Where the Boys Are (1984) User Reviews

A mindlessly pleasant 80's romp

[dallaskeffer · 4/10 · 10 March 2006]

Though far from an intelligent production, this 1984 reworking of the 1960 film is nevertheless a fun time capsule of early-to-mid 1980's culture. Forget about plot. This movie is just a mindless and pleasant romp on the beach at Fort Lauderdale before spring breakers were driven out and the monster condos took over the skyline. It features far more location shooting than the original (that one was mostly Hollywood sets) and some interesting 80's music. I am biased; I'm nostalgic for the 80's and I love Fort Lauderdale and Florida, so I may enjoy it more than the average viewer.

Not every film should be a literary gem as life is more than that. "Where the Boys Are" is an honest look at what was going on with the college kids of the time. There is some brief nudity and sexual content that may be mildly distasteful, but that is what was happening in Fort Lauderdale until the late 80's and 90's saw the city powers-that-be effectively sweep the spring break crowd north to Daytona.

Don't build up great expectations and you will probably enjoy this otherwise forgettable flick.

Disappointing

[gberns · 3/10 · 5 April 2005]

At first glance, this seems like it should be a mildly entertaining 80's style spring break party/skin flick. What unfolds is a disappointing attempt at a spring break drama. With a cast that includes babes like Lisa Hartman, Wendy Schaal, and playmate Lynn-Holly Johnson, combined with a R-rating, you'd expect to be fulfilled, yet bikini's and crappy drama is all you get. The R-rating isn't close to being justified, and it could've gotten a G-rating save for a few swear words. There's a few scenes that conjure up a brief chuckle, but you're definitely left wanting more, especially in the scenes with Holly-Johnson, who you'd expect to bare some skin considering her Playboy resume, but she appears to think of herself as more of a Thespian, which is ridiculous, considering I think this was her last big screen appearance. Overall I give it a 3. Rent Spring Break instead.....

"He could be an ax murderer!" .. "With that bod, I'll chance it!"

[moonspinner55 · 3/10 · 1 April 2023]

1960's "Where the Boys Are" repainted as a girls-on-the-make fracas during Spring break in Ft. Lauderdale. These four would-be beach bunnies--on loan from a ski college--don't have in-depth conversations (such as arguing if the term for a rest stop cause is "pee-pee", "tinkle", "leak" or "piss"), but the bright, attractive cast and lively music almost makes up for the noodle-headed writing and directing. No one is out to split the atom here; the slick, silly movie has been put together solely to get randy teenagers feeling even randier. Producer Allan Carr liked to say his film was inspired by the comedy-drama of 1960--there's even a credit "suggested by the novel by Glendon Swarthout"--although this one is not officially a remake; however, it was plugged heavily as "Where the Boys Are '84" (Wikipedia still calls it that). One surely misses Connie Francis' soaring version of the Neil Sedaka-Howard Greenfield-penned title tune over Lisa Hartman's here, but comparing the two movies is a useless argument--frankly, the first film wasn't exactly Shakespeare either. *1/2 from ****

Great, lighthearted fun trip of 80's nostalgia

[dizzymerc21 · 2 August 2011]

I have never felt the need to post here before, although I do frequently read the reviews of other members. I am doing so purely out of dismay at some of the negatives this movie (in my humble opinion) has been given. Obviously, I am far from a film snob and my reasons for enjoying any movie, no doubt come from a very different place than some reviewers, but I consider myself pretty well educated and I have seen many truly dreadful films in my time. This however, is not one of them. I appreciate that it's pretty cheesy fare - just as it was in the 80's when I first saw it - but to me that's part of its charm. It's a lighthearted, feel good and fun way to spend a couple of hours, while reminiscing what was for me, a very special time. It's true that certain scenes (1 in particular for me) do and always have, make me cringe a little but for this movie, that is a positive. There are also many laughs to be had and for me, any film that can entertain throughout and leave me smiling as this one does, has earned its rightful place in my collection and deserves a little more respect for those reasons. I only wish I could find it on DVD, as my well viewed VHS version has definitely seen better days.

