A very strange fish-out-of-water comedy with straight-laced stiff-upper-lip British art dealer Daniel Day-Lewis sent down South to try to purchase a priceless painting from kooky patriarch Harry Dean Stanton and contending with the various family lunatics. The tone of the film is quite uneven and the comedic moments are more mildly amusing rather than laugh-out-loud funny. Other films and books have done both the "normal guy out of his depth" and lampoon of the Southern Gothic family more expertly, but that is not to indicate that the film does not have some memorable moments. Some of the supporting performances are well done, particularly Maury Chaykin's obnoxious Elvis-garbed bully son and Martha Plimpton, as the sex-crazed teenager, who accompanies Day-Lewis on his trip. Unfortunately, others like Joan Cusack, Glenne Headley, Will Patton and Laurie Metcalf are either stuck with overly broad roles or limited screen time. Pat O'Connor's direction is rather clumsy and rough resulting in a film that moves in starts and stops, and misses the mark more often than not. Arguably the most interesting reason to see the film is Day-Lewis himself. Usually he plays straight dramatic roles filled with sweaty angst, it is rare to see him in a comedy, much less playing such a well-intentioned, discombobulated dweeb. He is surprisingly appealing and throws himself body and soul into the part, even when the film does not remotely deserve such consideration. It is a shame that he has refrained from doing much comedy, because he does show some skill in frantic slapstick moments - whether running around a hotel trying to prevent the meeting of two women or escaping from gangsters buck naked after being forced to strip. Not to digress, but Day-Lewis' surprising full frontal nude scene during the strip and escape is certainly another plus for any fans of his as, much like comedy, nudity is something he rarely does in his dramas.
15 Reviews
comic misfire has its moments
mjneu595 January 2011
It may be a far cry from classic screwball comedy, but even during its many forgettable moments this fish-out-of-water farce isn't a total write-off. Certainly there's nothing in it to justify the cold-blooded lack of confidence that killed it at the Box Office: the throwaway release it received is usually reserved for lame dogs someone wants put out of misery, and in this case it worked.
At least the film never pretends to be anything more than what it is: a self-consciously wacky social comedy with an outsider's exaggerated, broad-as-a-barn-door view of American manners, starring Daniel Day Lewis as a dapper English art appraiser who runs into an oddball collection of cartoon Confederate rebels while investigating a lost Renoir in backwoods Georgia. All the film needs is a laugh-track to become a respectable TV sitcom (a degenerate Beverly Hillbillies?), but director Pat O'Connor doesn't show much aptitude for low comedy, and the laughs collapse into a feeble slapstick conclusion, leaving the door wide open for a sequel which will never be made.
At least the film never pretends to be anything more than what it is: a self-consciously wacky social comedy with an outsider's exaggerated, broad-as-a-barn-door view of American manners, starring Daniel Day Lewis as a dapper English art appraiser who runs into an oddball collection of cartoon Confederate rebels while investigating a lost Renoir in backwoods Georgia. All the film needs is a laugh-track to become a respectable TV sitcom (a degenerate Beverly Hillbillies?), but director Pat O'Connor doesn't show much aptitude for low comedy, and the laughs collapse into a feeble slapstick conclusion, leaving the door wide open for a sequel which will never be made.
Reminds me of another Harry Dean Stanton misfire "Twister"
merklekranz31 January 2013
This fish out of water film has Daniel Day Lewis, uptight Englishman, thrown into a dysfunctional family of Southern hillbillies lead by Harry Dean Stanton. Not unlike Stanton's similar misfire movie "Twister", the story is slight, but not as stretched as "Twister". Both movies have offbeat characters on parade. "Stars and Bars" begins with a rather unflattering view of New York City, and then relies on Georgia backwoods stereotypes for both dark and slapstick humor. This film would certainly have to be classified as an acquired taste, and there are plenty of dead spots throughout. Nevertheless, the quirky characters, played by some good character actors, is enough to recommend for admirers of the strange. - MERK
Depending on your expectations, you'll either hate it or love it.
eno200030 November 2002
This is one of those rare films that seems to divide into only two
groups:
You will only be able to love or hate this movie. However, I think the
previous reviews leave out an essential element to determining which camp
you fall into: whether you are interested in the actors (based on
previous
roles) or the film.
The best way to give you some idea of what to expect is the usual vehicle: comparison with other films. If you loved Martin Scorcese's film, After Hours or enjoyed Something Wild (with Melanie Griffith and Jeff Daniels) or were even guiltily amused by Who's That Girl (Madonna and Griffin Dunne), then you will probably like this movie. Stars and Bars uses a similar formula of "straight laced, uptight man" being taken for a wild adventure by "free-spirited, sexy woman".
