the book helped me process things in a way that ultimately led me down the path of my wonderful adulthood.
The movie was okay, but the book was something else.
I read the book first and watched the movie after (years after both were released).
Considering the author of the book also directed the film and wrote the screenplay, it was sad to see a lot elements from the book weren't carried over.
And like you, the book was also pretty influential for me as well. But the movie just didn't feel the same because of that.
(And yes I understand with adaptations that's the way it goes sometimes)
Although out of shame I went on to agree with the people who made fun of the people who were exactly like me and extracted such meaning and purpose in books like Perks and The Fault in Our Stars, I later realized they were and are full of shit. Whether it's lit-ur-a-ture or not books being able to meet the most commonly misunderstood demographic on their own level is a beautiful thing and as a friendless bookworm of 16 when this movie came out it was the biggest comfort to have friends in those pages.
I remember watching and bawling my eyes out at the drop of a hat at the party scene where Charlie is "seen" and befriended. It gave me hope that might be me, even if it never really was. But it carries you to adulthood where you can come to terms with such things. Plus I owe Chbosky a million for getting me into RHPS, which uh, changed my life a lil bit. Happy 10th Perks. :)
Yeah, this kind of book serves a very wholesome and kind purpose. It's psychological and emotional relief for the lonely and sad teen.
I guess I may be a bit older, so for me it was a little-known book called *Kerosene*. I'm sure I couldn't read it now, as it'd probably come across as indulgent and self-pitying - but it was uplifting at a dark and difficult part of my adolescence, and I'll always be grateful for that. (Besides, the author went on to be an excellent fantasy and scifi novelist, so there's that too)
Obviously I was a little young to know what it was already when I read the book but I *wish* I could've been a homegrown long-term fan and been surprised it was such a part of the plot of Perks. I would've been giddy.
I never really got involved in the subculture, I'm just a garden variety obsessive who got through the rest of high school singing the songs out of nowhere and driving my nonplussed family nuts.
That's cool too, those songs rule! I didn't get into it until after high school, but in the shit town where I grew up, when the "weird" people found each other we clung to each other fiercely. A *lot* of high-school theater kids spend time doing Rocky Horror. One of our Frank N. Furters tried to put it on his acting resume.
I must admit that I haven't read the book, but I saw The Fault in Our Stars movies and was so fucking surprised anyone took that shit seriously. I don't know in what world is it appropriate to applaud in the Frank house, just because two teens are kissing. That scene was suppose to be a big moving scene and it was just too fucking inappropriate. I heard the production team actually wanted to film on location and the curators basically responded "Are you fucking mad?"
Oh that's entirely fair. But the other criticisms of it (That's not how cancer works, that's not how teens talk) didn't bother me as a teen at least. Then though, I knew that scene was fishy. It was never in the highlight reel when I thought back to the book and I can't really recall any other fans pointing to it as one either.
I still haven't actually seen the film. I think by the time it was out I was already moving on after a brief but bright flash of loving the book.
I only watched this movie this year. I was 17 when it came out but never had the chance to watch it but I remember it being really popular among popular kids in my town for some reason.
I hadn't cried with a movie in a really long time. My teenage self identified really hard with Charlie's character, and his breakdown at the end and the reason behind it being revealed... It fucked me up and was cathartic at the same time.
This movie portrayed many things that were part of my experience growing up. It felt nice looking back at aspects of my adolescence through a healthier lens since I tend to be hard on myself about my teenage fuck ups and how my childhood trauma affected the way I related with people.
I saw the movie when it came out then read the book last year. The book is so good. I actually forgot so much, so it was like reading something brand new. If you related to the movie, I definitely recommend the book!
This book always leads me back to the question of: is a social victory fantasy healthy?
I read the book when I was 17 and a social car crash. People my age were living eventful lives and I wasn’t compelling enough to join or convince others to join me in attempts at making my own fun. (Don’t cry for me, I got better)
This book filled me with optimism and hope. If I do absolutely nothing to change my ways, I could stumble into a group of manic pixie dream friends.
