The Outsiders (1983) User Reviews

stay gold

[gurghi-2 · 8/10 · 3 December 2005]

A terrific tweener for kids of any era. Serious but sweet, and refreshingly free of cynicism.

Godfather Coppola has a real way with family, go figure. But here he keeps the themes and emotions simple. One of the reasons for this story's lasting power is that it was written by a teenager, and so accurately reflects kids' perspective. It would have been very tempting to try and infuse an adaptation with "layers," to comment on the action and show yourself superior, but Coppola exercises great restraint and appropriate respect for the material. He knows it isn't profound stuff, but he understands that it *feels* profound to kids who identify with it. In walking this tightrope, he creates a rare thing: a movie that's for kids but neither talks down to or indulges them.

Lowe, Dillon, Estevez, Howell, Macchio, Garrett, Swayze. Only Cruise and Lane (and Sofia!) seem bigger now than they are here. That, and the 20-some years since, makes The Outsiders all the more poignant.

Not the stunning adaptation it could have been, but not a bad one

[Beta_Gallinger · 7/10 · 23 September 2007]

I studied the 1967 novel, "The Outsiders", by S. E. Hinton, back in middle school. It has been years since then, but it's a very powerful story, and rather hard to forget! I was shown this movie a couple years later, in my first high school English class. I can't remember exactly what I thought at the time (I guess I thought it was so-so), but I have seen it twice since then, and can't say it reached its full potential, but overall, it's still a reasonable adaptation.

Ponyboy Curtis and Johnny Cade are two teenagers who are members of the "greaser" gang. Their rivals are the "socs". One night, Ponyboy and Johnny fall asleep in a vacant lot. When they wake up, it is still dark, and they are clueless as to what time it is. Ponyboy goes home, where his eldest brother, Darry (who has looked after his two younger brothers, Ponyboy and Sodapop, since their parents' tragic death), has been worrying about his absence. Darry ends up hitting Ponyboy, and although he then says he didn't mean it, Ponyboy runs away. Pony wakes up Johnny, who is still in the lot, and they go to the park. Unfortunately, they are attacked by a group of Socs, who nearly drown Ponyboy, but Johnny comes to the rescue by killing one of them, and causing the others to run off! To try and avoid arrest, the two leave town, after getting directions from fellow greaser Dallas "Dally" Winston, who tells them to go to an abandoned church in Windrixville. What does the future hold for these two?!

One problem with this movie is that some scenes seem a bit rushed, such as the scene where Darry hits Ponyboy and he runs away. Also, the acting isn't that great, at least not from C. Thomas Howell (who plays Ponyboy) and Ralph Macchio (who plays Johnny). Mainly for those two reasons, some parts of the film are not as gripping as they should be. Fortunately, this adaptation of "The Outsiders" also has its merits. It's a faithful adaptation (it probably helped that S. E. Hinton was a consultant), despite not including certain parts of the book, which some would be disappointed by. It also includes at least some of the tension and poignancy from the book, and gets more gripping towards the end.

Overall, Francis Ford Coppola and Kathleen Rowell did a good job bringing S. E. Hinton's highly acclaimed story to the motion picture format. Far from a perfect job, but a good one nonetheless. For those who have been blown away by the book, I wouldn't expect this movie to be all you could possibly hope for, or else you could easily end up sorely disappointed. However, if you watch the film with moderate expectations, it will probably have a better chance of pleasing you, at least to a certain extent.

What to focus on in 2021

[fistofgonzo · 6/10 · 26 November 2021]

This movie feels very dated in terms of the way the drama is presented, but it is saved by standout performances from a laundry list of great actors cutting their teeth with the material. This is also worth watching in the present day for its portrayal of social class, and the universal theme of friends helping one another to learn, grow and survive. I also really loved that the small Midwest town isn't portrayed as a glamorous 1960s utopia, the housing is run down, businesses are shown struggling, and the feeling of growing up in a working class neighborhood is so real you can taste it. Ultimately, these things make The Outsiders worth a watch even if youre unfamiliar with source mayerial.

Don't worry about the critics, it's a classic now!!!

[PeachHamBeach · 12 July 2004]

This lovely film was universally trashed and smashed by all the critics. FF Coppola directed it, but they still smashed it. I don't get that.