Just dreadful

[NeelyO · 1/10 · 7 January 2000]

Allan Carr -- who gave the world both "Grease" movies and "Can't Stop the Music" -- trampled the wonderful 1960 original with this greasy remake, featuring over-the-hill ingenues, a lamely smutty script and just generally poor taste in every possible category.

Worth watching as a jaw-dropping example of Reagan-era crassness, perhaps, but that's about it.

Wish I had just seen the original...remake was a missed opportunity to tell a better story!

[luckybucksproductions · 2/10 · 27 August 2020]

Where the Boys Are '84 is one of those examples of a film that didn't need a remake. The original Where the Boys Are was groundbreaking for its time as it was the first film to suggest, as a young person, you could have premarital sex and it was perfectly okay! That was a big deal in 1960! You could feel the first stirrings of the sexual revolution that was to come later on in the decade. Because the Production Code was in still enforced, everything is pretty restrained. It still had one foot in the 50s when Tuggle (Paula Prentiss) has that cringeworthy line about being a "walking, talking baby factory". The original film's screenplay is like Shakespeare in comparison to the '84 screenplay, which deserved its Razzie nomination for Worst Original Screenplay. The dialogue felt unnatural and not like how people speak in real life with a couple of exceptions.

I think there were so many themes to explore in the '84 remake that were never developed. In the original film we got to know both the guys and the girls characters pretty well. Merritt was the leader of the group, intelligent, down to earth, and on the surface she advocates a feminist point of view of premarital sex. Then she meets Ryder (George Hamilton) and realizes she's not ready for sex. Jennie (Lisa Hartman) comes the closest to this character and there's echoes of this theme when she and Scott (Russell Todd) are on the beach early in the morning. We never really touch upon this subject again, but it's interesting that even in a more "liberated" time, that hasn't changed. Was Jennie from a conservative or religious family? Was she saving it for marriage? Who cares, right? Boobies! Texas S&M! Male blow up doll! (Which I'll get to in a moment. LOL!). The love triangle between Jennie and Camden (Daniel McDonald) could have been stronger. Camden is the kind of "safe" rich guy that would be considered more "appropriate" for her vs. working class "bad boy" Scott. The closest the story comes is when Scott and Camden have a fight at the piano over Jennie. Again, another chance to explore class issues like the original did with Ryder and Merritt, but that was rejected in favor of a predictable vanilla ending.

Sandra (Wendy Schaal) is the spoiled rich girl who lets loose by doing a striptease in a bar. I was kind of surprised her supposedly liberated friend Laurie didn't let her finish taking it all off, but perhaps she was concerned that she would sexually assaulted. Sexual assault is a dramatic theme in the original that the filmmakers narrowly avoided here because I presume it would've been too serious for a lighthearted sex comedy such as this one. I thought it was ironic that she puts down police officers and ends up having a love affair with Ernie, the officer who arrested her and Laurie. I wish there was a love scene between them after they left the party. They could've explored class issues with their relationship. The scene outside Ernie's trailer was one of the strongest scenes in the film because it was honest for once. Too bad the whole movie wasn't like that due to the raunchiness (which I will also get to in a moment).

We never really know why Carol (Lorna Luft) wants a break from her boyfriend Chip (Howard McGillin) (Carol and Chip - haha I just realized how corny their names were LOL). Is she bored with him for some reason? This was right after they had sex (she look like she enjoyed it, but I could be wrong). They could've expanded upon that by showing *why* Chip has become boring. Again, we don't really see it. (Side note: I find it funny that Judy Garland's daughter Lorna was in a film like this, or why any of the actors chose to be in a film like this, for that matter).

Laurie (Lynn-Holly Johnson) is presented as hypersexual and wanting to fulfill her ultimate sexual fantasy with "Conan". In the other strong scene in the film she meets her "Conan" on the beach and makes an "appointment" to hook up with him. But she is thrown for a loop when Conan turns out to be a male escort! I love how she put him in his place about his penis size. She realizes that there's more to a man's attractiveness than his external appearance. At first I thought Laurie was dumb and vapid (she makes a casual racist comment about wanting to be as tanned as Diana Ross, which almost made me turn the film off), but she had more intelligence than I gave her credit for. This kind of female empowerment could've been a big theme in this film (including when Sandra decides to leave Ernie), but there was just not enough of that. They could've made a powerful statement by saying even though the 1980s are a more cynical and progressive decade, how have things changed between the sexes and how have they not? It probably never occurred to the male filmmakers to go in that direction. They wanted to make a raunchy sorority film featuring female lead characters through a male gaze.

