Saw Sideways over the weekend, and my reaction was very much like my reaction to Lost in Translation: a nice little movie; amusing in spots, some good performances – but what was all the fuss about?
When you remove all the wine-speak, is there anything memorable in the script? Did “I’M NOT DRINKING MERLOT!!” just cause the critics to collapse on the floor in hysterics?
The scenery was nice, but shoot, I live in California, so that didn’t do much for me.
You’re not missing anything. Dull movie.
For such a supposedly high-brow comedy, they really seemed to be bordering on Three Stooges territory playing the head slaps, the jug-drinking, the giant naked man, and the car crash for what few laughs this snooze-fest had.
You’re not missing anything. You got it exactly right, even down to the similarity to the equally overpraised Lost in Translation.
There was one excellent moment - the one in which Paul Giamatti and Virginia Madsen talk about what they like about wine, which is really talking about what they like about life and themselves.
Other than that, a plethora of unsubtle buffoonery (and yes, buffoonery can be subtle - take Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind), a lack of character development, and a weak ending.
I liked it for perhaps the same reason I did like Lost in Translation - just little slices out of a life. No big beginnings, no big endings…just life.
I’m curious about the ages of those who didn’t like it – it’s absolutely a midlife crisis film, and I’m not sure anyone under, say, 40, would really enjoy it. It’s not a film with a lot of big yucks (though whatshisface escaping across town clad only in his sweatsocks was pretty funny), more like rueful recognition.
twicks, age 50
I’ve got a year on you, Twix, and I didn’t hate it but felt it was nothing special. A little film about little people, well done but nothing to rave over.
I liked “Sideways” and I’m 28. The slices of life were hilarious. Plus, I’m the type of person that when I get into a subject matter, I turn into a geeky snob so that aspect resonated with me. Drunk dialing, that friend who always gets you in trouble, being completely inarticulate about your work even through you’re a writer - completely nailed all of it. Oh yeah, I thought “Lost in Translation” was overhyped. So, I don’t think there’s an age correlation. Maybe there’s a gender?
Hm, so much for the age theory. (I didn’t love it, btw, merely “liked it a lot” – I told everyone I recommended it to, “Good, but not worth seeing in the theater – wait for it on DVD.”) (I did love Lost in Translation, though.)
I loved this movie!
But then, I’m a 37 year old, divorced, borderline drunk and writer wannabe.
(Or is that borderline writer and drunk wannabe?)
Just for kicks, let’s add to the age element. In addition to age, “where you are in life” (happy/stable vs ambivilently making it work), and general California-ness (lefty, a little artsy/cultural snob). For those folks, I think the movie reached right into their DNA. If you are not hitting on those cylinders, I can see where the flick could be a bit “eh”.
By the same token, a film like…oh…say “Friday Night Lights”, while pretty universally praised as a good film, I suspect would make an impact on a very different type of person.
Full profile: 50, female, single, recovering alcoholic (19+ years), who went to U.C. Santa Barbara undergrad and thus loooooooved the scenery.
51, male, happy & stable, California lefty artsy/snobby tendencies. Found Sideways kinda ‘meh’ (which is why I’m the OP). Loved Friday Night Lights.
I liked Sideways but then it was filmed in the area where I live so that aspect was kind of fun. It was cute and held my attention but then again I was in an airplane and even old episodes of Friends and Frasier are watchable in that situation. I would have enjoyed it well enough in the theater though.
Hated, hated, hated Lost in Translation.
Haj
I enjoyed Sideways a lot, but didn’t consider it sublime, or anything. It was a movie that was worth my time. Of course, being a temp with no degree and more ambition than accomplisment (not to mention having just broken up with my girlfriend) made me identify with Paul Giamatti’s character. I also have a friend just like Thomas Hayden Church’s character.
I liked Lost in Translation better, actually. These days, I just judge a movie by how many times it doesn’t insult my intelligence, and I never felt insulted watching Lost in Translation, so big thumbs-up for that movie. Sideways’s ending, especially, felt dumb and clichéd:
Why, in every “I’m a man trying to come to terms with life” movie, must the aforementioned man be Brave Enough to Open Up to a Good Woman as a symbol that he’s on the path to healing? Every. Single. Time. For fuck’s sake, the love of a good woman is a wonderful thing, sure, but doesn’t it place a little pressure on the ladies to treat it as the goddamned Balm of Gilead, as American cinema seems to believe it to be? The movie should have ended with Giamatti’s character in the diner, eating the burger and drinking that wine he’d been saving out of the paper cup.
Also, WTF was Giamatti’s character whining about? He’s got a good job as a teacher and he’s finished writing a novel. Not bad, in my opinion. 'Course, I’m still 27, so maybe I’ll have the bar set higher once I reach my actual mid-life crisis.
I agree with the age theory, but would lower the cutoff to around 30. The characters in the film are in their late 30s, if I remember correctly.
I meant to add that I agree the movie could have done without some of the low-brow stuff, especially the dumping the wine over the head thing. The line, “I am not drinking merlot,” though, was great, just because there’s nothing inherently funny about it … just delivery and context.