The then unknown cast was: Patrick Swayze, Matt Dillon, C. Thomas Howell, Rob Lowe, Ralph Macchio, Tom Cruise, Emilio Estevez, Diane Lane, and Leif Garrett. All these actors went on to fame, but the whole movie, the performances, the writing, were trashed.

I thought the cinematography was exceptionally lovely. The "Nothing Gold Can Stay" sunrise scene was gorgeous. The camera angles during the hair cutting scenes were creative and intimate. The music was "epic" sounding, yeah, but this film had a huge tie in with Gone With The Wind, remember. I thought the soft lighting and the creamy edging made the film look very much like IT was filmed in 1939!!!

I don't know. I thought the chracters were very engaging and the performances excellent. Lots of people loved this film, regular people like myself, that is.

Expected better from Coppola

[Jithindurden · 6/10 · 26 February 2022]

I might have enjoyed this a bit more if I didn't know Coppola directed it. I mean the guy who already made the Godfather films and Apocalypse Now didn't know how to properly adapt a novel seems ridiculous. One of the main problems with the film is that every frame of it tells you that it's based on a book. There really doesn't seem to have been any effort in the script other than shooting the important part of the novel and without all the details in the novel that is a disastrous choice.

Still, even with all those problems, it does manage to be pretty decent. Even though a lot of stuff does seem stupid, it tries to explore a handful of themes in a way that is also appealing to teenagers without completely losing its footing. The ensemble teenage cast is such a wonder to look back now, who would've thought a lot of them would go on to become some of the biggest names in the industry, let alone the delinquent friend side character would go on to become one of the biggest stars in the whole world. The issues dealt with seems a bit heavy-handed and artificial which wouldn't have felt as problematic if the direction was a bit more cleaner and more importantly if the writing was better.

A good transfer of lightweight story from book to screen

[rooster_davis · 6/10 · 1 March 2019]

I might not get the highest possible rating for my comments on this movie but I'm going to be totally honest. First, I read the book and then shortly afterward saw the movie. In my opinion the movie did a good job of getting the whole story from book to screen. A lot of the scenes caught the mood I felt when I read the book, or even shed some light on them for me. C. Thomas Howell played his part very well and showed acting skill, but he just seemed too nice, too sensitive to enjoy fighting for its own sake the way his brothers did. I could believe Darry and Soda looking forward to a fight with the Socs but I just did not get the feeling from PonyBoy that he was a fighter. Even Johnny Cade seemed more on edge, more 'ready to fight' than PonyBoy, who played all his scenes really well - he just didn't convince me he was someone who enjoyed a fight.

Of all the actors cast for the film, and really all were done well, I think Ralph Macchio as Johnny Cade was the most perfectly cast based on how I perceived him to be from reading the book.

To be honest, when reading the book I could tell it was written by a woman. I enjoyed it very much, and would say if you have a few hours, the book is not too long to read and I'd recommend it even more highly than the film.

The Outsiders is a very good film in any case and worth watching.

Mid

[peakfiction · 6/10 · 9 December 2022]

This film is alright at most.

1. The pacing, especially towards the end, is ridiculously bad compared to the book, it is one of those films where just thing happens then thing happens with no development. An example of this is the ambulance scene which in the book is roughly 2 pages and goes much deeper than the film which is LITERALLY 15 seconds.

2. The potential was massive. This film is directed by Francis Ford Coppola, you know the same guy that made all the godfather films. It could have been great but some poor acting, dissapointing delivery of lines and lack luster pacing, it is ruined.

3. Johhny's death is so bad. He just opens his mouth and dies, there is no buildup and you actually forget he's dead for a bit because it almost feels like a joke or a gag because of how bad the acting is. There are no emotions on characters except for dally.

The singular redeeming quality Dally. Dally is the saving grace of this film and without him it would be a 4 out of 10 film. His character can somewhat deliver lines and has more emotional scenes compared to other characters who are just completely and utterly emotionless. His character also may be the only thing that moves the plot forward in a narratively fitting way despite being somewhat trashed by again the DISGUSTINGLY bad pacing.