Now to the raunchiness. There were times when I thought this film could've had hardcore porn scenes in between the crazy beach scene antics and would've fit right in. We see plenty of topless extras, but none of the female leads got naked. Perhaps they were uncomfortable doing so, although Lorna was in bed with Howard at the beginning of the film (nothing was shown). Oh, there's the infamous Dave, the male blow up sex doll the girls practice foreplay on. It was an attempt at raunchy humor that was kind of strange. What I would've given to be a fly on the wall in those coke fueled production meetings (yeah, you read that right LOL)! This whole movie was like being on one long coke binge. Some of the hair, makeup, fashions, and art direction was dreadful and atrocious! And I usually love 80s style, but not in this film. Perhaps they were on a tight budget and they could only afford certain things. It was just awful. It was like they wrote down every idea they could think of and crammed it all in this film (and not any good ideas). It was the equivalent of throwing food on the wall to see what sticks. They could've still put some racy scenes in it and tell a good story too (because it can't be a movie about college students during Spring Break without a certain degree of wildness). Even in the original film we hear police calls on TV's (Jim Hutton) radio describing the crazy offscreen hijinks of the students. The whole subplot with Sandra's rich aunt was just bizarre. It was nice to see Alana Stewart even though she's not given much to do.

The remake is a desecration of the original one for sure, but it's not totally irredeemable. The cover of "Where the Boys Are" that Lisa Hartman sings isn't bad (but she is no Connie Francis). At least they paid homage to the original song in the end credits. The Rockats were a fun band with some good rockabilly covers of oldies songs (can't believe they're still together! LOL!). I can't fault the actors for their performances. If they were good/decent actors, this was not the film to prove their worth. The four lead actresses were too old to be playing college students, but they were still good looking and attractive, as were the actors who played their love interests. However, the characters they played seemed like caricatures instead of real people for most of the film. They did the best with the poor material they were given. And I can't fault the time period because some of my favorite films are from the 80s. Bad films have been made in every decade and that's the reason why I believe it's a "so bad it's bad" film instead of a "so bad it's good" film that would be worthy of cult status. Even though I saw this film on Tubi for free, I want to rent the DVD to see the extras because I'm such a film geek. LOL

Overall, the potential for an updated good film about how the sexual revolution that came to be in the 60s affected Gen X in the 80s was missed. It serves as an example of how Hollywood has and continues to sacrifice good acting and storytelling in favor of pandering to the lowest common denominator.

Thanks for reading. :-)

Female Sex Romp made for men

[akoaytao1234 · 5/10 · 26 September 2023]

Where the Boys Are is 80s sex comedy about a group College girls trying to get it. But unlike the expectation of it being all girls sex romp, its just a bunch of girls discovering guys are not that big dicks after all except the extremely hot ones. And yes, they still hates snobby people. BUT yet you just know it was intended still for Male Audiences.

Nothing here to write about. The acting can be borderline infuriating but not that bad. The writing is uninspired and only would make sense in a 80s kind of way (a band writer being more better of a classical composer than a real composer out of nowhere). It was written with women not for women. They are practically speaking but in the end are not really making any kind of decision themselves. The 80 amiright. BUT my biggest surprise, is that this is actually a remake of 1960s film - known to first show teenage promiscuity on screen.

Overall, its an 80s and its is what it is. Not recommended.

chick flick before the Hallmark network!

[mm-39 · 5/10 · 26 January 2023]

Chick flick before the Hallmark network! I remember my sister renting where the Boys Are back in the 80's with her friends. Being a young teenager when I watched parts of the V H S rental I thought was lames. Watching on tubi again I found the film lame but charming. Has all the romance angels. Four gals on a road trip, spring break Florida. Run into a who plays in a band, the hunk working class guy. The gals have a bunch of shenanigans! The gal from the Bond movie wants to meet a Conan type hunk. Drinking disorderly behavior with the cops etc, and new wave bands. Where the Boys Are goes totally goes hallmark has the nicer gal who has a love triangle. The rich but self centered musician vs the new waver working guy and the spring breaker must choose. Take one back to the 80's a cooler time, with no social messages; just a charming message, but lame too. 5 Stars.