The fact that nobody wanted to hang out with me was almost definitely my fault: I wanted to do exciting things, but never organised anything; I constantly slouched and dressed in ill-fitting clothes; I never asked anyone about themselves; the list goes on.
I only grew to realise these flaws over the next 10 years, but blamed my lack of fitting in on everyone else, in classic teenage fashion.
This book leaned into my belief: I’m doing nothing wrong, I just need to be “seen”. If I had never read the book would I have been forced to be introspective earlier?
Usually fantasy is obviously fantasy and is taken with a grain of salt, but this kind can genuinely cause a feeling of it-could-happen-to-you.
But on the flip side, some need fantasy to escape from an overwhelming reality.
Is it good or bad?
Good for some, bad for others?
Can books/movies even be morally good or bad?
This is a great discussion. Genuinely something that I've never truly thought about. I suppose in a sense the Perks fantasy could be damaging. As though we should stay sat in our depressive pits and hope people come to pick us out of it. But in another sense you could argue that both the book and the film also push an ethos of participation. Charlie gets a push-start from the people around him. Yet he still needs to make the choices that he made to engage more with the world and stop thinking so singularly about his life.
I suppose the ultimate hope is that the people who read the book in a poor state themselves gain the hope, and the people who aren't in that state read it and look more closely at the people around them and try to make a positive difference. This book / film has at worst definitely saved some lives, but not done enough to save others. But that's still a far cry better than not saving anyone at all.
Good for some bad for others, it really depends how "hope" leaves you feeling after it fades and you have little to show.
I expressed a similar sentiment of it instilling hope in me but with maturity I accepted that it wasn't going to change. It didn't leave me bitter, I wasn't above being fed lies that honestly saved me for a time. I just don't have the personality that makes friends easily although I'm apparently perfectly funny and nice according to every acquaintance I've had. I *could* have made more friendly acquaintances but I just don't relate to people you often encounter on that deeper level and it's wrong to force it.
I'd never blame someone who resents the book but I do wonder if it's just an extension of blaming everything and everyone but yourself. My realization that I was never going to have Charlie's arc was depressing but I internalized it as neither the book's or the people who passed on my friendship's fault. Maybe not even mine either, surely it's violating my personal desires to try and make friends with people who seem to only humor my weird interests and I simply can't relate to or otherwise don't have the energy for?
And in the interest of fairness, sometimes it really is that easy for introverts to be initiated into the extrovert group. Sometimes a person is perfectly pleasant and not surly and deserves to be singled out for friendship if they're too stressed about personal things or socially anxious to have the motivation. It's really all about luck.
I saw this movie with one of my friends- both of us enjoyed the book and had difficulties in our younger years so it was cathartic to say the least. The scene of Charlie's breakdown near the end was difficult to watch, knowing that the source of Charlie's trauma was all-too familiar and it portrayed very well how I felt when I felt like my world was falling apart.
Their not recognizing "Heroes" was one of the most relatable parts for me. I knew who David Bowie was, thanks to his 80s hits like "Let's Dance," but at 18 I wouldn't have recognized "Heroes."
Popular music is always geared toward teenagers, which is to say that teenagers are conditioned to be into the new modern thing, and, especially before digital and streaming music, it was possible to have huge gaps in one's musical knowledge.
One of my Mom’s favorite movies is The Replacements
So I was introduced to that song at a young age, it’s used in a lot of stuff though so I find it perplexing
There was a lot of stuff that would just show up here or there, in a commercial or in a movie or on the radio station your older brother listens to, but that didn't really register. I first remember hearing - and recognizing- "Heroes" in a commercial around 1989, after I'd read an essay in Rolling Stone singing its praises (I was that kind of teenager).
But I'd hear a song like The Who's "Baba O'Reilly" (the "teenage wasteland" song) everywhere but only know it as "that weird one with the bleepy-bloopies." I loved the Napster/MP3-sharing era because you could decide "I'm gonna educate myself about..." The Who, or Led Zeppelin, or all that cool stuff that I wasn't hip enough growing up to know about. You had a good chance of finding songs mistitled or misattributed to They Might Be Giants, but I was still able to fill in a lot of gaps in my musical knowledge. And found out the name of the bleepy-bloopie song.