There are also some pretty decent moments of cinematography in this film, clever shots through windows or different perspectives. However, most of it is very bland and has no taste. It makes the film feel dull even though it is meant to be action-packed mostly.

And yes, i have one final problem with the pacing, the opening. Pony boy is attacked in the OPENING CREDITS. In the book it is over 15 pages in, towards the end of chapter 1, it is so rushed.

TLDR: Film could have been great, ruined by bad acting, HORRIFIC pacing and bland cinematography.

Great Movie and Accurate Adaptation

[gracegibson · 10/10 · 6 March 2005]

I had to read the book in seventh grade and we also watched the movie. I though both of them were fabulous. Francis Ford Coppola has adapted almost every detail of the book into this movie. I thought the acting was great and the plot was good for teenagers, which is the movie's, as well as the book's, target audience. I was surprised on how many stars were in this movie (seven) and it was much better than I thought it would be. It didn't seem cheesy and small but you felt like you were watching a real film. Even though the Greasers seem to be born into undesirable lives, watching this movie makes you want to go back to 1967 in the Southwest and be a Greaser, too. Fabulous movie and perfect for teenagers.

Uneven

[clopzat1 · 6/10 · 30 January 2013]

Infamous not only for the stunning amount of future (then unknown) movie stars as for it's uneven direction, "The Outsiders", by no means a poor movie, starts fantastically and a third of the way through descends into a mire of corniness and choppy staging from which it is never really able to recover from. It leaves such a bitter taste ( especially for fans of the acclaimed YA novel) I believe because it starts so well, with Francis Ford Coppola's masterful staging of ensemble scenes and a seemingly unstoppable fast pace. It's unfortunately fitting that the film starts with bouncy rock and roll ( with the song "Gloria" used to fantastic effect) and then once the plot takes a turn for the dark it seems like Coppola has entrusted his direction with Carmine Coppola's unwieldy and manipulative music score. It's not all bad once you reach the third way point, the scenes with the boys just talking in Ponyboys house really flow, but Coppola rely's a lot on uncharacteristic framing devices like poorly placed jump cuts, shifting aspect ratios, fade ins, and a whole lot of corn. While the dialog is corny during the whole movie it sticks out like a sore thumb for most of the movie while in the opening it kind of fades away with Coppola's playful direction. As far as the acting goes curiosity value makes some of it more bearable then it must have been when the movie was originally released. I shall go one by one.

C.Thomas Howell- Ponyboy Curtis- Has a very limited range of expressions and actions, though he was hot stuff for a maybe 3 more years, suffice to say, he is no longer hot stuff. Though he never really has to carry the film except during the sequences at the church where the movie falls apart.

Matt Dillon- Dallas- While he is occasionally over the top he is an extremely commanding screen presence and the best actor in the film by far.

Ralph Macchio- Johnny- Simply annoying, he manages to make most of his dialog irritating.

Patrick Swayze- Darry- Look tough, take off shirt, Say three word line, repeat. His character is way cut down from the book and never manages to seem intimidating.

Rob Lowe- Sodapop- Look cute, take off shirt, say one word line, repeat. Unfourtunely Lowe, who tries his best, has about 30 seconds of screen time. His part is extremely cut down from the book.

Tom Cruise- Steve- Simply insane. Though Coppola's camera does it's best to ignore him. He isn't really a character as much as a unintentionally amusing ball of energy.

Brilliant!

[cmmsite · 10/10 · 30 December 2003]

The Outsiders is a great adaptation of S.E Hinton's wonderful (and heart-breaking) novel. The film is a piece of art. It's got a good, solid story, beautiful photography, convincing acting by the leading actors and a nice score.

It's a star-packed film with appearances by Tom Cruise, Rob Lowe, Patrick Swayze among others. (Not to mention it was directed by Francis Ford Coppola!) But I was most amazed by C. Thomas Howell's portrayal of Ponyboy Curtis, the central character of the novel and film, who did a great job carrying the story.

There are many scenes in the film that are exactly like the book, even following the same dialogue. Usually I don't think that's a good thing since I like to see someone else's interpretation, another one's point of view instead of a copy of the book. But Coppola masters everything beautifully anyway so it never gets boring and C. Thomas Howell's interpretation of his role is what makes the film stand on its own.