Fun, but shallow and prurient Spring Break frolics

[Wuchakk · 5/10 · 25 May 2023]

Four college gals from Massachusetts drive to Fort Lauderdale, Florida, for Spring Break where they experience varying results in their pursuit of the opposite sex.

"Where the Boys Are" (1984) is a quasi-remake of the cult classic from 24 years earlier, just way more debauched after the sexual revolution of the 60s. It's not as distasteful as the future "American Pie" flicks, but it mixes a little too much crude sexual exploitation with fun-in-the-sun innocence, at least for my tastes.

Lynn-Holly Johnson and Lisa Hartman stand out on the feminine front but, to be expected (given the scenario), there are several notables on the periphery. On the masculine side of things, Russell Todd is effective as the wannabe rock star contrasted by the classical pianist rich kid played by Daniel McDonald. You might remember Russell from "Friday the 13th Part 2."

A far better movie of this ilk is "Shag" (1989). Still, there are some positives, like Rick Derringer's "Shake Me."

The film runs 1 hour, 34 minutes, and was shot in the Fort Lauderdale area, including Boca Raton.

GRADE: C+

This movie is terrible and I love it!

[stevethepirate2 · 6/10 · 2 December 2010]

I used to watch this movie on VHS at my friend's house after school, in the late eighties. I wish I could find the movie now because I'd definitely buy it. It's a crude beach flick, meant to make you cringe and giggle, and it does it well. The performances are earnest, if not actually good, and you end up actually liking the group of ditzes. The music and the party scenes are enjoyable, in a trashy way, and I love that the rich, upper class characters like Barbara and Camden are so out of place in all the spring break wildness. I mean, who visits their uptight family friends on Spring Break? The plot to this movie is irrelevant, because its fun lies in its brainlessness. Enjoy the half-naked coeds and cheap jokes, because sometimes, that's a beautiful thing.

Classic Drive-in stuff!

[dgordon-1 · 10/10 · 15 October 2001]

I saw this movie back in April 1984 at the 400 Drive-in, in Toronto. The second feature was another classic titled "Spring Break". The plots are basically the same in both movies. With "Where the Boys Are '84", it's about 4 college co-eds that go to Fort Lauderdale for spring break. It's one of my fave movies, I bought it used on VHS last year, and must have watched it over 50 times! The sunshine, beach, the '80s style, and most of all Lisa Hartman, makes this a "so bad it's good" type of movie. What might be offensive to some people is the coarse language, but other than this it's a fun movie to watch. I just hope that one of these days this movie is offered on DVD. If you are looking for some classic '80s drive-in movie fare, this one should be at the top of your list.

Life's a Beach.

[triple8 · 6/10 · 1 January 2004]

I've read some bad reviews about the movie. I am not sure why it's considered THAT bad. This is actually cute though it holds no depth who cares? It's a spring break movie for women! And with all the movies of this nature geared toward men, this movie is a pleasant diversion, a fun time when one's choice in movie watching tends toward a fun light party. One could do worse then pick uo this fun, light remake.

It's not fantastic but a great 'popcorn" movie to watch and has some sweet moments. I'd rate this 6.5 out of 10 and would recommend as a fun light picture to watch when one wants a break from intensity and feels like a beach party. Look for Lisa Hartmen from Knots Landing-she has a major role.

Great Nostalgia!

