This article was written by Oliver Macnaughton on Friday, April 2nd, 2022.

It deals
with the lm adaptation of the book The Bon re of the Vanities. The article
highlights the contrasts between the great success of the book and the failure of
the movie adaptation directed by De Palma.It seeks to nd the reasons why the
lm was a real box-o ce bomb. We will rst see that the lm started on a good
path but quickly faced unforeseen events that led it to failure before being
destroyed by the various pejorative reviews.

At rst sight, the movie seemed to be going well. The producer was counting on
the success of Wolfe’s novel to bring forth a blockbuster. He was also counting on
the fact that there was already a commercial market for Wall Street Satire and
hoped to take advantage of that with his lm. In addition to that, the lm featured
well-known actors such as Tom Hanks and, at rst glance, they seem to t their
role perfectly. What could also have contributed to the lm’s notoriety is the fact
that the producer, De Palma, let a journalist, names Salomon, document the movie
and its shooting. That authorization allowed the director to have an outside
perspective even before the lm was released in theaters. Indeed, a Warner Bros
executive said that it was « the best lm we’ve ever made. » All of these elements
pointed to a glorious and prosperous future for the lm. However, things didn’t go
as planned…

As soon as the script was written, the producer had to deal with major issues : the
stereotypical image of the black community leaders portrayed in the book and the
contrast between the wealthy areas in Manhattan and the prevailing poverty in the
Bronx, where a dystopian war image was given. Moreover, in the book’s story none
of the characters seems likable or sympathetic, which does not correspond to the
cinema’s standard. Indeed, the spectator must be able to identify with this kind of
characters. During the shooting, De Palma also experienced some di culties :
some of the actors were not even often present on the set, like Bruce Willis for
example. The producer also faced rebellions from people on the set such as
Salomon.Then, as soon as the lm was released, things went wrong and elements
had to be corrected. Such a thing is rarely done on big budget lms with such a
great magnitude.But, despite these corrections, the journalists’ critics were not as
good as the producer expected. Most of them were pejorative and downplayed the
lm on all of its aspects. All these criticisms led to the failure of the movie in the
theaters. A third of the lm’s production cost was barely paid back by the box
o ce with a revenue of only 15 millions dollars.

Despite the lm’s failure, the producer De Palma does not see this project as a
mistake in his life. In spite of all the negatives reviews, the producer have said,
many years after, that the movie have been judged before being even seen and
therefore was not judged at its true value. In his opinion, it will remain an excellent
lm, quite up to standard of all the productions he made throughout his career
even if they were more successful than that one.
fi
fi
fi
ffi
fi
fi
fi
ffi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ffi
fi