Thanks to Howell there are many memorable Ponyboy moments. One of those is Ponyboy's recital of Robert Frost's 'Nothing Gold can stay', which is a scene that stays with you forever. Another actor who caught my attention in this film was Emilio Estevez who plays Two-Bit Mathews, friend of the Curtis brothers and a greaser. Estevez lights up every scene he's in and the film wouldn't be as great without him.

There are only two things I don't like about the film: The greasers are too well-groomed and clean and the socs are a too one-dimensional.

so earnest and so artificial

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 13 March 2015]

Ponyboy Curtis (C. Thomas Howell), Dallas Winston (Matt Dillon) and Johnny Cade (Ralph Macchio) are three of the Greasers from the poor north side of town. Dal harasses Cherry Valance (Diane Lane) at the drive-in. Ponyboy, Johnny and Two-Bit Matthews (Emilio Estevez) befriend the girls. Ponyboy's brother Sodapop (Rob Lowe) works at the gas station. He doesn't get along with his oldest brother Darrel (Patrick Swayze) since their parents died. The Socs are the rich kids from the south side. Cherry's boyfriend Bob Sheldon (Leif Garrett) is a drunk. Later that night, Ponyboy runs away from home with Johnny. Bob and a car full of Socs track them down to fight. Ponyboy is almost drowned but Johnny stabs and kills Bob. Dallas helps them hide out in an abandoned church. Later, they decide to return. On the way, they rescue a group of children trapped in a burning church. Johnny is severely burnt and hospitalized. The Socs and The Greasers prepare to fight.

Director Francis Ford Coppola has created something unreal and nostalgic. It's a beautiful piece of cinematic art. It's almost a throwback to another era. The dialog is clunky but the mannered speech creates its own atmosphere. It has an interesting artificial quality which Coppola's beautiful look can only enhance. There is something beautiful about this and the great young cast doesn't hurt.

An all time classic!

[jeffman52001 · 10/10 · 19 December 2004]

The Outsiders is a great film, well done and well acted, I read the novel by S.E. Hinton, great book. I am glad they made this movie back in 1983.

The Outsiders touched on a lot of issues when it came to having money and not having money, the "greasers" where the poor kids from the north side of town and the "socs" are the rich kids from the south side of town.

Matt Dillon(Over The Edge, The Flamingo Kid) as Dallas Winston, Tom Cruise(Top Gun, Vanilla Sky, and Minority Report)as Steve, Ralph Macchio(The Karate Kid Parts I,II,and III) as Johnny Cade, C. Thomas Howell(The Hitcher, Red Dawn,and Soul Man) as Ponyboy Curtis, Rob Lowe(About Last Night, St. Elmo's Fire and Wayne's World)as Sodapop Curtis, Patrick Swayze(Red Dawn, Grandview U.S.A. and Point Break) as Darrell Curtis. Emilio Estevez(The Breakfast Club, Repo Man, St. Elmo's Fire and Nightmares) as Two Bit Matthews, Diane Lane(My Dog Skip, Streets of Fire, and Unfaithful) as Cherry Valance, Darren Dalton(Red Dawn) as Randy, and former teen heart throb Leif Garrett as Bob Sheldon, William Smith(Any Which Way You Can, Red Dawn and Conan The Barbarian) as the stork clerk, Michelle Meyrink(Valley Girl, Real Genius, and Revenge of the Nerds) as Marcia, make up the great cast for this awesome film.

The movie really touched me in lots of ways, the story of kids being on the wrong side of the tracks, like Ponyboy and Johnny, who have a lot of heart and goodness inside. The movie does show what the true meaning of friendship and spirituality, especially Ponyboy loving sunsets. The poem by Robert Frost, "Nothing Gold Can Stay", does have a lot of meaning about youth and the moments of enjoying things you find wonderful when you are young, you should always embrace them.

I give this movie 2 thumbs up and 10/10 stars. Francis Ford Coppola did an excellent job directing the movie.

The song, "Stay Gold", is such a great song, sung really well by Stevie Wonder.