Obviously, this would put someone like Daniel Day-Lewis into the right role (a tightly wound serious man), but in a very different universe from films like "My Left Foot" and "The Age of Innocence". If you are hoping for another period piece or serious art, this film is not for you. Luckily, I happen to like films that range from Wim Wenders to the latest Adam Sandler vehicle. :)
The best way to give you some idea of what to expect is the usual vehicle: comparison with other films. If you loved Martin Scorcese's film, After Hours or enjoyed Something Wild (with Melanie Griffith and Jeff Daniels) or were even guiltily amused by Who's That Girl (Madonna and Griffin Dunne), then you will probably like this movie. Stars and Bars uses a similar formula of "straight laced, uptight man" being taken for a wild adventure by "free-spirited, sexy woman".
Obviously, this would put someone like Daniel Day-Lewis into the right role (a tightly wound serious man), but in a very different universe from films like "My Left Foot" and "The Age of Innocence". If you are hoping for another period piece or serious art, this film is not for you. Luckily, I happen to like films that range from Wim Wenders to the latest Adam Sandler vehicle. :)
An astoundingly bad movie
roisinmoriarty17 April 2001
Like a lot people unfortunate enough to see this film, I chose to watch it because Daniel Day Lewis was in it. I mean, I've seen this guy play Hamlet on stage; I know what he's capable of so what on earth possessed him to make such a breathtakingly terrible film? Come to think of it, what possessed Harry Dean Stanton, Joan Cusack and Laurie Metcalf? They're all good actors and I just can't understand why they had anything to do with such unadulterated tripe.
Thankfully I'd actually taped the film to watch later so I was able to stop and start and eventually just scan through it to see what the final outcome was. Needless to say, the conclusion to this truly lame movie was as bad as the rest of it.
If you're curious about "Stars and Bars" and are thinking that maybe you'll take a peek if you come across it just to see how bad it really is; do yourself a favour and don't bother. It's not even worth seeing for that reason.
As for Day Lewis, Dean Stanton, Cusack and Metcalf: hang your heads in shame people; you're all smart enough to know better.
Thankfully I'd actually taped the film to watch later so I was able to stop and start and eventually just scan through it to see what the final outcome was. Needless to say, the conclusion to this truly lame movie was as bad as the rest of it.
If you're curious about "Stars and Bars" and are thinking that maybe you'll take a peek if you come across it just to see how bad it really is; do yourself a favour and don't bother. It's not even worth seeing for that reason.
As for Day Lewis, Dean Stanton, Cusack and Metcalf: hang your heads in shame people; you're all smart enough to know better.
An ensemble cast could be very misleading.
MovieAlien23 August 1999
I was switching around channels one day when I happened to catch the beginning fencing scene of the movie on Showtime. I thought it would be good, as Daniel Day Lewis was in it, and when the beginning credits mentioned other members of the cast, it seemed like a diamond in a rough. Well, I was right about the "rough" part, but not about a diamond. Nothing about this movie resembled a gemstone, and it just goes to show that things aren't always what they seem.
The movie is a fish-out-of-water look at a self-centered British art expert who takes a trip to southern America so he could pick up a priceless Renoir which somehow surfaced there. Only problem, is that he'll have to get past a group of reckless hillbillies and crazies in the process. The film was poorly written, and some parts didn't seem scripted at all. Day Lewis' character is so unappealing, that the only thing left to root for in the movie is hopes that this painting will come away undamaged. I tried to channel surf to see if something else was on, just to get away from watching this horrible wreck.
I haven't talked to very many people about this film, but those I've had said they have never seen it or heard of it. It figures.
The movie is a fish-out-of-water look at a self-centered British art expert who takes a trip to southern America so he could pick up a priceless Renoir which somehow surfaced there. Only problem, is that he'll have to get past a group of reckless hillbillies and crazies in the process. The film was poorly written, and some parts didn't seem scripted at all. Day Lewis' character is so unappealing, that the only thing left to root for in the movie is hopes that this painting will come away undamaged. I tried to channel surf to see if something else was on, just to get away from watching this horrible wreck.
I haven't talked to very many people about this film, but those I've had said they have never seen it or heard of it. It figures.
Something wild
Prismark1030 August 2016
William Boyd adapts his own novel, Stars and Bars. Boyd has form in the fish out of water comedy as he made a television adaptation of Evelyn Waugh's novel Scoop in the mid 1980s.