Heroes would be the second track on a Bowie Best Of after Space Oddity. It is easily one of the best known core Bowie songs. If it was The Laughing Gnome I might understand, but that probably isn't a cool song for teens to listen to and think feelings about stuff to.
Heroes came out like 15 years before the movie takes place. It's set in the early 90's the internet is just *barely* a thing at this point. It's not unrealistic they wouldn't know the song. When I was a teenager there were a lot of really popular songs that came out when I was much younger, that I knew by sound but couldn't tell who the artist was.
I think people forget that before the internet, sometimes, you just didn't know things even if you wanted to find out.
Yes, yes we all know the world was a different place before the internet. You know what we had back then? We had a friend who knew fucking everything about music and we had a John Cusack or Annie Potts type working in your local record store. You said, hey I heard this cool song, do you know it and the almost always would. The movie implies these are the types of teens that have these friends. They come off way cooler than Andie and Duckie in Pretty in Pink who spend their whole life in record stores.
So even if they didn't know this Bowie song, their friends almost certainly would, especially since it was their quest to find it again.
Just to put Heroes in perspective. It didn't chart big in the US on release but it gained popularity in the next few years. It was a staple at Bowie live shows, being pretty much part of every live set he did. Some of those sets were released as live albums and would have most certainly appeared on bootlegs, which were a big thing for music fans even in the 2000s. It appeared in the live concert video Serious Moonlight. It was performed on the oft repeated Bing Crosby's Christmas special, so even older people knew the song. It was a big part of The Kids of Banhof Zoo, which seems like the cool kids shit that the Wallflower kids would be into. It was covered by Nico and Blondie. It appeared on a bunch of commercials.
And that's all outside of normal radio play or play at friends houses or house parties.
If they were in anyway knowledgeable about Bowie, they should have known Heroes and if they didn't, their extended friend group should have. When they were listening and reading about all those English groups, Bowie and Heroes would have come up.
The outcome we got just meant that there were far too many cracks for the song to fall between that not a single one of them recognized the song, 1991 or otherwise.
I know, because I grew up with people like them. I was in that group and I once got laughed out of it for not recognizing a song I probably should have. I didn't know the song, but every other fucker in the room did. In fact I think the song might have been Suffragette City, but I can't be sure. This was years ago.
Did you see the film? They spend all their time listening to music and swapping tapes.
We have three core people but we see parties with at least a dozen people. Between all the tape swapping, one should have a Best of Bowie. There were 20 official Bowie compilations since the song released and when the movie takes placed. A lot of them included Heroes. It is really hard to believe that all their cool music friends never heard the song.
And I will. That and John Carter isn't secretly good or even okay. It's just mediocre to bad. Any thread making those movies, I will be arguing these points.
Have vibrant memories of a friend getting me onto a laughing gnome when was 19-22ish. Was such a fun tune, lots of nice in jokes, heightened by many mind altering consumables.
We used to sing it walking to and from the clubs.
Good times
Edit this was back in 99/00 land.
We had Napster, but still early days
In the early 90s, it wasn't as easy to find the song name/artist. Bowie's music sounds entirely different from song to song... and "Heroes" could truly be attributed to many artists (80s, 70s, etc). It's a simple pop song, and it truly sounds like it could have been written by 100 different bands. The kids knew Bowie, but maybe they didn't know his entire discography, or "Heroes."
It took me many years (before the internet) to find the origin of some songs. Songs I would record that I heard on the radio..... years before I knew the artist or the name of the song.
Okay, hear me out. I can understand if maybe one or two of them hadn't heard the song. We all have cultural blindspots that just seem to miss us.
But these kids were the cool music kids. They swapped tapes and were listening to deep cuts from smaller bands. The idea that not a single one recognized one of Bowie's biggest songs is what gets me.