[j_cerwin · 6 January 2007]

The real charm of these 80's beach movies like "Where the Boys Are '84" is that it brings back the memories of days long gone...especially for us 40-somethings! As for you movie critics that slam this is as a bad flick, get over it! I get as much of a laugh at watching these movies as I do reading the in-depth, serious critiques that condemn the acting and the plot. OK, so this is not academy award material. But so what? It was never meant to be. Its a lot of fun to watch these films and see how Spring Break was represented by these movies makers during the legendary Ft. Lauderdale Spring Break days. That glory will never be again. Today, Ft. Lauderdale has been taken over by convention centers and up-scale hotels. Boring! Almost all of the famous landmarks that made Spring Break in the 80's worth remembering are gone. "The Button", "The Candy Store", and "Cunningham's" to name a few, are all history. "Where The Boys Are '84" and "Spring Break" are the ultimate in nostalgia for anyone that has spent a drunken, crazy night down there during that one week in March when we all went nuts! This film (and "Spring Break") should be forever immortalized in DVD and put in the "80's Hall of Fame" as representative of an era that was a little more innocent (and a lot more brainless) than the sagging, HIV scared, terrorist terrorized, politically-too-correct life we live in now. I say its time for another re-make! "Where The Boy's Are '07" and "Spring Break...Again"! Long live "The Oberlin Student"! Wasn't he in both movies?

"Where The Over-Ripe Actresses Are '84"

[Blooeyz2001 · 7/10 · 3 April 2002]

If you're into Spring Break flicks about Ft. Lauderdale, Fla. in the 1980's you'll probably enjoy this silly romp. These actors are all a little too "over-the-hill" to play college students! Keep an eye on Lorna Luft (she's Judy Garland's daughter & Liza Minelli's half sister) she spends a a lot of time mugging for the camera. She tries very hard to make you believe she's a college kid, but looks more like a 30-something housewife who belongs in a station wagon, not a convertible. An attempt to give her a younger appearance with pigtails (in a beach scene) only makes her look retarded, not youthful. Unintentional laughter will take hold of you when Luft's character, Carole Singer, enters a "Hot Bod"(?!) contest & wins second place!!! The soundtrack is good, with the standout tunes "Seven Day Heaven" by Shandi, & Lisa Hartman's remake of the Connie Francis classic "Where The Boys Are".

F.A., major F.A. (Fox Alert)

[simnia-1 · 8/10 · 22 May 2006]

I'm absolutely astonished at the negative and even erroneous comments people are making about this film. I loved it! For an '80s teen-sex-beach party type of film, what other film could compare? "The Beach Girls" (1982), "Fast Times at Ridgemont High" (1982), "Foreplay" (1982), "Goin' All The Way" (1982), "The Last American Virgin" (1982), "Porky's" (1982), "Spring Break" (1983), "Screwballs" (1983), "Loose Screws" (1985), "Summer School" (1987), "Hard Bodies" (1989)? I've seen most of them, and for my taste none of those even come close to having simultaneously such good music, good humor, and good scenery as this one.

My favorite scene in this movie is in the intro when the girls first hit the road and the great song "Hot Nights" is playing, with nice aerial photography of their convertible zipping along en route to Florida. Lynn-Holly Johnson is one foxy lady! In that (pre-Internet) era when I was just starting to get interested in tracking down films with Lynn-Holly in them, the combination of my having found her by accident in this film, the great music, the aerial photography, and the nice Florida scenery really did it for me. I was thrilled. This became my favorite recent movie for the next several months, and I still haven't seen anything in the same genre that compares since then.

The music is generally good throughout this whole film, which I can't say for the 1960 version or any other teen-sex comedy I've seen. "Hot Nights" is by far the best song, but "Be-Bop-A-Lula," "Slow Down," and "Seven Day Heaven" are good, too, as are the Rockats songs in general. The inflatable man scene, the drunk driving accident scene, and the mansion party scene are high points of humor. The overall upbeat feel of the film is good, and it looks and feels like it was set in Florida, just as it was supposed to. If its goal was to capture the party atmosphere of spring break in Fort Lauderdale in the '80s, it succeeded admirably.

It's hard to compare this film to the original 1960 version because the two versions were set in such different eras that they are almost completely different films. The 1960 version may have been cute in some ways, but it is *so* old-fashioned with its euphemistic talk about "playing house" and the girl being traumatized just because she lost her virginity that it's painful to even watch at some points. In contrast, this 1984 version has freewheeling drugs, drunken driving, and stripping. Nobody's striving to land a husband, and it even has a few topless shots in it. This is a real party movie. To hell with the plot. Who needs a story line in a film like this?