This is probably the last film by Daniel Day-Lewis before he broke out as an Actor with a capital A. He plays an art dealer Henderson who has newly arrived in New York. Henderson is a repressed stiff upper lipped Englishman who wants to break out and let loose in New York. Maybe just like the real DDL who was stuck playing either priggish English toffs (more akin to his upbringing) or yobs at this point in his career.
At work he has bizarre relationship with a work colleague (Steven Wright) and hits it off with a kooky artist (Joan Cusack.)
Henderson is sent down by his boss to the Gothic south to purchase a loss Renoir that the eccentric Harry Dean Stanton purchased in France at the end of the war. While he is there he encounters various family oddballs including Stanton's son who hates him and find himself in the middle of a rival bidding war for the painting.
The film is meant to be a bizarre comedy but it is uneven and strained. The characters are painted in broad brush strokes, some with limited screen time as the film is choppily edited. It has a loose structure which makes little sense again highlighting issues in the editing.
Whatever William Boyd's novel was, it did not hit the screen. DDL looks uncomfortable with the slapstick but at the end his Henderson might have found himself in amongst all the shenanigans.
This is probably the last film by Daniel Day-Lewis before he broke out as an Actor with a capital A. He plays an art dealer Henderson who has newly arrived in New York. Henderson is a repressed stiff upper lipped Englishman who wants to break out and let loose in New York. Maybe just like the real DDL who was stuck playing either priggish English toffs (more akin to his upbringing) or yobs at this point in his career.
At work he has bizarre relationship with a work colleague (Steven Wright) and hits it off with a kooky artist (Joan Cusack.)
Henderson is sent down by his boss to the Gothic south to purchase a loss Renoir that the eccentric Harry Dean Stanton purchased in France at the end of the war. While he is there he encounters various family oddballs including Stanton's son who hates him and find himself in the middle of a rival bidding war for the painting.
The film is meant to be a bizarre comedy but it is uneven and strained. The characters are painted in broad brush strokes, some with limited screen time as the film is choppily edited. It has a loose structure which makes little sense again highlighting issues in the editing.
Whatever William Boyd's novel was, it did not hit the screen. DDL looks uncomfortable with the slapstick but at the end his Henderson might have found himself in amongst all the shenanigans.
New York in the late 80s.
soyarra9 February 2008
I remember standing in a long line to see this in Manhattan, and thinking that the New York parts were a perfect representation of the city at that moment in time. It's a weird vehicle for Daniel Day-Lewis, apart from his ability to play a perfect British upper class twit - I don't think he's done a comedy since (and certainly not before). The use of Joan Cusack as leading lady and love object is bizarre, too - up until this point she'd been relegated to kooky sidekick/friend of the heroine roles (Broadcast News springs immediately to mind), something she went back to almost immediately after this film. It's strange all around, but also a funny time capsule of sorts. I too wish it was out on DVD.
DDL trying to act funny
SnoopyStyle28 December 2023
British art expert Henderson Dores (Daniel Day-Lewis) loves living in New York City. Someone called about selling a presumed missing Renoir. It's worth $10 million and the commission is a million bucks. Henderson is ordered to retrieve it from southerner Loomis Gage (Harry Dean Stanton).
I've never heard of this one and it comes in between two important Daniel Day-Lewis movies. I don't know of another broad comedic performance from him. He doesn't fit. There are plenty of familiar faces in this. The cast is pretty big and they are all doing something wacky. It's being ridiculous without a lead who could make the comedy work. One can see DDL really trying to act funny. That's different than being funny. He's even getting naked for the comedy.
I've never heard of this one and it comes in between two important Daniel Day-Lewis movies. I don't know of another broad comedic performance from him. He doesn't fit. There are plenty of familiar faces in this. The cast is pretty big and they are all doing something wacky. It's being ridiculous without a lead who could make the comedy work. One can see DDL really trying to act funny. That's different than being funny. He's even getting naked for the comedy.
Weird but fun
pyattimac10 March 2019
I stumbled across this film on HBO years ago, and am so glad I recorded it, as I could never find it on DVD. I have always been a big Daniel Day Lewis fan, and this is unlike anything else I have ever seen him do. It is hard to believe this is the same year he appeared in "The Unbearable Lightness of Being;" what a contrast! It truly demonstrates his range and willingness to completely inhabit any role he takes on. Make no mistake- it is a really quirky film, but there are hilarious moments, and the supporting cast contribute to the overall effect. Just go with the flow!