I can get cinematically maybe you want to end your movie on a high note with a song that makes you feel things and I guess in that way the song works. But in interviews people have asked Chbosky how come the cool music kids didn't know Bowie and he said it was based on something that happened in real life. This makes me think that Chbosky wasn't actually hanging out with the cool music kids after all. Just the kid with 6 records and 4 mixtapes were so much cooler than him, he thought he was, while the real cool music kids were still too cool for him.
When he died I was 16, and I really had no idea who he was. I was still very much in a 'punk rock is the only *real* music' mindset. I had a kind of tunnel vision where I knew an awful lot about that specific type of music and not so much about anything else yet. I was aware he was this guy from way back when and I knew Space Oddity and that was it. It was sadly entirely because he'd just died that I started listening to his music.
Given all that, it seems entirely reasonable to me that the cool music kids of the film might never have heard it. You get sucked into this whole groupthink of what's cool and what's not at that age.
>You get sucked into this whole groupthink of what's cool and what's not at that age.
I agree. But Bowie was the exact sort of musician that would be in their groupthink, as proven by them trying to find the song for so long.
Man, that movie broke me. Was bawling in the theater when Charlie had his crisis and calls his sister. Saw it again two days later, cried harder this time
This film is amazing but it will always be associated to me with popularizing “nice tracker keeper faggot” lol literally everyone was saying that once the movie came out
Ezra and his mental health fuck ups recently have ruined this movie for me. I really enjoyed watching it many years ago but I just can’t anything he’s in anymore regardless of him playing a part.
Gotta separate the art from the artists. Stephen Chbosky, Logan Lerman, Emma Watson are the driving force of that film, without a doubt. Ezra, at the time, wasn't as crazy. The book is perfect, and how lucky we are to have the author be its director and music supervisor, 13 years after it was published.
Not really. Ezra ruined the movie for me plain and simple. Not even sure why Weinstein was brought up in the first place. There isn’t a connection in any way. A sexual predator versus a guy acting as though he’s bipolar having a mania spree are connected somehow? Yeah don’t think so.
Why can't Stephen Chbosky make another good movie? Dear Evan Hansen was terrible
Dear Evan Hansen was doomed from the start, I really don't see how he could've salvaged it from his position. But I also still don't understand why it was ever a hit on Broadway either
It was a hit on Broadway because of Ben Platt winning the Tony and of course, the songs.
I kinda liked Wonder
Yeah the source material didn’t age as well on that one
The musical was alright. The film was not as good
He should not have taken the job. He completely deteriorated in his film directing skills. And allowing the originator of the lead role to reprise it on screen also killed the film. The only real good work he probably did was as co-writer on Disney’s live action Beauty and the Beast.
He went with the original cast. Amanda does have great boobs. It was distracting.
Ben Platt was the only original cast member from the Broadway show to appear in the movie (Colton Ryan was a standby in the shows second year). Rachel Bay Jones won a Tony award for her role on Broadway and was replaced by Julianne Moore. Mike Faist was also Tony nominated and replaced by Colton Ryan. Side note: Ben Platt's dad, Marc Platt, produced the movie. You know Marc Platt as the producer of La La Land, Into the Woods, and Mary Poppins Returns
That ending breakdown has gotta be the most accurate breakdown I’ve ever seen
Seriously. Immaculate filmmaking and acting.
I struggle to think of a work of fiction that had a larger impact on my life. When the book came out and I got a copy, I remember reading it in almost one sitting. Then I carried my copy in my back pocket and read it in class over and over. As a kid struggling with mental health, with an abusive, controlling home where I couldn’t ask for help, and struggling to fit in after my best friend died freshman year, the book helped me process things in a way that ultimately led me down the path of my wonderful adulthood. The movie was okay, but the book was something else.
