INTRODUCTION: WHERE’S THE DRIVE?
Grandview, U.S.A. (1984) is a strange, sputtering little film that wants to be many things at once—a coming-of-age drama, a quirky small-town romance, and an underdog story set against the backdrop of demolition derby culture. But despite an impressive cast, including Jamie Lee Curtis, C. Thomas Howell, and Patrick Swayze, the movie meanders aimlessly, unsure of what story it really wants to tell. The result is a mostly negative viewing experience that squanders its potential at every turn, weighed down by tonal inconsistency, shallow character development, and a lack of narrative urgency.
PLOT OVERVIEW: DERBY DREAMS AND COMPLICATED CRUSHES
Set in the fictional town of Grandview, Illinois, the film follows high school senior Tim Pearson (C. Thomas Howell), who dreams of becoming a marine biologist—a goal that couldn’t feel more at odds with his corn-fed Midwestern surroundings. His father, played by an unusually restrained Michael Winslow (best known for his sound-effect antics in Police Academy), wants him to take over the family hardware store, while Tim is more concerned with lusting after older women and escaping the boredom of his hometown.
Enter Michelle “Mike” Cody (Jamie Lee Curtis), a tough, independent demolition derby driver who owns the local track. Mike is caught in a deteriorating relationship with her ex, Slam Webster (Patrick Swayze), who is in the midst of his own emotional unraveling. When Tim becomes romantically entangled with Mike—yes, it’s as weird as it sounds—the movie tries to juggle this May-December affair with Swayze’s self-destructive behavior and a host of irrelevant townie subplots. None of it quite lands.
JAMIE LEE CURTIS: STRANDED IN A THANKLESS ROLE
Jamie Lee Curtis has always been a magnetic screen presence, but Grandview, U.S.A. gives her precious little to work with. Her character, Mike Cody, is vaguely sketched: she’s tough because she drives a demolition car, tender because she hugs kids, and conflicted because the script says so. There’s an intriguing premise here—a woman trying to preserve her passion and identity in a male-dominated, blue-collar sport—but the film never explores it meaningfully.
Curtis does her best to inject grit and humanity into the role, but she’s ultimately undermined by a screenplay that doesn’t know who Mike really is. Her relationship with Swayze’s character is more backstory than emotional journey, and her flirtation with a teenager (Howell) plays out like a clumsy fantasy sequence that belongs in a different movie altogether.
C. THOMAS HOWELL: MISCAST AND UNDERWRITTEN
Coming off the success of The Outsiders, Howell was an up-and-coming actor with undeniable appeal. But here, he seems lost in a role that calls for more than the script allows. Tim Pearson is supposed to be the beating heart of the film, but he’s so vaguely drawn that it’s hard to root for him. His romantic attraction to Mike feels forced and underdeveloped, and his coming-of-age arc is stunted by a story that never quite decides whether it’s about him or everyone else.
There’s also a dissonance between Howell’s youthful awkwardness and the mature themes the film half-heartedly tackles. His scenes with Curtis veer into implausibility, and by the time the film tries to resolve his internal conflict, the audience has already checked out emotionally.
PATRICK SWAYZE: INTENSITY IN SEARCH OF A PURPOSE
Swayze plays Slam Webster, a man with a broken heart and an increasingly unstable grip on his life. Swayze brings his signature intensity to the role—he’s angry, tender, volatile, and desperate—but he too is let down by a script that offers melodrama without meaning. His motivations are unclear, his arc muddled, and his ultimate fate more baffling than poignant.
There are moments where Swayze nearly elevates the material, especially in his scenes with Curtis, but he’s trapped in a movie that doesn’t know how to handle his emotional firepower. Slam is either a tragic hero or a man-child throwing tantrums, depending on the scene, and this inconsistency makes him more frustrating than compelling.
SUPPORTING CAST: FILLER CHARACTERS IN SEARCH OF A STORY
The film includes a host of supporting characters who serve mostly as window dressing: town busybodies, aimless youth, and cartoonish authority figures. Joan Cusack pops up in a forgettable bit role, as does Jennifer Jason Leigh, who’s criminally underused. The town itself is painted in broad strokes—a composite of every small-town trope without the charm or specificity to make it feel real.
