Home Alone (1990)

Director: Chris Columbus

Cast: Macaulay Culkin, Joe Pesci, Daniel Stern, Catherine O’Hara

Have I Seen It Before: Oh, sure. I’m six years old in 1990, it would have been a marvel of avoidance—or a set of parents far more concerned about cartoonish violence than the ones I had—to somehow get to my 40s without having seen it probably half a dozen times.

Did I Like It: I’d be remiss to start this review without a word about Catherine O’Hara. That’d be the big reason why the review gets written now, as she passed away on Friday. Shee could play the imminently believable Kate McCallister here and seamlessly switch gears in the span of just a few years between the hateful/delightful Delia Deetz in Beetlejuice (1988), Sally the Ragdoll in The Nightmare Before Christmas (1993) and spend most of the rest of the next decade regularly being the best thing in a series of Christopher Guest movies where there were plenty of candidates for the MVP. I don’t say this lightly, but: She shared and was ultimately the heir to Madeline Kahn’s reign as the livewire in whatever movie she appeared. Now that they are both gone, I can’t think of talent that reaches anywhere close.

Yeah. Pretty safe bet that a review of A Mighty Wind is coming pretty quick.

But let’s try and make this review about something this movie offers that doesn’t get talked about all that much. There’ve been a dozen times when I seriously gave consideration to adding a field in the early matter detailing the credited screenwriter. One can make all the arguments about the auteur theory they can, and there are plenty of films where those arguments are unassailable, but I think the real reason I didn’t include the field is the prospect of going back to all of the previously written reviews and having to add that info. This film does feel of a piece with other Chris Columbus films, but that may be in no small part because this film was such a success that studios continued to hire him with the hope that he would bring some of Home Alone to those subsequent films. But we really need to talk about John Hughes’ work here. From all angles, this is obviously a family comedy, but it has the seemingly breezy, complicated plotting of the best thrillers. One can see the raw material for Kevin’s (Culkin, with enough charisma to spare that one never questions why they built a movie around him) war on crime all around the house, but the moments that drift in during act one that make the conceit work are unfurled so as not to make the viewer aware that they are seeing a plot unfold, but that Christmas is chaotic and anything can happen. Definitely, Hughes’ screenwriting work is not given enough credit here.

Diner (1982)

Director: Barry Levinson

Cast: Steve Guttenberg, Daniel Stern, Mickey Rourke, Tim Daly

Have I Seen it Before: Yes, but it has been ages.

Did I Like It: It’s the mark of an unassailably likable fil that it can feature five (six, if you count Paul Reiser’s Modell, but he does seem like he merely orbits the movie more than the others) main characters who range from willfully obnoxious (Guttenberg, and honestly the food, too—who puts gravy on french fries?) to believably pig-headed (Daly) and still be enjoyable.

Maybe it’s that the film is so forgiving of its leads, that I as the viewer can’t help but be forgiving of them, too. They like each other despite themselves, and that camaraderie doesn’t feel desperately co-dependent like some other “the friends of your youth are the best friends you’ll ever have” films of the period. They have enough problems on their own without ruining each other’s lives, minus a roast beef sandwich, a manger, or anything Boogie (Rourke) has cooking up. I’m looking in your direction, The Big Chill (1983).

Maybe it’s that the film reflects the young adult male experience pretty spectacularly. I knew each of these guys. While it may the film’s least believable sub-plot, I knew a guy in college who would have absolutely done the football test for a prospective spouse. I remember going to his wedding quite well, if for no other reason than the marriage was over inside of a year, in case anyone was wondering what an ill-advised sequel to the film might have looked like. 

Although, you can’t help but wonder what became of the characters in the 60s and beyond. As with most great films, I think it is the timelessness written into its DNA. That kind of interaction has not changed much from 1959 to 1982 to 2009 to now. The only thing that has changed now is that you don’t have to wonder about the guys from the diner. You just need to search for them on Facebook.