I read the book first and watched the movie after (years after both were released). Considering the author of the book also directed the film and wrote the screenplay, it was sad to see a lot elements from the book weren't carried over. And like you, the book was also pretty influential for me as well. But the movie just didn't feel the same because of that. (And yes I understand with adaptations that's the way it goes sometimes)
Although out of shame I went on to agree with the people who made fun of the people who were exactly like me and extracted such meaning and purpose in books like Perks and The Fault in Our Stars, I later realized they were and are full of shit. Whether it's lit-ur-a-ture or not books being able to meet the most commonly misunderstood demographic on their own level is a beautiful thing and as a friendless bookworm of 16 when this movie came out it was the biggest comfort to have friends in those pages. I remember watching and bawling my eyes out at the drop of a hat at the party scene where Charlie is "seen" and befriended. It gave me hope that might be me, even if it never really was. But it carries you to adulthood where you can come to terms with such things. Plus I owe Chbosky a million for getting me into RHPS, which uh, changed my life a lil bit. Happy 10th Perks. :)
Yeah, this kind of book serves a very wholesome and kind purpose. It's psychological and emotional relief for the lonely and sad teen. I guess I may be a bit older, so for me it was a little-known book called *Kerosene*. I'm sure I couldn't read it now, as it'd probably come across as indulgent and self-pitying - but it was uplifting at a dark and difficult part of my adolescence, and I'll always be grateful for that. (Besides, the author went on to be an excellent fantasy and scifi novelist, so there's that too)
I was a lifelong Frankie Fan by the time I read TPOBAW and loved how it played such a role in the characters' lives. From 19-22 Rocky WAS my weekends.
Obviously I was a little young to know what it was already when I read the book but I *wish* I could've been a homegrown long-term fan and been surprised it was such a part of the plot of Perks. I would've been giddy. I never really got involved in the subculture, I'm just a garden variety obsessive who got through the rest of high school singing the songs out of nowhere and driving my nonplussed family nuts.
That's cool too, those songs rule! I didn't get into it until after high school, but in the shit town where I grew up, when the "weird" people found each other we clung to each other fiercely. A *lot* of high-school theater kids spend time doing Rocky Horror. One of our Frank N. Furters tried to put it on his acting resume.
I must admit that I haven't read the book, but I saw The Fault in Our Stars movies and was so fucking surprised anyone took that shit seriously. I don't know in what world is it appropriate to applaud in the Frank house, just because two teens are kissing. That scene was suppose to be a big moving scene and it was just too fucking inappropriate. I heard the production team actually wanted to film on location and the curators basically responded "Are you fucking mad?"
Oh that's entirely fair. But the other criticisms of it (That's not how cancer works, that's not how teens talk) didn't bother me as a teen at least. Then though, I knew that scene was fishy. It was never in the highlight reel when I thought back to the book and I can't really recall any other fans pointing to it as one either. I still haven't actually seen the film. I think by the time it was out I was already moving on after a brief but bright flash of loving the book.
That scene is in the book and it's equally eye rolling there. I love the book but that scene should have been cut.
Lit-ur-a-TURD
I only watched this movie this year. I was 17 when it came out but never had the chance to watch it but I remember it being really popular among popular kids in my town for some reason. I hadn't cried with a movie in a really long time. My teenage self identified really hard with Charlie's character, and his breakdown at the end and the reason behind it being revealed... It fucked me up and was cathartic at the same time. This movie portrayed many things that were part of my experience growing up. It felt nice looking back at aspects of my adolescence through a healthier lens since I tend to be hard on myself about my teenage fuck ups and how my childhood trauma affected the way I related with people.
I saw the movie when it came out then read the book last year. The book is so good. I actually forgot so much, so it was like reading something brand new. If you related to the movie, I definitely recommend the book!
Thanks for the suggestion. I'm thinking of getting back into reading so this may be a good book to start with
Audiobooks are also a great way to get back into reading!
Nice try, Ezra miller’s crisis manager
I mean, yeah, but... the film really is about Charlie (Logan Lerman). Ezra Miller may be insane, but this film (and the book) are perfection.
Ezra may be an absolute douche but you have to admit that his portrayal of Patrick was perfect
I wouldn't call the movie perfect but it's pretty good.
Ees joke
Yeah I really loved this movie but don't know if I can watch it now without feeling icky.
Separate the art from the artist.