Good enough

[TheLittleSongbird · 6/10 · 24 November 2010]

I won't lie and say I wasn't disappointed when I saw The Outsiders. I was a bit, considering it is from Francis Ford Coppola. It is well made, with great photography and great shots and camera angles. I also liked the story, it was nicely constructed and quite conventional, and the film moved briskly. The direction from Coppola is great, and the film further benefits from a great cast(Matt Dillon, Tom Cruise, Diane Lane, Patrick Swayze, Emilio Estevez among others).

However, Ralph Macchio and C Thomas Howell are rather wooden and unconvincing in their roles. Plus there is some stilted dialogue, and I wasn't taken with the music score which was too over-the-top for my taste. Overall, it had flaws but it was good enough. 6/10 Bethany Cox

Fun sometimes, poor overall

[foxtografo · 4/10 · 28 September 2020]

I didn't know this movie until now, so I guess I don't have the love some others have for it having watched it back in the day, the nostalgia part doesn't play on me. I found very interesting the casting, most of the actors went to be big in cinema, so it's fun to see them all together when they were just starting. The story was fun to watch too, but the acting get more and more in the way of fun as it becomes more and more cheesy and just plain bad. The story it's very inconsistent and dramatism is given randomly some times, and it's missing in others. The music is poorly paced in my opinion, it's not that doesn't fit the movie, but some scenes are jut a total miss musically. As it was common in most of the movies on the 80s and 90s, the choreography in fights and scenes of violence were pretty ridiculous, which wouldn't ruin the movie for me on it's own, but here it only added up something else I didn't like. I felt the last half hour was quite rushed and the worst in terms of acting and pace on the story, I was wishing it ends for the last about 20 minutes. I can't say I didn't enjoy the movie at all, but it really went down the hill the second half. It's a curious rare casting thing to watch, but definitely not a great movie, calling it a classic it's just out of nostalgia.

Teen tensions mount on both sides of the tracks

[mdm-11 · 16 October 2004]

"The Outsiders" was one of my favorite novels I read in high school, and the film version is just as powerful. -- Set in a small town in 1963 Oklahoma, two groups of teenagers from opposite sides of the tracks defend their "turf" and rival for girls. The "Greasers" are tired of being shown-up by the "Soashes", who drive around in fancy cars and wear expensive clothes, and when someone calls for a "rumble", both sides are in for the fight.

The main plot line centers around two of the younger "Greasers" who are on the run after one of them kills a "Soash", even though it was clearly self defense. Later the boys are celebrated as heroes when they rescue children from a burning building. The dying words of the alleged killer sum up the entire story: The fighting must stop; there are better ways to communicate other than kill one another. The Stevie Wonder song "Stay Gold" is a nice finishing touch. I especially recommend this film for teenagers or young adults; the message is a powerful one and it hasn't aged over the decades.

Youth Class Struggle

[ricardojorgeramalho · 7/10 · 1 January 2023]

Youth Class Struggle A film full of young talent destined for stardom, in a story of youth gangs, premature deaths and family reconciliations, directed by Francis Ford Copolla who, after the enormous success and recognition in the 70s, spent the following decade far more removed from favors of the public and the critics.

This Outsiders isn't a bad movie, but it doesn't quite convince either. A tear-jerking social drama, but Spielberg is better at emotional manipulation than Copolla, clearly more at ease when violence is amoral, as in the Mafia or at wars.

It is interesting to see these young actors at the beginning of their careers directed at the best level, but this is certainly not an anthology work by the director.

Artsy teen melodrama in mid-60's Oklahoma from the perspective of a 16 year-old

[Wuchakk · 7/10 · 16 May 2022]

In the Tulsa area in 1965 the rivalry between the Greasers (poor kids) and the Socs (rich kids) heats up after a gang member is killed. The Greasers supposedly responsible flee the area (C. Thomas Howell and Ralph Macchio), but ironically end up being viewed as heroes. Matt Dillon costars while the notable peripheral cast includes the likes of Patrick Swayze, Rob Lowe, Emilio Estevez, Tom Cruise, Diane Lane and Leif Garrett.

"The Outsiders" (1983) was one of two films Francis Ford Coppola shot back-to-back based on SE Hinton's young-adult novels. This one was successful at the box office while the even more artsy "Rumble Fish" (1983) failed to draw an audience.