Completely despicable in every way and shape.
mark.waltz12 August 2021
Warning: Spoilers
Without a doubt on the list of the worst films of 1988, so unfunny and
messy, a real shame since it stars Daniel Day Lewis who has hopefully forgotten about it. The huge cast of talented character actors gather together for the worst ensemble in a comedy ever. It's also one of the most annoying as well, dealing with the art world and ridiculing southerners and just downright idiotic from beginning to end, outside of the presence of Day-Lewis completely foul to the point to where you begin to think you can smell it rotting off of your TV.
Harry Dean Stanton is the patriarch of a southern family that makes the Ernest films and the Clampetts seem like the Hemingways. Glenn Headley and Joan Cusack are the type of people who would pull out a shotgun if anyone dared to ask for the polaner all fruit. Headley's character is particularly hateful, seemingly trying to look like Elvis in his last days. Bea Winde, as the housekeeper, is also quite obnoxious. Not a great film either to showcase the talents of Laurie Metcalf either. I wouldn't hand this film over to friends I wanted to dump out of fear that they'd hire a hit man to get revenge on me.
Harry Dean Stanton is the patriarch of a southern family that makes the Ernest films and the Clampetts seem like the Hemingways. Glenn Headley and Joan Cusack are the type of people who would pull out a shotgun if anyone dared to ask for the polaner all fruit. Headley's character is particularly hateful, seemingly trying to look like Elvis in his last days. Bea Winde, as the housekeeper, is also quite obnoxious. Not a great film either to showcase the talents of Laurie Metcalf either. I wouldn't hand this film over to friends I wanted to dump out of fear that they'd hire a hit man to get revenge on me.
Good novel adaptation
peter-patti1 July 2004
William Boyd's "Stars and Bars" - the book - stands in the great tradition of the English comic novel (Evelyn Waugh being one of Boyd's masters and inspirators). Now, I've seen the film only in German language... That's a pity because of the resulting demi-lack of Englishman-in-New-York-effects. As you can image, the German translation cannot be that perfect. I guess that the linguistical misunderstandings between the "hero" (Day Lewis) and the bizarre Georgian family with Anglophobic slursare are ten times funnier in the original version (as they are in the book). Anyway, I liked the film immediately and I'm happy to have taped it. Great cast! Unforgettable: Maury Chaykin as Elvis-like Freeborn.
Kudos!
elisaberger5 January 2003
Oh, how I would love to own this on DVD! A marvelous job by Daniel Day
Lewis, Harry Dean Stanton, Joan Cusack and Glann Headley. In my opinion
it
is a deep South tour-de-farce. I guess you have to have lived there to
appreciate the humorous poke at what lies behind the moss-covered trees
that
line the backroads of the South. It reminds me of Out on a Limb, a
similar
Southern dark comedy with Matthew Broderick. Both are hysterical
weekends
with people whose family trees "don't branch!!" You'll never see Lewis
doing this whimsy again, except perhaps as the pansy boyfriend in "Room
with
a View" which he did at about the same time. Both characters are played
with equal artistic integrity he grants all his roles. Kudos and many
laughs to all!
Great cast, bad script, worth watching for the in-jokes
mapleleaves6 September 2000
The cast includes Daniel Day Lewis and Joan Cusack, who one thinks could turn out stunning performances with the worst scripts. This isn't the case.
The main reason I actually wanted to watch this movie twice is because of the in-jokes that only Southerners, and Atlantans especially, would get.
In one scene at an Atlanta hotel, the Marriott Marquis was transformed into a parody of another major hotel which once had a "lake" in its lobby, and a long-standing restaurant with an overworked Civil War theme.
I highly recommend seeing this movie at least once if you lived in Atlanta in the 80's. It's also good, I would think, if you've had experience with stubborn patriarchs and traveling art buyers, but that's probably a smaller group.
The main reason I actually wanted to watch this movie twice is because of the in-jokes that only Southerners, and Atlantans especially, would get.
In one scene at an Atlanta hotel, the Marriott Marquis was transformed into a parody of another major hotel which once had a "lake" in its lobby, and a long-standing restaurant with an overworked Civil War theme.
I highly recommend seeing this movie at least once if you lived in Atlanta in the 80's. It's also good, I would think, if you've had experience with stubborn patriarchs and traveling art buyers, but that's probably a smaller group.
Extreme flop, to be kept off Dan's resume
lor_24 April 2023
My review was written in March 1988 after watching the film at a Manhattan screening room.
In David Puttam's legacy at Columbia Pictures, "Stars and Bars" represents a major faux pas. Unfunny mixture of farce and misdirected satire has no conceivable audience apart from undiscriminating pay-cable viewers.