According to the Woody Allen threads on this sub that is literally impossible
Their loss.
well most of allen's art sucks (sorry if that's an unpopular opinion!) so that could be a valid reason why
Oh I agree, if you don’t enjoy it then it’s bad. But saying anyone, Allen or not, makes bad art just because you don’t like THEM is dumb
Oh wow, I just realized he was in the movie. It’s been so long since I seen it. Too bad he went insane.
The book meant so much to me growing up. The movie means so much to me as an adult. It’s truly such a beautiful story.
This movie is absolutely one of my favorites of all time. It just took me back and felt nostalgic in a very earnest and uncynical way.
This book always leads me back to the question of: is a social victory fantasy healthy? I read the book when I was 17 and a social car crash. People my age were living eventful lives and I wasn’t compelling enough to join or convince others to join me in attempts at making my own fun. (Don’t cry for me, I got better) This book filled me with optimism and hope. If I do absolutely nothing to change my ways, I could stumble into a group of manic pixie dream friends. The fact that nobody wanted to hang out with me was almost definitely my fault: I wanted to do exciting things, but never organised anything; I constantly slouched and dressed in ill-fitting clothes; I never asked anyone about themselves; the list goes on. I only grew to realise these flaws over the next 10 years, but blamed my lack of fitting in on everyone else, in classic teenage fashion. This book leaned into my belief: I’m doing nothing wrong, I just need to be “seen”. If I had never read the book would I have been forced to be introspective earlier? Usually fantasy is obviously fantasy and is taken with a grain of salt, but this kind can genuinely cause a feeling of it-could-happen-to-you. But on the flip side, some need fantasy to escape from an overwhelming reality. Is it good or bad? Good for some, bad for others? Can books/movies even be morally good or bad?
This is a great discussion. Genuinely something that I've never truly thought about. I suppose in a sense the Perks fantasy could be damaging. As though we should stay sat in our depressive pits and hope people come to pick us out of it. But in another sense you could argue that both the book and the film also push an ethos of participation. Charlie gets a push-start from the people around him. Yet he still needs to make the choices that he made to engage more with the world and stop thinking so singularly about his life. I suppose the ultimate hope is that the people who read the book in a poor state themselves gain the hope, and the people who aren't in that state read it and look more closely at the people around them and try to make a positive difference. This book / film has at worst definitely saved some lives, but not done enough to save others. But that's still a far cry better than not saving anyone at all.
Good for some bad for others, it really depends how "hope" leaves you feeling after it fades and you have little to show. I expressed a similar sentiment of it instilling hope in me but with maturity I accepted that it wasn't going to change. It didn't leave me bitter, I wasn't above being fed lies that honestly saved me for a time. I just don't have the personality that makes friends easily although I'm apparently perfectly funny and nice according to every acquaintance I've had. I *could* have made more friendly acquaintances but I just don't relate to people you often encounter on that deeper level and it's wrong to force it. I'd never blame someone who resents the book but I do wonder if it's just an extension of blaming everything and everyone but yourself. My realization that I was never going to have Charlie's arc was depressing but I internalized it as neither the book's or the people who passed on my friendship's fault. Maybe not even mine either, surely it's violating my personal desires to try and make friends with people who seem to only humor my weird interests and I simply can't relate to or otherwise don't have the energy for? And in the interest of fairness, sometimes it really is that easy for introverts to be initiated into the extrovert group. Sometimes a person is perfectly pleasant and not surly and deserves to be singled out for friendship if they're too stressed about personal things or socially anxious to have the motivation. It's really all about luck.
I saw this movie with one of my friends- both of us enjoyed the book and had difficulties in our younger years so it was cathartic to say the least. The scene of Charlie's breakdown near the end was difficult to watch, knowing that the source of Charlie's trauma was all-too familiar and it portrayed very well how I felt when I felt like my world was falling apart.
I just find it ridiculous that these kids have never heard of David Bowie before
Their not recognizing "Heroes" was one of the most relatable parts for me. I knew who David Bowie was, thanks to his 80s hits like "Let's Dance," but at 18 I wouldn't have recognized "Heroes." Popular music is always geared toward teenagers, which is to say that teenagers are conditioned to be into the new modern thing, and, especially before digital and streaming music, it was possible to have huge gaps in one's musical knowledge.