It is not true that there are only non-nude bikini shots in this movie: see the Mister Bullhorn part and the Hot Bod Contest part for topless shots. I also think Lorna Luft has a great body, so I don't understand the criticisms about her being in the Hot Bod Contest. I also didn't notice that the girls looked too old for college, either, since college is full of students of all ages. Also, the criticism that this movie was a "career stopper" for Lynn-Holly and others just isn't logical since it might only be coincidence that those stars didn't go on to make any more significant movies, and other actresses have starred in turkeys and their careers still survived. Also, Lynn-Holly was *not* a Playboy magazine Playmate. She appeared under some bed covers in one photo in the June 1981 issue of Playboy at the time of "For Your Eyes Only" (1981), but I believe that's all. Therefore I don't think many of the criticisms about this film and its actresses are valid or even factual.

A deeper criticism might be that most of the humor relies on sex, alcohol, and drugs: the M*A*S*H syndrome. I've watched this film at times when I thought all the humor was funny, and at other times when I thought all the humor fell totally flat, so apparently it depends on your mood and your perception of those topics. In any event, this film definitely captured a freer, more tolerant era, just before the War On Drugs became oppressive, just before the AIDS scare became serious, and before the city of Fort Lauderdale harassed spring breakers nearly out of existence in that city. I never thought I'd look back on the '80s with affection, but considering America's post-9/11 Zeitgeist, the '80s are starting to look pretty darned good in comparison.

No matter how you look at it, this film definitely deserves a *lot* higher rating than its current 2.5/10. I give it 8/10.

Where's the really bad film, cause this ain't it.

[videorama-759-859391 · 6/10 · 26 May 2015]

I really feel like this fun sex foursome + 1 hunk comedy has been singled out. There were many others floating about, before or in the after, male or female, where I'm not gonna run down a list. On the contrare, this is one of the better ones. At least it has a story and characters, you involve yourself in, instead of just going for the T and A. By no means, I'm not saying it's a good film, but it wasn't the worst film of 84. May'be it's close, I don't know, but just take in what I've just told you. It's hard to believe this was a remake of a respectable sixties film, but we have to get with the times. You know the story: girls go looking for the three S's, where the setting is Fort Lauderdale, yeah again, you spring breakers. The actresses are quite good, particularly Schall, as a southern belle, and Lisa Hartman, who I have a soft spot for. The girls have their own issues, one falls fall in love, one is to marry, whatever. One line of dialogue, there's a reference to Dickie Gere, when one of the lasses is kissing a blow up doll. I don't know, but I quite enjoyed this one, and there are some some real cheesy, so fake moments, but like I said, I really couldn't understand why this movie has been like, picked on. It's joins those other foursome teen sex comedies, but this is of higher rank. Oh did I mean, Lisa Hartman. You decide. Funny start.

Millennial's Just Don't Get It

[TobaccoSmoke · 19 June 2021]

This is one of my top spring/summer movies to watch every year. The movie emits a signature 80's aura to it that has me longing for the year it was released - 1984! A time when college student revelry during spring break was a must! I love each character and the Florida scenery, even with all the cheesy scenes, like the bouncy dance competition. It's still nostalgic and that's right up my alley. You could even see hints of homosexuality where muscle men are riding on each other's shoulders, lol! To me, it's just good amusement. There is also something about road trips and checking into sleazy, run-down beach motels that I love. Probably because I remember staying in those places where the beds had loud flower covers and the vending machines only produced warm soda. Sure it was hard time, but plenty of us still have fine memories surrounding these little misfortunes. 1984 was perhaps the best year of my life (I wore a pair of checkerboard VANS!) and this movie brings it all back so well. People who never experienced being a young adult in the 80's will never understand how much of a blast the decade was. Louise Sorel and Wendy Schaal are two 80's actresses I admire for their class and talents, both have a history of comedy/drama roles and are definitely underrated, not to mention gorgeous. The producers also did a great job of actually making wealthy characters likable. You even felt sympathy for them, especially when Camden performs his heart out to Jenny on piano, competing with Scott. Giving a hoot about "snooty" characters like these is a rarity in flicks now. No one will ever change my opinion about this movie because it's so well rooted into my past and, of course, it makes me wanna go back to 1984 every time I watch it, even if all I do is grab a warm DrPepper from a vending machine at the beach RAID house. I'm packed.

