In honor of the 25th anniversary of Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, we’ve been tasked to write interesting articles on the Phenomenon that is FBDO (Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, of course).
Our pop culture loving and post-ironic society being what it is, many crazy thoughts have been written down and yelled in drunken bars about the classic John Hughes film. Here are a few of my favorites, counting down:
5) The Movie Is Oddly Prescient
This is a pretty simple idea — the movie somewhat predicts the behavior of a few of the actors. Charlie Sheen portrays a drug addict making out with a teenage girl … maybe that’s a bit too soon, but it’s in there. In somewhat creepier news, the creepy principal didn’t end up well in real life. You may recall him being accused of sexually harassing the sister of Ferris when he was breaking into the house, but last year he was arrested as a sex offender. A bit of a downer, and it’s not entirely accurate — after all, the actor who played lonely Cameron, Alan Ruck, ended up married to a young actress. Pretty good for him.
But as for Ferris himself, some people are not fans at all…
4) Ferris is a Truly Terrible Person (courtesy of Spoony Experiment and Ruthless Reviews)
Most people consider the villain of the movie to be the principal or some sort of concept of “life passing you by.” But others say the REAL evil person is Ferris, who seems to have real sociopathic tendencies and behavior. This theory often says that the hero is the PRINCIPAL, who only seems to want his students not to be corrupted by Ferris. Ferris Bueller lies constantly, including some very serious ones involving disease to even his loving family. He always manipulates his friends and family to get what he wants without really taking their feelings into account.
The main question is whether or not Ferris finally takes responsibility for his actions at the end of the film — if you think it’s just another lie, he’s evil. If he’s truly reformed, it’s a transformative character arc.
Or perhaps the villain was the unseen person constantly referenced: Cameron’s father. The movie could also be viewed differently altogether as …
3) It’s an Independent Film Before They Existed
Of course, independent films have been around since movies started, but the common definition of an “indie film,” with the tone and themes, is something that started in the 1990’s, AFTER Ferris Bueller. Angst, disaffected youth, bittersweet ending … it has some of those qualities.
Think I’m exaggerating? Take a look at the video that uses almost entirely the same footage.
Of course, you could always take the movie in your own interpretation, such as …
2) It Promotes Hedonism/Misogyny/Suicide Prevention
Many of the reviewers really disagreed on what the movie was really about. Escapism, freedom, happiness, appreciating life’s shortness and moments. But then there are those who very much disagreed.
New York Magazine and others called it an overindulgent abundance of greed and Reagan-era consumerist fervor. Others called it blatantly hateful towards women, especially with regards to the character of Ferris’ sister. On the positive side of things, critic Richard Roeper considered it a suicide prevention film, promoting self-esteem and joy in life. One area almost all critics had in common was saying that the movie was the epitome of “Teenagehood.” It’s an interesting thing that a movie can grab people so many different ways … But the craziest of them all is …
By far the most popular out there theory of them all. If you’re familiar with the movie Fight Club, keep reading — otherwise SPOILERS!
An interesting theory is that Cameron is actually imagining Ferris; that it’s all in his head. He creates a character that’s beloved, great with women, smart, and competent. And with a loving, functional family, unlike Cameron. And the whole movie is Cameron coming to grips with his delusion and taking responsibility for his actions, no longer blaming “Ferris.” Some go further to say that even the character of Sloane was invented, a way to imagine an ideal woman, albeit one that he could never be with. The proponents of this theory say that this makes the movie truly brilliant, but otherwise they don’t like it much.
A fascinating video of the concept is on YouTube.
It all goes to show you how fascinating the movie truly is, to engender such wildly different viewpoints. But perhaps more importantly, how do you see it?
Clacked by Jeremy Fogelman 
on Jun 11, 2011 @ 09:00 EST5EDT