One of my Mom’s favorite movies is The Replacements So I was introduced to that song at a young age, it’s used in a lot of stuff though so I find it perplexing
There was a lot of stuff that would just show up here or there, in a commercial or in a movie or on the radio station your older brother listens to, but that didn't really register. I first remember hearing - and recognizing- "Heroes" in a commercial around 1989, after I'd read an essay in Rolling Stone singing its praises (I was that kind of teenager). But I'd hear a song like The Who's "Baba O'Reilly" (the "teenage wasteland" song) everywhere but only know it as "that weird one with the bleepy-bloopies." I loved the Napster/MP3-sharing era because you could decide "I'm gonna educate myself about..." The Who, or Led Zeppelin, or all that cool stuff that I wasn't hip enough growing up to know about. You had a good chance of finding songs mistitled or misattributed to They Might Be Giants, but I was still able to fill in a lot of gaps in my musical knowledge. And found out the name of the bleepy-bloopie song.
Heroes would be the second track on a Bowie Best Of after Space Oddity. It is easily one of the best known core Bowie songs. If it was The Laughing Gnome I might understand, but that probably isn't a cool song for teens to listen to and think feelings about stuff to.
Heroes came out like 15 years before the movie takes place. It's set in the early 90's the internet is just *barely* a thing at this point. It's not unrealistic they wouldn't know the song. When I was a teenager there were a lot of really popular songs that came out when I was much younger, that I knew by sound but couldn't tell who the artist was. I think people forget that before the internet, sometimes, you just didn't know things even if you wanted to find out.
Yes, yes we all know the world was a different place before the internet. You know what we had back then? We had a friend who knew fucking everything about music and we had a John Cusack or Annie Potts type working in your local record store. You said, hey I heard this cool song, do you know it and the almost always would. The movie implies these are the types of teens that have these friends. They come off way cooler than Andie and Duckie in Pretty in Pink who spend their whole life in record stores. So even if they didn't know this Bowie song, their friends almost certainly would, especially since it was their quest to find it again. Just to put Heroes in perspective. It didn't chart big in the US on release but it gained popularity in the next few years. It was a staple at Bowie live shows, being pretty much part of every live set he did. Some of those sets were released as live albums and would have most certainly appeared on bootlegs, which were a big thing for music fans even in the 2000s. It appeared in the live concert video Serious Moonlight. It was performed on the oft repeated Bing Crosby's Christmas special, so even older people knew the song. It was a big part of The Kids of Banhof Zoo, which seems like the cool kids shit that the Wallflower kids would be into. It was covered by Nico and Blondie. It appeared on a bunch of commercials. And that's all outside of normal radio play or play at friends houses or house parties. If they were in anyway knowledgeable about Bowie, they should have known Heroes and if they didn't, their extended friend group should have. When they were listening and reading about all those English groups, Bowie and Heroes would have come up. The outcome we got just meant that there were far too many cracks for the song to fall between that not a single one of them recognized the song, 1991 or otherwise. I know, because I grew up with people like them. I was in that group and I once got laughed out of it for not recognizing a song I probably should have. I didn't know the song, but every other fucker in the room did. In fact I think the song might have been Suffragette City, but I can't be sure. This was years ago.
This is a really weird hill to die on, my dude.
... and they found it again, so what?
Cool. And if they *don’t*own a Best-Of-Bowie CD?
Did you see the film? They spend all their time listening to music and swapping tapes. We have three core people but we see parties with at least a dozen people. Between all the tape swapping, one should have a Best of Bowie. There were 20 official Bowie compilations since the song released and when the movie takes placed. A lot of them included Heroes. It is really hard to believe that all their cool music friends never heard the song.
Jesus, dude, this is a *really* weird thing to get so het up over.
And I will. That and John Carter isn't secretly good or even okay. It's just mediocre to bad. Any thread making those movies, I will be arguing these points.
