It shows how much U.S. culture
has changed in the past 10 or so years—in terms of difficulties we face, in
terms of how pop culture tries to square with this (responsibly or not), and in
terms of what “pabulum” the movie industry is willing to put out there—that we
view this film and are struck by how much it seems from a different time. It is
well-tooled in an “analog” way—with color-schemed set design, editing, blocking
of actors in shots, and so on—and it has a generally fun feel, in an
MTV-inflected sort of way. And satires on high school life (or more celebratory
looks at it) are a dime a dozen in movie history; Heathers (1989) is one tart example, on which see my review on
this blog from April 10, 2012.
In my review of Heathers, I discuss the issue of “scars”
(that film’s stars’ term) from high school as were germane to that film’s
satiric approach, but Clueless seems
to embrace a quite different approach. It is not so much bitter about the
excesses of high school pretensions, arrogance, etc., as it is jovial in taking
them for granted in making an overall pleasantly humorous look at manners among
more upscale kids.
A smooth satire marries the LA scene and Austen’s Emma
This film is about a high school
in Beverly Hills, Calif., and so the main character, Cher Horowitz—played by
Alicia Silverstone, in this her most notable role, I believe—and her best
friend Dionne, played by a model-like actress Stacey Dash—are two
princesses who, the narration makes clear, have what some would consider an
arrogant attitude in taking their popularity and privileged-kid’s attitude for
granted, and doing things with others accordingly (on the plus side, being
helpful; or on the negative side in certain passing instances, expressing a
bratty distaste or the like).
The film—written and directed by
Amy Heckerling, who did Fast Times
at Ridgemont High (1982)—was meant to be inspired (or informed) by Jane
Austen’s novel Emma, but I don’t
think you need to know that book as you watch this story of a young woman (1) aiming
to work her wonders on getting two teachers romantically involved, then (2) helping
a new student, played by neophyte Brittany Murphy, fit in more as a
contender for being popular and a catch for a school hunk. In short, Cher is whimsically playing matchmaker (and meddler of
sorts)—and then (3) after a lot is said and done, she ends up in a crisis of
conscience where she suddenly seems to lose her touch as a popular “do-gooder”
and doesn’t even quite know who will be her mate until….
A jaundiced eye is foregone for a fun revue, but may not click with
today’s viewers
The plot is a little less
interesting than just the parade of humorous moments and the roundly-surveying take
on manners, not least the argot of American teens in certain privileged
environments. So, instead of citing a lot of examples of “quotable lines” and
the like, I’ll say this is a film to watch for its little pleasures.
The funny thing is, I’ve watched
this several times recently, aiming to write a review that fits in with my
general themes on this blog. Though this film is fun, there’s something
perpetually shallow about it—not simply with regard to my own usual themes, but
even regarding how it might be seen by American audiences today. This film immediately
spawned a TV show of the same name in the 1990s, but I wonder if this film
would be a hit (in theaters) at all today. Probably your more carefree high school students with eat
it up with relish (not hotdog relish, of course).
But the idea of satirizing high
school life, yet aiming to have light fun with it rather than to be a little
angrier (even if not as angry as writer Daniel Waters was with Heathers), seems out of step today. It’s
almost like thinking that, for adults, a Pillow
Talk–type romp with George Clooney actually playing, seriously, a Carey
Grant type (at his more innocuous), and someone else doing an earnest Doris
Day, and an older male playing a spry Tony Randall type, would fly today. From
another angle, you could almost say that Clueless
isn’t snarkily meta enough for
today’s young viewers.
A few little notes suited to an episodic film
* Dan Hedaya is amusing as
Cher’s gruff litigator father, Mel Horowitz.
He’s like the dour (yet joke-capable) uncle who has to pay the bills, and so he
stomps his foot occasionally to restore a quiet of sanity amid the ongoing
hubbub of kiddie commotion.
* Paul Rudd (looking quite
young here—and still turning up today in notable movies) plays Cher’s earnest college student half-brother, who is in
the household for a periodic family visit. The plot development between him and
Cher by movie’s end may startle some. (His
Wikipedia article notes this role as his career’s breakout performance.)