Hinton began writing "The Outsiders," her most popular novel, in 1965 when she was 16, inspired by two rival gangs at her school, Will Rogers High School, which is about 2.5 miles west of downtown. I bring this up because the movie definitely comes across as an overdramatic tale from the perspective of a teenager. The most mundane, trivial events are presented as life-or-death happenings, like going to a drive-in theater or facing your nemeses at a park where one person idiotically brings a switchblade to a fistfight.

This explains why some people write the flick off as "the cheesiest and corniest movie ever." In its defense, you have to acclimate to it in order to appreciate it. Go back to what was happening in your life when you were in your mid- teens and how a fistfight or breakup was an earthshattering event. The movie captures this very well.

The original theatrical film runs 1 hour, 31 minutes, while the 2005 Director's Cut runs 23 minutes longer and includes new music. It was shot in the Tulsa area.

GRADE: B-/B.

Hands down, Coppola's best recut

[pmtelefon · 7/10 · 20 February 2022]

I saw the original version of "The Outsiders" in the theater (Bellerose, NY). I've seen it quite a few times since. It's not a good movie. It's a very heavy handed melodrama. It's not a satisfying watch. The extended version is way better. The characters are more fleshed out and the story flows much better. It's still a chick flick disguised as a teen gang movie but that's okay. I watched both versions today back-to-back (Don't ask me why). The long version is the only way to watch "The Outsiders".

Fairly good adaptation

[perfectbond · 9/10 · 26 February 2005]

First let me say that this will not be a comment where the author will be gushing about how "hot" the cast is! Like a lot of people who have commented on this film I, too, read the book first in school and then proceeded to seek out the film to see how the story translated to the screen. I thought esteemed director Francis Ford Coppola (The Godfather, Apocalypse Now) did a fairly competent job of adapting the book (there will always be somerevisions and omissions in such an enterprise). He preserved the essence of the class struggle: the eternal conflict between those who were better favored by birth and station (Socs) with those less favored (Greasers). Coppola elicited more than competent performances from the young up-and-coming cast he assembled. All in all, a very good coming of age film.

If you give this the right approach, it will be a good watch.

[Horst_In_Translation · 6/10 · 18 August 2017]

"The Outsiders" is an American/French co-production from 1983 that resulted in this English language film that is going to have its 35th anniversary next year. The director here is a certain Francis Ford Coppola and a decade after taking us into the world of organized crime, he takes us now into the world of youth gangs that commit a fair share of their own crimes as well. If you see the names of Dillon, Macchio, Lowe, Cruise, Flea, Waits, Estevez and others in here, you will find a group of young actors that managed tremendous careers in the years or even decades to come. It is somewhat ironic that next to all these big names, C. Thomas Howell did not manage a huge breakthrough as he is probably playing the most central character in here. Coppola's very young daughter Sofia, an Oscar winner now, is in it too briefly. The biggest female character is played by the tremendously beautiful Diane Lane back then and even she does not have that much screen time. It's all about the boys. The film is certainly channeling stuff like West Side Story, Rebel Without a Cause and some early Marlon Brando works a bit, so it is definitely not FFC's most original work. But like I wrote in the title, it is still easy to enjoy this movie if you give it the right approach. Don't go in it expecting Godfather quality. I personally think it could have been a bit shorter and more focused, but then again I watched the version that comes close to two hours and not the original 90-minute version. I suggest you go for that one instead perhaps.

The film was successful enough for them to make a television show afterward and I see that one was pretty successful too, even if it only ran for one short season. Back to the movie, I see this was discussed pretty controversially. Some loved it, some think it's garbage. Decide for yourself. I think it was a good watch from that moment on when it really started to focus on three characters only. Those were the days when you could be called Ponyboy or wear a Mickey Mouse shirt and people still think you're badass. The ending with the faces (and even more the words) of the two dead characters may have been a bit on the pretentious side, but I can forgive them for it because Macchio really gives a good performance and portrays the most memorable character in here, a really good kid that makes a not necessarily wrong decision with horrible consequences, but stays a loyal friend and saves even some kids' lives later on. A perfect example of how his financial situation and as a consequence the people he hangs out with really literally destroy his life. Oh yeah and they really are outsiders as police only care for them when they have to shoot them. A good outcome here I would say and if you like Elvis, you are in for an even bigger treat. Go check it out.

