MovieChat Forums > Singles (1992) Discussion > Singles...23 years later

Singles...23 years later


I loved this film in 1992, so much so that I went out a bought the soundtrack.

I saw it last night for the first time in 15+ years, and my opinion of the film has really gone down. What seemed fresh over two decades ago now seems like an shameless effort to market a generation and its lifestyle. Its selling grunge for sure, with Chris Cornell, and Pearl Jam all acting, and the soundtrack is like a best of grunge.

Back in the early 90s, there was an idea of a radically new generation (Gen X), as almost a second coming of the 1960s. But this was all hype, and by 1995, the idea had become a joke. It makes this film obsolete.

The performances were generally ok, but Campbell Scott and Kyra Sedgewick were so annoying, it ruins their storyline. Matt Dillon is miscast. Bridget Fonda is really the only bright spot.

I'll take Punctuality

reply

I didn't like it then for basically the same reason. I wasn't an old fuddy duddy then either, I was 23 years old, like a lot of the characters were supposed to be.

I'm in RI, and I liked most of the bands on the soundtrack BEFORE the whole Seattle scene exploded nationally.

The movie just sucked. Crappy movie filled with vignettes with *beep* love stories and really no plot at all.

Ok, the name of the movie is Singles, I get that, but I think most expected more than the literal translation.

reply

I saw it in the theatre when it came out. I enjoyed it for the same reason I did tonight, rewatching it for the first time since then--it's light, not stupid, has a good soundtrack, enough characters to keep it interesting, there's an absence of moralizing, and its construction is charming without being cutesie.

People at the time who I knew (on the east coast) who weren't into bands or any real "scenes," I think took it as more of an instruction manual, or as a realistic peek into the Seattle/grunge thing that had started unfolding in the late '80s, then others of us, who saw it more as amusing and not hitting the mark, but not infuriatingly so.

Matt Dillon's character was a caricature. He looked perfectly right, but either he's not that good an actor or the part is too cartoonishly drawn--not sure which. There would have been a lot more drugs, smoking, and booze at that time and a lot more swearing. I remember when I first saw it I was slightly annoyed because the only really creative person who was a main character was made to look silly/foolish.

Bridgette Fonda's character was sort of on the fringe of being cool, and there were lots of girls like her. Campbell Scott's character didn't ring exactly true. If he had been such a big deal DJ in college he would have looked cooler and/or geekier than his character did.

But some things were really funny to see, like all the answering machines, the fact that people that age ---it was true!--- could have actually good jobs without it being the total focal point of their lives---Being A Success or Having a Career. That was very true. People our age tended to be moderately ambitious, but not bloodthirsty and competitive. There was a sense of abundance, and that if you worked relatively hard and were relatively good at and interested in what you were doing, you would make a decent salary, and have a car and an apartment, a pretty cool wardrobe, and be able to take modest trips or whatever--and none of that was that big a deal. Going out many nights a week to see live music in small clubs, talking about music, listening to music together and just hanging out was something people did. "Wanna come over and listen to music?" "Sure, why not?" Have a beer and listen to music and talk, maybe head out later.

I remember at the time we thought it was fake that Bridgette Fonda's character would have even considered having the baby. I did not know literally anyone who had a baby that young. Everyone was on birth control (women). And if someone occasionally got pregnant (usually for forgetting to take their pill or skipping wearing their diaphram), they'd have an abortion. I remember at the time this came out I thought "Focking Bush Administration messaging!" because the tide toward post-60s conservativism was picking up speed then, like the anti-abortion/choice movement. I doubt that people not born in that era would even blink at the fact that she almost had the baby. But at the time, my best guy friend who saw it at the time and I rolled our eyes.

I knew people who left the east coast and headed to Seattle in the late '80s. I was curious about the scene out there, but got the impression that it was a little too raw for me. It probably was---and this movie definitely cleans it up and sands the edges way down. Again: makes it a little silly. That's partly because Cameron Crowe was always an outsider and always a little bit squeaky clean.

Gen X was different from the Baby Boomers, to be sure. We just were kind of like middle children, with Baby Boomers being extremely dominant and self important oldest child. They still are, still think themselves the center of the universe, and maybe that's what bugs them about Milennials--the "spoiled" precocious youngest child--the Milennials are finally taking the spotlight from the Baby Boomers. Our Gen X generation just sort of went along without too much of a fricking fuss about ourselves.

"Grunge," tho that's a stupid label, was very radical---the whole DIY thing was very powerful, and very fun.

reply

Interesting thoughts, thanks.

A slight correction, it was Kyra Sedgewick's character who was pregnant.

I think Generation X is a real thing, I didn't mean to indicate otherwise. I was born in the early 60s, and growing up, I was always alienated from those who were older than me. They were so imperious, pompous, and self righteous about their music, their politics, etc. It wasn't clear to me that a entire new generation had formed until the late-80s. What you say about Gen Xers feeling like the 'middle child' is spot on!

That said, I don't like the idea of hyping generation. That's exactly what the baby boomers did, and its why I dislike the generation as a whole. It seems to me that most Gen Xers would agree. That's one thing I can say as an early Gen Xers, we hated stereotyping.

This is where the film went awry, IMO. Still, its Cameron Crowe, and as you say, its pretty much harmless stuff.

As far as the Seattle/grunge scene being raw, with a lot of booze and drugs, I think that's also been hyped a lot. My sister has lived there since the 80s, and I spent a lot of time there in the 90s. It seemed to me that there were a lot of 'scenesters' there who went out of their way to seem raw and edgy.

Interesting discussion, thanks again for the reply.

reply

If the movie were made today, Bill Pullman would have said 'Bless you' at the end.

reply