St. Elmo's Fire (1985) - Drama, Romance

Hohum Score



A group of friends, just out of college, struggle with adulthood.

IMDB: 6.4
Director: Joel Schumacher
Stars: Demi Moore, Rob Lowe
Length: 110 Minutes
PG Rating: R
Reviews: 45 out of 170 found boring (26.47%)

One-line Reviews (108)

Filled with all the yuppie, self-indulgent longings that we would expect from a 1985 brat-packer movie.

Judd nelson's character was just plain boring.

Shallow and Pointless .

Each character has a different dilemma: Kirby (Emilio Estevez) is going all out to impress the girl of his dreams; Billy (Rob Lowe) is a drunkard with a wife and a kid, who wastes his talent as a musician; Leslie (Ally Sheedy) and Alec (Judd Nelson) are stuck in a relationship that is rapidly going nowhere; Jules (Demi Moore) is a deluded, self-destructive liar and Kevin (Andrew McCarthy) is a writer who does little other than hanker after the good times and ponder the meaning of life...

Elmo's Fire" is sadly only an occasionally funny, relatively entertaining film about seven young friends trying to grow up in the big world.

The characters range from dreary and dull, to loathsome and despicable.

This is a deeply tiresome movie which makes me glad I'm not a fraternity, because then I could be a dreary boozing proto-yuppie too.

"St Elmo's fire" is far too clean and conservative for us to identify with its boring "heroes".

I do think the film was kinda slow in some parts, I didn't appreciate that.

Knowing too well that being a responsible father/husband/employee is TOO much of a chore after the halcyon days of the Georgetown frat house) and ready to face the everyday mundane reality of work, keeping a roof over your head, many bills to be paid, raising a family, juggling all those balls in the air and hoping and praying not to sink in the process.

Let's not forget the entire cast have been stars since before they sprouted pubic hair, and so coming of age is not a theme on which they can draw substantially from their own lives.

In the end, their lives were just as shallow and pointless as in the beginning.

St. Elmo's Fire is one of those coming of age film dramas that has really talented actors and can carry the weight.

It's not a classic or a great film, but it's worth watching, especially if you're a teenager!

Worth watching just to see what NOT to become after graduating from college.

The characters involved are: Alex and Leslie who live together in a precarious relationship; Kevin looks bored writing obituaries for the newspaper; rich girl Wendy shares a doomed relationship with Billy; law student Kirby tries to pursue Leslie, an older flame from college; and party-girl Jules is promiscuous,snorts coke and drinks too much.

Vapid, boring, and homophobic .

If anything good came out of this snore-fest, it was the music.

It is very well acted, but the movie has no story threads that connect, or characters that really come through.

Dreary .

Andrew Mcarthey was a wet Morrissey, The blonde virgin (up the duff at the time) played the part so well she bored me to tears, Emilo Estavez?

It has no plot, no comedy, no drama, no passion.

That said, the "white people" in this film are uniquely uninteresting, every single one of them.

Everyone is concerned about Jules who works in a bank and doesn't have a job to afford the glamorous lifestyle she puts on, near the end she seemingly even tries to kill herself in a really slow way.

Emilio Estevez is (inexplicibly) head over heels in love with dull Andie MacDowell--who can't stand him.

There was no plot direction, and nothing was accomplished.

This movie is silly, shallow, pointless and dull.

For evidence see St. Elmo's Fire, a saga of the boring lives of some self-absorbed, over-educated yuppies.

Humorous, engaging and somewhat silly "Big Chill" for the twentysomething set with a not-so-bad premise and some nice moments here and there.

I'd argue that Joel Schumacher's direction is pretty bland and there's nothing good looking about the picture.

Pretentious rubbish.

* Lowe's contrived, pretentious little speech to a theatrically traumatized Moore about St. Elmo's Fire.

Good "coming of age" film, way underrated.

If this is your idea of a moving film, you must lead a really dull life, that's all I can say.

All in all, an entertaining and realistic, heartfelt film for anyone over 25.

I mean, who wants to admit that they identify with a group of whiny, spoiled, self-indulgent, narcissistic and cruel Georgetown grads?

Coming of age is not so damn easy.

All in all, without dissecting it completely, I enjoyed it very much for about the third or fourth time I have watched it.

Some of these I still haven't seen because they look totally uninteresting.

I felt then as I do now (and I have given it a real chance over the years) that this is one of the worst movies I have ever seen.

A coming of age classic - I still love this movie.

The slushy plot is rescued by sharp dialogue which, while a little too witty and knowing, is entertaining all the same.

A wise cracking guy, pessimist kind of guy who's secret love is all to predictable.

Going into this film, I expected something just as witty, engaging and entertaining at the Breakfast Club, which nearly all the leading actors and actresses starred in.

An extremely underrated film, that's nearly a classic in my opinion, with an engrossing story and brilliant performances from all.

Do real people really behave in such shallow, self-indulgent, and boring histrionics?

This is fairly engaging, and there is some tension.

Still a relevant and entertaining film.

A complete waste of time .

Each personality is just so "real" and the actors and actresses are all very intense in them.

This movie was just outstanding from beginning to end as it had a superbly written script that had some great dramatic and intense scenes plus it really showed what life was like for college graduates in the 1980s.

Joel Schumacher may be a fine director, but his dialogue for this age group is highly contrived.

Andrew McCarthy is a bore, and Judd Nelson will always be "John Bender" to me.