I admire both the book and movie

[x0baybc0x · 10/10 · 24 March 2005]

I think that both the movie and the book were outstanding. The book sent off an amazing image in my mind in-order for me to picture the "happenings" included through the lives of these young kids. In the movie, I thought it sent off a different type of perspective, and yet it was very well done because of the fact that it was changed a bit, though, it was basically a better image of the story where you can see through your eyes, so that you were able to picture and make out with what you originally were thinking. Very well done! The actors were placed in very well positions, and each actor really fit each character the story The Outsiders. =)

the outsiders

[mossgrymk · 7/10 · 5 December 2021]

A heart warming if too sentimental film ironically intended by its director as a way back to artistic and financial success after the debacle of "One From The Heart". It certainly achieved the financial part. Artistic triumph, alas, eluded Coppola until, arguably, his next foray into the world of S. E. Hinton, "Rumblefish". Problem with this one, aesthetics wise, is that its lugubriousness outweighs its grit or, to put it another way, there's too little Matt Dillon and way too much C Thomas Howell/Ralph Macchio. (in general, it's always a good idea to avoid scenes where actors recite Robert Frost with pastel sunsets in the background). I will say that the film is wonderfully shot by a cinematographer whose work I am not familiar with but hope to be, Steven Burum. Fairly certain that Tulsa Okla has never looked so painterly. No wonder the citizens of that benighted burg love this movie. Give it a B minus.

The Outsiders

[PoniboiizaQT · 10/10 · 26 March 2005]

The Outsiders is one of the best movies and books ever written! It was manatory for me to read it and I got right in with the characters. The movie is......... I can't describe it, it's that awesome! I personally, fell in love with it so much that I've read it 5 times and have seen it 45 times. This movie really brings out the book and if you have not seen it, but you've read it go to your local movie store and rent it! Or, if you have not even read it go read it! This is a movie that you will talk about with your friends and will always remember. Both Coppola and Hinton did a great job with this. This movie included excellent acting to, Matt Dillon, C. Thomas Howell, Ralph Macchio, Emilio Estevez, Rob Lowe, Patrick Swayze, and Tom Cruise. This movie will surly be popular with those who love Drama.

A Lackluster Adaptation of a Classic Book

[JoshuaMHetu · 6/10 · 21 August 2019]

I remember enjoying S.E. Hinton's "The Outsiders" when I read it in high school, so I've always looked forward to watching the 1983 film adaptation directed by Francis Ford Coppola - the man who made three of my all-time favorite movies (The Godfather, The Godfather Part II, and Apocalypse Now). Unfortunately, after several years of putting it off, I was disappointed by Coppola's mediocre take on "The Outsiders." As in any Coppola movie the performances are top-notch and the music choices amplify the overall viewing experience. But I was surprised by the almost complete lack of effort put into establishing and developing characters, or even crafting a focused and entertaining story. 20 minutes into the film I was totally uninvested in the central characters or what little existed of a plot. Coppola's talents as a visual genius are no where to be seen in "The Outsiders," which looks more like a low budget TV movie than a major motion picture. If I hadn't sat through the opening titles I never would've guessed that "The Outsiders" was a Francis Ford Coppola film.

I really wanted to like "The Outsiders," but sadly the film just doesn't hold water. Unlike the original novel, which remains a classic to this day. Hinton's book gets high marks, but Coppola's movie doesn't. 6/10.

You will never see a cast like this again

[policy134 · 5/10 · 15 September 2009]

Now that one of the cast members of this highly memorable, but also kind of tedious and slow teen film, is no longer with us, let me remind everybody that this movie was made before anyone had ever heard of much of the cast.

The reason to see it is mainly the cast, not if you are a fan of the book because although it is more faithful to the source than the dismal That Was Then, This Is Now, you will find many omissions.

The casting is spot on and I can't think of anyone who could do better with the characters they were given. Especially Emilio Estevez as Two Bit and the aforementioned Patrick Swayze as Darrel.

So if you want to reminisce about those years gone by where things looked a little more innocent, enjoy seeing a one in a lifetime cast. Just don't expect a fun filled romp. The movie is virtually moving back in time.