Pretty in Pink
Pretty in Pink
PG-13 | 28 February 1986 (USA)
Pretty in Pink Trailers

Andie is an outcast, hanging out either with her older boss, who owns the record store where she works, or her quirky high school classmate Duckie, who has a crush on her. When one of the rich and popular kids at school, Blane, asks Andie out, it seems too good to be true. As Andie starts falling for Blane, she begins to realize that dating someone from a different social sphere is not easy.

Reviews
Lawbolisted

Powerful

... View More
ThedevilChoose

When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

... View More
Mandeep Tyson

The acting in this movie is really good.

... View More
Josephina

Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

... View More
Ian

(Flash Review)Well, I did it. I finally finished off the Molly Ringwald 80's trifecta and the pinnacle of her career. Aren't you all envious. Hardy har! This movie hits hard on social classes. Quirky cute girl with a low economic status and a high class handsome dude have feeling for each other. How will they navigate the mockery and put downs of their usual clicks to keep their romance flourishing…or will they? Straight-forward story within 80's high school atmospheres and mix in another eclectic fellow with a crush on Ringwald (who actually does an amazing job with his role) and a dash of subtle tertiary plot point depth and there you have it. Check that off the list.

... View More
MiamiReviewer

To preface: I love high school movies, feel-good movies, lightweight fluffers, and have a soft spot for several John Hughes movies.But on the 30th anniversary of this one, I was inspired to add my two cents - because apparently I am alone in my unbounded hatred for Pretty in Pink.Problem #1: every character in this movie is unlikeable. Andie is whiny, pouty, and while she's going for the "quirky" thing, her droning on and on about being an outsider is insufferable. Blane is obviously a jerk who has little going for him other than his computer skills. He certainly lacks a backbone. He also lacks a personality or any interests. Duckie is grating, obsessive, and like a bad case of eczema that you keep needing to scratch but it never goes away. All three of these main characters are superficial tropes of stereotypes. Yeah, sure, stereotypes are Hughes' forte (see The Breakfast Club, e.g.) but the stereotype thing doesn't work as well when they are all loathsome.Problem #2: And this is my biggest problem with the movie. Andie and Blane's relationship is devoid of any relationship. There is no real relationship here on which to build a romantic plot line. Their interactions are fleeting and, to the extent they have any real conversation, it is almost entirely Andie going on and on about how much she hates the preppie kids. They first interaction is by 80s computer - no real conversation. Blane stalks her in the record store. Not much real conversation. They go on a date and spend literally the whole date with Andie freaking out about his rich friends. She is petulant and unbearable. And every time I watch this movie, I cringe in wonderment that Blane ends the date emphatically telling her he really likes her and wants to make their relationship work. Based on what?? It makes absolutely no sense. If I recall, they hang out once or twice more - but certainly not at school. And then he bails on her. And then we're supposed to believe at the end that it was true love and they just didn't "believe" enough? Arghhh! Problem #3: Andie and Duckie. Everyone knows the story was originally written with Duckie getting Andie. Lots of commenters on here complain that it should have gone that direction. I say "ick". First, this movie was a different era, but if that character was written in 2016, he would have been the non-threatening gay best friend. He so lacks any charming sexual tension with Andie that it's impossible and almost gross to imagine them as a couple. Further, see above comments about how astoundingly annoying he is. Creepy, stalkerish, obsessive, interfering and rude. The only reason he belongs with Andie at the end is because they're both so unlikeable together.Problem #4: The dress. The dress. Why did she have to take that beautiful specimen of a 1950s prom, so perfect in its shape and features, and turn it into an unflattering potato sack? My mom used to give me old scraps of fabric to craft with when I was a little kid. With a pair of scissors and glue, we used to make Barbie dress sacks pretty much the same as Andie's dress. Horrible.I watch this movie about once a year because I'm a sucker. And every time, I spend the whole thing cringing and annoyed with this clunker.

... View More
Mr-Fusion

I usually take to John Hughes movies pretty well, but "Pretty in Pink" was strangely flat for me. Part of the reason is that I saw "Some Kind of Wonderful" first (which, despite its faults, is much more effective in its pursuits), this is also a fairly lackluster cast, with Annie Potts being the only real standout (although, the ladies' room scene was some genuinely funny Jon Cryer). But that ending . . . everything points to Andie ending up with Duckie. The way the story moves, everything, it's a foregone conclusion. We know how this will shake out. Yet it goes the other way, and for no good reason. In a movie like this, that's a nonsensical rug-pull. It kinda helps when you know the behind-the-scenes reason for this, but it's still a fumble.5/10

... View More
gavin6942

A poor girl (Molly Ringwald) must choose between the affections of her doting childhood sweetheart (Jon Cryer) and a rich but sensitive playboy (Andrew McCarthy).Of all the films John Hughes wrote or directed, this is probably the least best. At no point in time does the boyfriend give us a reason to think he has changed, or that he is even someone we can see the lead actress falling for. Years later, Molly Ringwald said they probably broke up shortly after the film ends. This is probably true, as nothing suggests otherwise.Jon Cryer was impressive here, and it is a bit of a shame he is playing a geek (or a closeted homosexual, as some have suggested). Clearly he has a great deal of talent and physical ability, so it would have been nice to be able to show that off without having to be the fool.The film's redeeming quality -- and there is only one -- is the casting of Annie Potts. Although best known for "Ghostbusters", she is allowed to show off her acting and range here, and she comes across as the most lovable character. (Interestingly, she is supposed to be fifteen years older than Ringwald -- which she is in real life -- but has aged so well that they could be in the same grade.)

... View More