The gentleman I’ve been seeing was at a photography workshop last week, and people were raving about the movie Sideways. I read reviews of it in the local paper, and it looked interesting, if not a must-see. It looks like the kind of movie which you watch with friends, then hang out and talk afterwards over coffee or some such. (On the other hand, friends and I did that with Stealth, but it was a birthday treat for the one who writes military fiction.)
I like the idea of interesting, complex characters. On the other hand, I once persuaded my best friend to see Magnolia because it looked like it had them and we wound up hating it because only one of the characters was a decent human being, and I got the impression we were supposed to laugh at him. It was also too pretentious for my taste.
What say you, Dopers? I’ve got pretty wide-ranging, eclectic tastes and I like movies which make you think. On the other hand, I’d prefer to avoid another Magnolia.
The cop, right? John C. Reilly’s character? I haven’t seen Magnolia since it came out, but I remember hating most of the characters (and the movie) as well.
Do you remember anything else about the movie you’re thinking of? The two recent movies I’d think were most worthy of continuing discussion afterwards are Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and Garden State, and both are wonderful.
I liked “Magnolia” a lot, myself, even if there were a few parts where I cringed, and a few where I found myself saying (not just thinking), “What the f*** was THAT?”
That said, “Sideways” (which I also liked a lot) is a lot more straightforward than “Magnolia,” there aren’t any bizarre twists or detours, and it doesn’t jump around from one of a dozen characters-and-plots to another. You may or may not like the movie, but you won’t be confused.
Now, IF one of your problems with “Magnolia” was that there weren’t any good, likeable characters in it, well, you may have the same problem with “Sideways.” Paul Giamatti and Thomas Haden Church give great performances, and you’re liable to find yourself sympathizing with and/or liking them after a while, they’re both despicable characters in many ways. Giamatti is an arrogant, pretentious, snobbish drunk, and Church is a lying sack of manure who’s always looking for way to cheat on his fiancee.
So, if you’re the type who can’t enjoy a movie unless there are some virtuous characters to root for, well, “Sideways” doesn’t have any of those. The characters are all highly flawed- and nobody knows how flawed better than Giamatti’s character himself.
Still, you may find yourself liking them in spite of their sins and in spite of yourself. I did. And you’re likely to laugh a lot, too. There are some hilarious sequences.
Like **astorian **says, there’s not a likable character to be found (I found myself yearning for more of Sandra Oh because she was mostly not despicable…but being the idealized Madona/Whore got old really quick, too.) I found the dialog uninspiring, the plot nonexistent, and the pompous arogance overbearing.
And I generally *like *dialog-heavy “character-driven” introspective celuloid philosophizing.
This was just depressing and morose, when it wasn’t being insulting and juvenile.
In short, it was too much like life. I give it two "meh"s.
Perhaps you’re thinking of June Bug? I haven’t seen it, but I suspect it’s strongly character driven and it’s also pretty new.
As for Sideways, I like it. My guess is that if you like Seinfeld, you’ll like Sideways. It’s kind of like a long, movie version of a *Seinfeld *episode.
Sure both movies were full of dispicable people but the characters in Magnolia were broken humans trying to find peace for themselves, whereas the characters in Sideways were empty, boring, dispicable people.
Liked Sideways a lot. Can’t say I’d even heard of Magnolia.
The male leads in Sideways are a mixed bag - I wouldn’t say they’re despicable, but they both have their moments of being difficult to sympathize/identify with. But they both have their share of redeeming moments.
Well, I’m going to give away a minor plot point, something that happens very early in “Sideways.” Your reaction may be a good sign of whether this movie is for you.
Paul Giamatti’s character steals a large sum of cash from his mother’s dresser drawer to pay for the trip he and Thomas Haden Church are going on together.
His mother is a nice lady who adores her son, and would surely have GIVEN him all the money he needed if he’d just asked for it.
A despicable act? Absolutely- and Giamatti’s facial expression (he does a lot of superb acting with his face alone) shows that he knows better than anyone how low and despicable he is.
So… do you think it’s possible you could ever find yourself forgiving and even liking a man who’d resort to that, even though he never really does anything to redeem himself? If the answer is no, you won’t like “Sideways.” On the other hand, if you’ve ever cared about someone who’s made all the wrong choices in life, who’s his own worst enemy, and who may even be beyond redemption, you may like this movie after all.
I didn’t find either character in Sideways despicable. Especially Giamatti’s character, he didn’t come off as arrogant or pretentious to me. Maybe a bit snobbish, but everyone has their flaws. The only think I think he really did that came close to “despicable” was not telling the women that THC’s character was going to get married. Oh yeah, taking money from his mom was pretty bad, I’ll grant that.
Both characters are far from perfect, but I think the intent was to highlight their flaws instead of the way a lot of movies downplay them.
I noticed this in Alexander Payne’s other movies. Election was one where none of the main characters were good people, but I enjoyed it anyway. Schmidt wasn’t really a bad person in About Schmidt, but he had his flaws too.
I think Sideways is one of those movies that got so much great press that it sort of backfired, because it’s impossible for the movie to live up to the hype. That said, I liked the movie a lot.
I didn’t think either of the lead characters was despicable, and certainly not Paul Giamatti’s character. The only really bad thing that I recall him doing was
taking money from his mother’s house.
And even with that, it’s hard to know how bad it is without knowing more about their history.
The Thomas Haden Church character is more complicated, and I think that’s what makes him interesting. He definitely does bad things, and people get hurt as a result. At the same time, it’s hard to dislike him. He’s not malicious, just very self-centered.
What I really liked about the characters was that they seemed very real to me, as did their relationship. They weren’t glamorous, cool movie people experiencing things that only happen in movies. It was the sort of story I could picture happening to people I know.
I only got about 20 minutes into this movie last week before getting pissed at the characters, and myself for watching them. I made it through Giamatti stealing money from his mom and being a general snob and a pain in the ass, but then when Church talked about wanting to spend his last week before marriage cheating on his fiancee, I turned off the DVD and went to watch something valuable. Probably some porn.
Sidways is a love it or hate it type movie, only I didn’t love it or hate it.
I am glad I’m not the only one who thougth Giamatti’s character was a real piece of kaka. He did NOTHING to deserve redemption. The Bad Lieutenant was a more reedemable character than this pathetic little man.
Still, it wasn’t a bad movie. A real slice of life and I kind of liked it.
I think there’s a difference between saying that the characters seem like real people, and saying that everything that happens to them is 100% realistic. Let’s face it, if everything in a movie was a completely realistic depiction of ordinary life, it would be pretty boring.
And aside from the naked-guy scene, nothing else you list seems outlandish to me.
No one ever fakes a minor car accident? Gets hit in the face with a hard object? Does something obnoxious and embarassing (like take a swig from a wine spittoon) when they’re drunk?
Of course, tastes vary. But I thought the characters and their issues (if not every funny incident) were very believable.