Roger Ebert Absolutely Hated Patrick Dempsey’s Cult ’80s Teen Comedy – SlashFilm

Director Steve Rash’s 1987 teen comedy “Cannot Purchase Me Love” has one thing of an arch premise. Patrick Dempsey stars as Ronald, an uncool nerd who lives subsequent door to Cindy (Amanda Peterson), a well-liked cheerleader and the kind of particular person he might by no means affiliate with at their class-obsessed highschool. When Cindy by chance spills wine on certainly one of her mom’s suede outfits, Ronald presents her $1,000 to interchange it in alternate for her pretending to be his girlfriend for a month, hoping that “courting” her will elevate his social standing at college. Cindy already has a boyfriend, however he is away at school, so she agrees (albeit reluctantly).

This course of goes nicely at first, as Cindy realizes that Ronald is definitely a candy, first rate child with a deep appreciation for poetry and astronomy. Ronald, in the meantime, discovers that associating with Cindy is certainly rising his clout at college, so he turns into boastful and even imply-hearted as his recognition will increase.

“Cannot Purchase Me Love” was a kind of movies that ’80s youngsters watched frequently on cable TV or at slumber events, with a few of us seeing it a number of instances with out making an attempt. It additionally helped make Dempsey a teen idol, and he cemented that standing along with his later roles in movies like “Coupe de Ville.” (Clearly, this was lengthy earlier than Dempsey’s days on “Gray’s Anatomy.”) “Cannot Purchase Me Love” is not a terrific film by any measure — its examination of recognition and sophistication in highschool is hardly revolutionary — however folks of a really particular age keep in mind it fondly.

Robert Ebert, nevertheless, deeply hated it. In his half-star evaluation, Ebert wrote that it “makes American youngsters appear like silly and materialistic twits. […] It would not have a thought in its head and doubtless no notion of the corruption at its core.”

To some, “Cannot Purchase Me Love” would possibly seem to be a light-weight however in any other case innocent romantic comedy. Can youngsters put apart their obsession with social standing lengthy sufficient to see one another extra carefully? And the way a lot does standing do harm to a teen’s psyche? Roger Ebert did not care about such considerations, although, arguing that the film’s values had been backward. “Is that this actually a portrait of teenage America?” Ebert requested, after which answered, “After all not. It’s extra probably a portrait of the possession-oriented values of the adults who made this movie.”

Ebert continued by writing, “The youngsters within the faculty are portrayed, virtually with out exception, as monstrously merciless snobs. Their mother and father are usually uncaring, unloving, or absent.” He went on:

“If ‘Cannot Purchase Me Love’ had been meant as a satirical assault on American values — if cynicism had been its goal — we is likely to be on to one thing right here. However no. On the premise of the proof, the individuals who made this film are so materialistic they really suppose this can be a ‘teenage comedy.’ Cannot they see the screenplay’s rotten core?”

Ebert identified that there had been a spate of teenage romantic comedy movies within the mid-Eighties that handled comparable themes (particularly, unpopular youngsters pining for well-liked ones), citing motion pictures like “Lucas,” “Sixteen Candles,” and “Gregory’s Woman,” all of which he appreciated. However he famous that these movies “revered the innocence and even the idealism of their adolescent characters.” “Cannot Purchase Me Love,” Ebert felt, had an extremely bleak worldview … and bought it as innocence.

On the core of Roger Ebert’s considerations, as a reader would possibly intuit, was his points with teenage innocence. Ebert clearly felt that adolescent movie characters must be depicted as retaining a sure diploma of their youthful pleasure about life. And for Ebert, introducing cash right into a romantic transaction was too miserable to contemplate. He concluded his evaluation by writing:

“It might be true in our society that folks marry for cash. That they search profitable folks to exit with. That they attempt to purchase recognition. However if you end up an adolescent, love is not any respecter of greed, and the center beats robust and true. The makers of ‘Cannot Purchase Me Love’ by no means knew that, or have forgotten it.”

It is also value remembering that Ebert additionally hated slasher motion pictures for comparable causes. He typically referred to them as “lifeless teenager motion pictures,” which he outlined in 2012 as a “generic time period for any film primarily involved with killing youngsters, with out regard for logic, plot, efficiency, humor, and so on. Usually imitated; by no means worse than the ‘Friday the thirteenth’ sequels.”

Ebert hated to see teenagers being mistreated in motion pictures for causes of leisure, and he did not respect when teen characters got an unrealistic diploma of grownup irony. Let the youngsters have their innocence.

Now, outwardly cynical motion pictures about extra lifelike horrors that include the broader teen expertise, Ebert was superb with. As an example, he liked “Higher Luck Tomorrow” (which is technically a part of the “Quick and Livid” universe, amusingly sufficient), and he was principally okay with “Heathers” (itself, surprisingly, a field workplace flop), i.e. movies that cope with youngsters committing crimes in some method. However when a film like “Cannot Purchase Me Love” tried to masks its inside materialism with “candy” interactions, he bristled.