* Brittany Murphy, who sadly
died in 2009, almost seems in this film not entirely promising (at least in
appearance) as the actress she would later become (including in films like Girl, Interrupted [1999] and 8 Mile [2002]), looking here somewhat
funky and a little lacking in star power. Here, with cute face but (for the character)
protruding New York City area accent, she is the
“new girl in town,” Tai Frazier. Seeing a golden opportunity, Cher and Dionne
make Tai over and coach her to become a hot property, so to speak, among the
most popular boys. I mean, Murphy rises well enough to the role, but Tai seems
an inauspicious start for Murphy, given her later roles, even if, through her
career, she wasn’t a grandly marquis actress. (She was a good second banana who
was guaranteed to add some spice.)
* Cher
as a character is a mix of ingenuousness, vanity, wiles, possible career
promise, and the more global quality of a simple spoiled brat who willingly
enough does excursions into altruistic behavior. Cannily mixing a surface
“blonde airhead” flavor with a wisdom to work her will (if not quite a
distasteful manipulativeness), Silverstone adds charm to this mixed character.
Cher uses her “powers of persuasion” to get better grades with surprisingly
gullible teachers, and so on; her rhetorical flair, as shown in the narration
that combines semi-satire and fun slang-imitation, suggests that (if, we could
interpolate hypothetically, she could do well on the LSAT) Cher might have a
career as a lawyer (if this means a lawyer less nasty than her father’s
corporate-law armadillo).
But we don’t know how serious Cher
is as lawyer material (not that this means much to the story); her performance
in debate class is entertaining, but she leavens up her work with flakiness.
(Silverstone is attractive enough, but I guess her acting range isn’t terribly
broad, hence her limited film career. After a critically panned turn in a
Batman installment in the 1990s, she apparently hasn’t appeared in anything of
great note. Also, a minor quibble: notices how she does a funny rumple with her
lips in Clueless, which sometimes
suits the character and sometimes just seems an odd mannerism.)
* Even moments that display amusing
enough satire (like Cher’s blithe “love is everywhere” narrated while we see a
boy puking up in a pool at a “Val party” [“Val” = San
Fernando Valley, I presume]) seem to slide by as if they don’t
want to be taken as what the movie generally is about (tone-wise or
ultimate-message-wise). (Daniel Waters would have mined this sort of moment
conspicuously for heightened, centered pitch-black humor.) The one character
who regularly issues one-liners that fit a darker satire is Cher’s father; an
example is his warning to a hip, somewhat smarmy young man, Christian, who has
come to take Cher on a date: “Anything happens to my daughter, I’ve got a .45
and a shovel. I doubt anybody would miss you.” Indicative of the film’s mood,
the boy gives a forgiving goodbye gesture with his stylish hat, as he heads off
with Cher.
* Of course, what would a movie
about high school life be without the requisite stoner(s). There’s a Travis
Birkenstock, played by Breckin Meyer, who is king of the “tardies” (i.e., instances
of being late) to debate class. At one point, when he sees his grade for the
class, he leaps up as if to jump out the window, and the ever-patient teacher (played
by the well-cast Wallace Shawn) grabs him as he beseeches with
forbearance (in a more general advisory), “Would the suicides please wait until…”
Tai Frazier, arriving at school
as a self-revealing druggie, first takes a liking to Travis (as if valuing that
they are druggies of a feather), but Cher and
Dionne steer her to a more honorable/“self-disciplined” circle of kids. Late in
the movie, Travis has turned a new leaf (no pun intended) and given up on
drugs—he is in a 12-step program—and his new obsession is skateboarding. It is
also at this time that Tai really starts a healthy (drug-free, one assumes)
relationship with him.
It’s that kind of movie. The focused-on
stoners give up drugs, and love becomes the main guideline for their lives. This is a
different matter from the apparent key concerns of a swath of today’s high schoolers.
