MovieChat Forums > A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints (2006) Discussion > A 1986 movie placed in the 1970's was di...

A 1986 movie placed in the 1970's was distracting?


I was these kid's age in the 1970s. The music and the clothing were from that decade...halter tops, boob tubes, cut off shorts. I know the music from the 80s sucked, but kids that age are permanently marked by the decade of their teens, especially by the music, whether they liked it or not. I enjoyed the movie and I got the message. But I was so distracted by my memories of the 70's that I felt the movie was disingenuous to the 80's and therefore found it a little hard to take seriously. Anybody else in their mid 40's experience the same distraction?

reply

no

reply

Now that I think about it, it didn't really scream 80s to me at tall. I was kinda thinking Summer of Sam while watching it.

reply

I absolutely felt the same way. By 1986, no-one in the NYC metro area was asking "disco or rock?" any more. And there was no (or very little) midriff-baring by girls in the mid-80's. I don't really know where they went wrong here, because the director lived this story. At least the musical references to Black Flag and hardcore in general were on the money...





Right. Well, I have to-- I have to go now, Duane, because I, I'm due back on the planet Earth.

reply

maybe these kids were that poor they could'nt afford modern 80's clothing,in which case it makes it even more realistic.

what do you want - for them to be wearing pastel pink shoulder padded suits whilst driving around in deloreans ,talking on gigantic cellular phones & listening to duran duran like every other cliche used in modern movies to portray the 80's.

reply

the only ones wearing seventies clothes were the two girls in the group besides that everyone just wore normal dirty clothes that didnt have a time period. And as for the music the kids never really listened to music in the movie except for dito and mike talking about it.

Dear Diary.... JACKPOT

reply

The standout song in the movie was Gerry Rafferty's "Baker Street", which was playing near the climax of the movie in the last scene with Frank the Dog Walker. The song was recorded in 1978. It does have a timeless feel to it though.

Also, just a thought - I thought Robert Downey Jr looked far too old to play Dito 20 years later. In general, I think the movie didn't do well at conveying a realistic sense of a certain period of time.

reply

I thought Robert Downey Jr looked far too old to play Dito 20 years later...

that bugged me a little. how do rosario dawson, eric roberts and robert downey jr. even look the same age at all?

reply

well it couldn't be set in the 70s, dito's not that old.

the downey/dawson thing bugged me too. i just kept thinking how far apart in age they are in real life. but hey it's done all time (like with bea arthur and estelle getty being the same age, vicki lawrence for mama's family, etc).

and with eric roberts playing older antonio, maybe the filmmakers cast him to kind of portray antonio throwing his life away. he's never done anything with his life and now he's in prison, so he can't really be all that beautiful

I'm not prejudiced. I hate all stupid people.

reply

I agree. As far as trying to set the movie in the 80s, this film didn't make much effort. All the music is from the 70s and the hairstyles do not reflect the 70s or the 80s. Not one mullet? Mid-80s was Cyndi Lauper and the Material Girl. Pet Shop Boys. Prince. The girls would've had big hair and torn tutus over jeans.

reply

You're right. Actually alot of the music was from the 70's also.Gerry Rafferty's
Baker St? 1977.. Actuallythe filmlooked totally 1970's to me. Great film, though.
maybe because I loved the 70's!

reply

Nobody but nobody shaved their hair in the 1970's, or 1980's except marines, Hare Krishna devotees or arty types; if anyone had walked through where I lived with a shaved head during that period he would have got some looks I can tell you. When Telly Savalas shaved his head instead of wearing a hair piece he was taking a risk of standing out and looking like a wierdo but he pulled it off.

the jeans were straight, not baggy and there was no fake fading, they were straight blue, and cut off jeans came way up the thigh not down to the knees like todays style; at that time baggy shorts was thought of as 1940's

reply

I agree...it really looked like the 70's to me.

Om Mani Padme Hum

reply

I liked this movie, but, yes...I thought there were way too many 70's references for it to be about the 80's.




"I can't stand a naked light bulb, any more than..a rude remark or a vulgar action" Blanche DuBois

reply

This movie was completely like it swas in the 70s. I don't know why they just didn't place it there. Right fom the start when they played Native New Yorker I was confused why would they do that I don't know or want to know. thank you

reply

Yeah, I wasn't too sure what decade they were trying to be in. While it was supposed to take place in the mid-80's, the entire soundtrack was from the mid-late 70's. The scene with the dog walking guy singing along to Baker Street seemed lifted from the Boogie Nights scene where the coke dealer is singing Sister Christian. Decent film for the most part, although I also found it ironic that Downey Jr and LaBeouf were cast as the older and younger Dito, respectively. Talk about irony.

reply

how is that ironic.

reply

they might not look much alike but downey was pretty damn good at imitating shia, so who cares

reply

apparently nobody has read the book. did anyone notice the black acid wash skirt worn by the girl in the striped tube top?

in 1986 I was in jr. high and EVERYONE dressed like that. the big clue is when Dito mentions Journey. This was as 80s as it gets. As far as the shaved head, these guys were into the hardcore punk scene (though not explored in the film) which would explain such a hairstyle.

the costumes were perfect.

reply