Project was developed by Puttna, but given to his ex-partner Sandy Lieberson to produce after Puttnam acceded to head of Columbia. Though an American picture, it features a high complement of U. K. personnel behind the camera.
Scripted by William Boyd from his novel, thin story line follows the misadventures of a Brit in America, or rather someone's view of what America is like (targets of Boyd's satire are all straw men). Daniel Day-Lewis plays the hapless hero, an art expert sent by his boss to acquire a rare Renoir painting (worth about $10,000,000) from hayseed Harry Dean Stanton, who claims to have bought it for $500 in France in 1946.
Bulk of the pic deals with Day-Lewis' interactions with Stanton's weird brood, including Maury Chaykin as his Elvis-imitating son who already has sold the painting to unscrupulous, rival New York art dealers. Nonsensical gags and caricatures represent a real comedown from Hollywood's cutesy but effective portrayal of Southern goofballs, especially in such funny films as the 1945 Fred MacMurray vehicle, "Murder, He Says".
Add to this concoctions some awkward bedroom farce (Day-Lewis unconvincingly juggling his new pickup, Joan Cusack, at an Atlanta hotelwith his fiancee Laurie Metcalf) that wouldn't pass muster as a West End farce for the tourist trade, and pic self-destructs rapidly. Helmer Pat O'Connor evidences no feel for comedy, having the cast overact unmercifully, except for standup comic Steven Wright (as Day-Lewis' business rival) who maintains his familiar deadpan pesona.
Day-Lewis is downright embarrassing, suffering through two extended nude chase scenes and nearly bursting a blood vessel in his uncharacteristic turn. Stanton is wasted in the sort of role he graduated from a decade ago and juve actress Martha Plimpton is miscast in a precocious temptress role.
Supporting cast is one long in-joke, featuring tons of New York talent whose presence will mean nothing to national audiences and add nothing to the picture, e.g., Spalding Gray, Rockets Redglare. Structurally the fact that Will Patton (recently impressive as the villain in "No Way Out") has a key role but doesn't show up on screen until two brief scenes in the final reel is mystifying.
Sting contributes an excellent theme song "An Englishman in New York", from his latest LP, which is pointlessly reprised near the end of the film.
In David Puttam's legacy at Columbia Pictures, "Stars and Bars" represents a major faux pas. Unfunny mixture of farce and misdirected satire has no conceivable audience apart from undiscriminating pay-cable viewers.
Project was developed by Puttna, but given to his ex-partner Sandy Lieberson to produce after Puttnam acceded to head of Columbia. Though an American picture, it features a high complement of U. K. personnel behind the camera.
Scripted by William Boyd from his novel, thin story line follows the misadventures of a Brit in America, or rather someone's view of what America is like (targets of Boyd's satire are all straw men). Daniel Day-Lewis plays the hapless hero, an art expert sent by his boss to acquire a rare Renoir painting (worth about $10,000,000) from hayseed Harry Dean Stanton, who claims to have bought it for $500 in France in 1946.
Bulk of the pic deals with Day-Lewis' interactions with Stanton's weird brood, including Maury Chaykin as his Elvis-imitating son who already has sold the painting to unscrupulous, rival New York art dealers. Nonsensical gags and caricatures represent a real comedown from Hollywood's cutesy but effective portrayal of Southern goofballs, especially in such funny films as the 1945 Fred MacMurray vehicle, "Murder, He Says".
Add to this concoctions some awkward bedroom farce (Day-Lewis unconvincingly juggling his new pickup, Joan Cusack, at an Atlanta hotelwith his fiancee Laurie Metcalf) that wouldn't pass muster as a West End farce for the tourist trade, and pic self-destructs rapidly. Helmer Pat O'Connor evidences no feel for comedy, having the cast overact unmercifully, except for standup comic Steven Wright (as Day-Lewis' business rival) who maintains his familiar deadpan pesona.
Day-Lewis is downright embarrassing, suffering through two extended nude chase scenes and nearly bursting a blood vessel in his uncharacteristic turn. Stanton is wasted in the sort of role he graduated from a decade ago and juve actress Martha Plimpton is miscast in a precocious temptress role.
Supporting cast is one long in-joke, featuring tons of New York talent whose presence will mean nothing to national audiences and add nothing to the picture, e.g., Spalding Gray, Rockets Redglare. Structurally the fact that Will Patton (recently impressive as the villain in "No Way Out") has a key role but doesn't show up on screen until two brief scenes in the final reel is mystifying.
Sting contributes an excellent theme song "An Englishman in New York", from his latest LP, which is pointlessly reprised near the end of the film.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