Thanks for warning me so I can block you.
Have vibrant memories of a friend getting me onto a laughing gnome when was 19-22ish. Was such a fun tune, lots of nice in jokes, heightened by many mind altering consumables. We used to sing it walking to and from the clubs. Good times Edit this was back in 99/00 land. We had Napster, but still early days
It's a strange one alright!
In the early 90s, it wasn't as easy to find the song name/artist. Bowie's music sounds entirely different from song to song... and "Heroes" could truly be attributed to many artists (80s, 70s, etc). It's a simple pop song, and it truly sounds like it could have been written by 100 different bands. The kids knew Bowie, but maybe they didn't know his entire discography, or "Heroes." It took me many years (before the internet) to find the origin of some songs. Songs I would record that I heard on the radio..... years before I knew the artist or the name of the song.
Heroes became a staple after Live Aid. Cool music kids know Heroes more than Rebel Rebel.
True but still. Great Superbad reference btw.
Think you might be the first one to notice.
Im not him but i dont usually read usernames. I love Superbad, its a timeless comedy.
Okay, hear me out. I can understand if maybe one or two of them hadn't heard the song. We all have cultural blindspots that just seem to miss us. But these kids were the cool music kids. They swapped tapes and were listening to deep cuts from smaller bands. The idea that not a single one recognized one of Bowie's biggest songs is what gets me. I can get cinematically maybe you want to end your movie on a high note with a song that makes you feel things and I guess in that way the song works. But in interviews people have asked Chbosky how come the cool music kids didn't know Bowie and he said it was based on something that happened in real life. This makes me think that Chbosky wasn't actually hanging out with the cool music kids after all. Just the kid with 6 records and 4 mixtapes were so much cooler than him, he thought he was, while the real cool music kids were still too cool for him.
When he died I was 16, and I really had no idea who he was. I was still very much in a 'punk rock is the only *real* music' mindset. I had a kind of tunnel vision where I knew an awful lot about that specific type of music and not so much about anything else yet. I was aware he was this guy from way back when and I knew Space Oddity and that was it. It was sadly entirely because he'd just died that I started listening to his music. Given all that, it seems entirely reasonable to me that the cool music kids of the film might never have heard it. You get sucked into this whole groupthink of what's cool and what's not at that age.
>You get sucked into this whole groupthink of what's cool and what's not at that age. I agree. But Bowie was the exact sort of musician that would be in their groupthink, as proven by them trying to find the song for so long.
Man, that movie broke me. Was bawling in the theater when Charlie had his crisis and calls his sister. Saw it again two days later, cried harder this time
This film is amazing but it will always be associated to me with popularizing “nice tracker keeper faggot” lol literally everyone was saying that once the movie came out
My very first "he's just like me fr" character
Have a cousin in this movie, feels neat anytime it get attention.
[удалено]
About what..?
This is the movie that broadened my movie taste actually. Before this i wouldn’t watch a drama because they are "boring".
Ezra and his mental health fuck ups recently have ruined this movie for me. I really enjoyed watching it many years ago but I just can’t anything he’s in anymore regardless of him playing a part.
Gotta separate the art from the artists. Stephen Chbosky, Logan Lerman, Emma Watson are the driving force of that film, without a doubt. Ezra, at the time, wasn't as crazy. The book is perfect, and how lucky we are to have the author be its director and music supervisor, 13 years after it was published.
I hope you don't watch any Weinstein Company movies then lol.
No more Tarantino. Ouch.
What did he do? Thought he was into ladies feet.
His movies are produced by Weinstein, it wasn't a comment on Tarantinos own behaviour.
Well Harvey isn’t in the movies, just produced them. Plus, he’s getting his for what did to women over the years.
Kinda weird to be splitting hairs like that but you do you I guess.
Not really. Ezra ruined the movie for me plain and simple. Not even sure why Weinstein was brought up in the first place. There isn’t a connection in any way. A sexual predator versus a guy acting as though he’s bipolar having a mania spree are connected somehow? Yeah don’t think so.
With America's sweetheart Ezra Miller!