It’s not that the cast lacks talent—it’s that the movie doesn’t know what to do with them. Instead of weaving together a tapestry of interconnected lives, Grandview, U.S.A. leaves us with a frayed patchwork of ideas that never gel.
TONAL CONFUSION: A FILM WITHOUT AN IDENTITY
Perhaps the most damning flaw in Grandview, U.S.A. is its confused tone. Is it a romantic drama? A comedy? A sports film? A teen coming-of-age tale? It wants to be all of these things, and in trying to juggle them, it drops the ball on each. The scenes often feel like they were lifted from different drafts of different movies, edited together by a committee with conflicting visions.
One moment we’re watching a sentimental exchange between Curtis and Howell, the next we’re at a demolition derby with goofy sound effects. Then we’re asked to care about Slam’s psychological deterioration, only to be interrupted by a subplot involving a school dance. The result is a jarring experience that leaves the viewer more bewildered than engaged.
VISUAL STYLE: FLAT AND FORGETTABLE
The film is shot competently but unimaginatively. Director Randal Kleiser, known for Grease and The Blue Lagoon, seems unsure how to frame the story. There are moments—a misty morning at the derby track, a quiet scene in a dimly lit garage—that suggest visual flair, but they are few and far between. The editing is equally uninspired, often cutting scenes off just as they might begin to gain momentum.
The demolition derby sequences should be a highlight, but they’re choppily shot and lack the visceral thrill one might expect. The crashes have little weight, and the audience is never drawn into the chaos or the culture. It’s another missed opportunity for the film to stake out a unique visual identity.
SOUNDTRACK: AN EMOTIONAL PATCHWORK
The soundtrack is an odd mix of generic early-’80s tunes that feel more like filler than thematic punctuation. Unlike other teen dramas of the time (Footloose, The Breakfast Club), Grandview, U.S.A. fails to leverage its music to enhance the emotional tone or narrative drive. It’s serviceable but forgettable, much like the film itself.
THEMES: UNEXPLORED TERRITORY
The film hints at themes of longing, escape, and emotional maturity, but it doesn’t commit to exploring any of them. Tim wants to leave his hometown—but why? Mike wants to protect her derby—but to what end? Slam wants to win her back—but what does that say about his self-worth?
The movie seems afraid to confront these questions, instead layering sentimentality over its emotional beats. This is a film that flirts with depth but always backs away before things get too uncomfortable or interesting.
LEGACY: A FORGOTTEN DETOUR FOR RISING STARS
Grandview, U.S.A. is rarely discussed today, and for good reason. It’s a minor footnote in the careers of Curtis, Swayze, and Howell, all of whom would go on to bigger and better projects. For Curtis, it’s a blip between her scream queen days and her later comedic triumphs. For Swayze, it’s a showcase of his raw talent with no real outlet. For Howell, it’s an example of youthful promise undercut by weak material.
Despite its cast, the film has little rewatch value and no lasting cultural footprint. It’s the kind of movie you find halfway through on cable, watch for a few minutes out of curiosity, and then change the channel.
CONCLUSION: A DERBY WITHOUT COLLISION
In the end, Grandview, U.S.A. is a film that lacks clarity, conviction, and cohesion. It wants to be a heartfelt slice-of-life tale about small-town Americans and their emotional growing pains. But its script is too unfocused, its characters too shallow, and its tone too muddled to pull it off. While there are a few moments of charm and a couple of good performances—particularly from Curtis and Swayze—they’re not enough to save the movie from its own indecision.
There’s a better film buried in Grandview, U.S.A. somewhere. One that leans harder into the derby world, or into the psychology of longing, or into the class dynamics of a fading Midwestern town. But what we get is a cinematic stall-out, idling in neutral, occasionally revving its engine but never going anywhere.
FINAL SCORE: 4/10 — A well-meaning misfire that wastes a great cast on an undercooked script. Skip it unless you’re a completionist for Curtis or Swayze.