On an aesthetic level I find the photography stunning.

Most of them are longing to become big dull yuppies anyway.

The soundtrack was really to awesome to listen to plus on the DVD that I watched there was an outstanding commentary track by the director which is worth listening to along with a music video and a featurette which is worth watching.

The dialogue is quite bland and it feels like Joel Schumacher was really going through the motions during filming.

The confusion, sense of disillusionment, and uncertainty in identity and life, which so many go through - this movie captures that, and the importance of friends and love.

There is no storyline to speak of, and it's hard to imagine anyone caring one bit about these people.

All the characters in this movie have major issues; we have Billy a womanizing jerk who's married but can't hack the responsibility of marriage or a child, Alec- a philandering political type who thinks that if he marries his girlfriend that it will make him faithful, Wendy-the rich girl who's virginity is given away to Billy a guy who will never appreciate it and doesn't deserve it, Kevin-the cynical newspaper writer who's totally in love with his best friend's girl, Kirby-the boring lawyer type who's not even interesting enough to catch the attention of a pretty doctor, Jules-the fast living coke-head who spends the whole movie acting like she's someone she's really not; and her unhappiness and self-loathing at being unloved by her father is exaserbated by her cocaine use.

), the characters seem cool and fun, but like, nothing happens.

Mildly entertaining...

An interesting and entertaining film - well worth watching or watching again.

unfortunately boring .

One of the most entertaining coming of age films for the young adults.

This is an extremely underrated film, that's nearly a classic in my opinion, with an engrossing story and brilliant performances from all, and I say it's a must see for everyone!.

This movie is silly, shallow, pointless and dull.

Just as a note -I know some may comment on the poor morality of the characters, however, I truly believe these characters give an accurate representation of the confusion and fear most young adults face when they first enter the world on their own and how the excitement of life and freedom can cause a person to make poor decisions in the heat of the moment.

I think the reaction at the time was mostly that these are shallow, irritating, uninteresting characters, and the movie doesn't give you any reason to care about them.

In my teens it was fascinating and focused on decisions I would be making in a few years.

The script is beyond lazy, falling into a predictable rhythm.

Another slow paced teen-related movie .

Some things are hard to swallow, but lighten up; it is an enjoyable post-college 80s romp.

If you've ever gone to Times Square NYC and stood next to a cardboard cutout of a celebrity, then you get the gist of this ensemble of predictable now very dated 80's stereotypes; the hypocritical career climber politico (Judd Nelson), the self-destructive, emotionally vacant, druggie (both Lowe and Moore), the overage, good girl, virgin (something out of the '40's), and on and on.

In the end, all it's about is shallow, empty sex lives.

This is an extremely underrated film, that's nearly a classic in my opinion, with an engrossing story, and brilliant performances from all!.

This is fairly engaging, and there is some tension.

It's funny, it's sad, it's exciting.

This is another great one of the great underrated and often overlooked 80's movies, with a great cast, engaging story and a perfect soundtrack.

Great acting in a dull movie .

An OK coming of age 80's film .

Each cookie cutter figure simply goes about making you hate them in the blandest, most predictable way possible.

After having sat through the torturous experience in 1985 and paying for the original privilege of watching this abomination back in the good old days, I thought I would revisit it in the year of our lord 2014 to see if time and experience had sharpened my insight and appreciation of this pretentious stink bomb.

every once in a while I'm like "hey, maybe I'll watch St. elmo's fire and it'll be better than last time" and it's just as boring as I remember.

It is enjoyable & it has some very familiar feelings in it.

-Billy (Rob Lowe) who is talented, unstable and unpredictable -Kevin (Andrew McCarty) who is following a love that is with someone else.

Directed by Joel Schumacher (The Lost Boys, Phone Booth, Tigerland) made an fine coming of age dramatic comedy for the young adults.

Most of them are quite stereotypical and aren't that likable or are, at best, dull.

Emilio esteves' character was too needy and too boring.

The first time I saw this movie, I was still in high school, and the plot came off as being a little self-indulgent and weak.

Demi Moore, an empty-headed druggy.

Another is that these characters, credible and well-written though they are, are spoiled, selfish, superficial, and at times empty-headed, brats.

One of the worst movies ever.

It is realistic in the sense that life throws unexpected curveballs at us, and that we have to be ready to take them head-on.

I saw this film when it originally came out and was so repulsed by the film's repellent, self-absorbed characters that I walked out in the middle of it.

Here is yet another lovely example of the smug, self-indulgent neurosis that is everything 80s (RENT, anyone?

You basically waste 2 hours of your time watching these characters you just can't seem to get attached to...

This movie this very slow paced.

Obviously some more-than-just-slightly removed writer's idea of what the trials and tribulations of recent, trendy college graduates are like and, boy, are these guys especially dull and shallow.

What never occurs to them, as with the characters in this stinkbomb, is that life can be difficult, mundane, demanding and frustrating.

However, after watching this film, I was left feeling completely empty and a bit strange.

The uninteresting characters with their equally uninteresting character arcs?

The result is a great film with intense and real emotions that are fresh and striking.

A great cast in this movie is wasted in a slow paced semi-ok movie.


It is disjointed and feels like a 3 hour movie that has been edited to 1 hour and 40 minutes.

So, you ask, what possible reason could there be to follow the exploits of these dreary character types?

The characters left the film the same way they came in with me: bores.