OMG This is my absolute favorite movie of all time!

[meredithkaybutler · 10/10 · 23 June 2021]

This movie is my teen years! This was the goal for our spring break, I never got to do this, but this was such a great movie to bring back all of those memories. Laurie's hair is something I've loved and have strived for all my life (love the curls & the tan!), Lisa Hartman, stunning in the movie and in life, Laura Luft (daughter of Judy Garland) was just perfect for the part and some of Sandra's quotes from the movie, along with Laurie's.. these are quotes I use today. "You're on vacation cleaning other people's toilets" "and a quarter, in case I have to call home" "time is money"... just so many things that were awesome in the movie. I loved it. I'll always love it. Thank you for reading my review! :)

They aimed low and hit their mark!

[Hoohawnaynay · 15 January 2004]

This is a really tacky 80's movie. Crass, crude humor that is not really dirty or shocking enough to be funny. This movie was made 40 year olds, acted by late 20's to late 30 year olds, made for horny teenagers and I bet even they were unsatisfied. The original 1960 version was a light piece of fluff that was beautifully filmed and had an innocence to it. There is nothing innocent about this! Lorna Luft entering a "Hot bod" contest? Okay, she is no slouch but she is not Carmen Electra! All this movie needed to push it over the edge was a cameo by producer Allan Carr playing a lesbian gym teacher on vacation. If you want to see some really bad 80's perms and fashions then by all means knock yourself out and watch. It does have some bad movie appeal.

This is progress?

[The_Film_Cricket · 24 March 2014]

You know that theory of human cloning that says that if you make a clone of a clone of a clone, the results will be diluted and far less defined than the original the more copies you make? Where the Boys Are is kind of like that. It comes so far down the line of Horny Teenager flicks that even the mere idea feels watered down and diluted. There is nothing here you haven't seen before even from fellow inferior clones.

The pitch idea, flimsy as it was, might have seemed tantalizing. There is the typical standard, average story of kids who are up to no good heading to Fort Lauderdale to party and get laid. The twist is that instead of four guys, there are four girls. That's not exactly a step forward for women especially considering that this female quartet is just as boneheaded as any quartet of guys. If that's equality God help us all.

The movie follows these four college girls down to Ft. Lauderdale for spring break. There is the potential to build characters there. There's Laurie (Lynn-Holly Johnson, who won a Razzie for this) who thinks and dreams only of hot sex with a hunk. There's Sandra (Wendy Schaal) who seeks the heart of a good man. There's Carol (Lorna Luft) who needs a vacation from her boyfriend. There is Jennie (List Hartman) who is torn between the affections for a stuffy concert pianist and a rocker. The potential, you can see, is there to build some characters but the movie doesn't have that kind of energy. This isn't a movie so much as a checklist of antics from a hundred other party movies.

The characters are irritating. They talk in short, clichéd sentences and only do what is required of them by the genre. I could say that the camera loves them but even that little detail is lost on this film. The title suggests more than the movie can provide. Hearing it may illicit memories of the old Connie Francis ditty (never heard here) from the 60s but one look at the film takes a bat that notion. The soundtrack that is on display is dead as a doornail.

The only point of interest in this film is to note that it was produced by Allan Carr three years before he produced the Oscar show that paired Snow White and Rob Lowe in a duet of "Proud Mary" and three years after he unleashed The Village People's "Can't Stop the Music" into the very first Best Picture award at the Razzies. 'nuff said.

only marginally better than "Attack of the Killer Tomatoes"

[Kcuaron · 2 May 2003]

I saw the original in 1960 and it was a piece of fluff even for back then. What I can't understand is who would want to remake a bad movie, except, perhaps, if your goal was to end the collective careers of everyone in the cast. All the actors were a little long in the tooth for the roles they played. Lisa Hartman Black looked like she may have been a professor at Heidi Fleiss University but a 21 - 22 year old co-ed? I don't think so. This movie was so awful, I felt embarrassed for the actors. Come to think of it, it did effectively serve as a career-ender for several of them. On the whole, I think it's only marginally better than the "Attack of the Killer Tomatoes," which is generally believed to be THE worst movie of all time.