I probably have a couple of years on anybody in this thread and I’m a writer by profession.
Does it count that I hate wine snobs and extroverts? 
I’m 38 and a writer wannabe. I liked it- it was worth the price of admission but wouldn’t lose much if anything on the small screen- but I would agree it was overpraised. (Particularly overpraised was Thomas Haden Church- Giamatti was 10 times more deserving of an Oscar nomination- and I still don’t know how it cost $16 million to produce when they used B-list or below stars, had no special effects and filmed most scenes with handhelds.)
I detested Lost in Translation.
I loved Lost in Translation, but I left Sideways totally baffled as to why it was getting the acclaim that it got.
Total snooze-fest for me, and I didn’t particularly care for any of the characters. It felt like a TNT or ABC Family original movie with slightly smarter writing in parts.
I figured it might be an age thing, too, and that as a 21-year-old, I’m probably not getting everything out of it that other people are.
Well, I’m 33 and I really enjoyed it. 'Course, I’ve already gone through a couple of quarter-life crises (I’m hoping to make to about 120 
), but I could identify quite a bit with Miles, so some of the laughter was laughing at myself.
As others have indicated, this wasn’t a film with a linear plot; the characters don’t "learn profound life lessons or grow or come to like each other or overcome obstacles to succeed in the end, " (to borrow a few words from Charlie Kaufman). Instead, they keep doing the things their experience has taught them to do, looking for a place where their particular personality quirks fit in.
For instance, you know Jack is going to muck about in his father-in-law’s business, play a lot of golf, have some pointless, dead-end affairs to brag about over drinks, and generally be an insincere suburban jackass. It’s where he fits. Payne and Taylor didn’t try to make him a redeemable character, because he isn’t. On the other hand, he is not without good qualities; his love for Miles and wanting to get him to have a good time even through his own selfishness, and his shameless (and very amusing) attempts to manipulate other people both highlighted his shallowness (as a person) while giving him depth (as a character).
Ditto with Miles. He’s a deeply flawed person and self-absorbed person: he lies needlessly about being late, he steals money from his mother instead of asking for it, he whines despondantly about his book not being published even though it is by his own description so terribly incoherent that he can’t even explain it, and he uses his oenophilia as a way of masking his insecurities and dominating other people. He wants to break free from his life, to be successful in something–in particular, being an author–but gives himself every excuse not to do so.
One thing I think the movie shorted on was Virginia Madsen’s character. I’ve never been partial to the actress (there are much more beautiful women on screen) but I thought she was great here and wish they’d developed her out a little more. The character was very interesting in how she started as just a MacGuffin (to get Miles laid) but became a very real person with her own hopes and dreams. I’d like to have seen more of her.
A few scenes I liked (spoilers here, not going to use tags):
The scene of Miles and Jack visiting Miles’ mother. Miles writing out a birthday card at the last moment, his theft of money from her, and sneaking out without going to breakfast as promised all spoke to a very passively conflicted relationship with his mother. Clearly, he thinks she owes her something (maybe for taking care of his father as suggested in his novel?) but doesn’t want to challenge her.
Miles’ “drinking and dialing” phone call to his ex-wife. This call, and the later scene where she reveals that she’s pregnant with her new spouse says volumes about their relationship; it confirms Jack’s comment, “Do you remember how controlling she could be?”, and reveals how Miles refuses to embrace change, even for the better.
The scene of Miles and Maya on the porch, talking about vinting and wine was good (although a little melodramatic for me) but prior to that, where they are tasting the wine Maya just opened; Jack pronounces it good, but Maya contradicts him by stating that the alcohol content of the wine is too high (and Miles then agrees.) This showed me that Miles is really something of a blowhard with respect to wine; he knows the terminology and the manners, but doesn’t really appreciate or understand how wine is supposed to taste, or at least not as much as he’d like to pretend.
Closing scene, with (okay, I’ll use a spoiler here):
Miles walking up Maya’s staircase after receiving a phone call from her: it’s somewhat hopeful, in that he has another chance with her, but the writers don’t try to make some kind of promise that this will revolutionize Miles’ life or that he’ll go through a sudden change. He still dresses in the somewhat slobby way, his novel still isn’t going to be published, no matter how much Maya likes it, and he’s still going to drag all of his passive/aggressive baggage along with him. But maybe she’ll accomodate him, maybe he’ll get better about dealing with it, maybe it’ll work out…at least for a while.
Payne did put in some kind of slapstick humor, but that’s a trademark with him; see Election or About Schmidt. The thing is, it usually comes so far out of left field, and yet isn’t especially gratuitous or unbelievable, that it is really funny. Miles getting in a fight over a wine sample, or (okay, I’ll do it again)being chased by the naked husband of the wife that Jack just arse-bunged were just perfectly timed.
A great film? Well, I’m not going to put it on the list of instant classics. There were some other really good films last year that didn’t get the kind of press Sideways got even though they were as good or better in their own way. The Oscars and other awards are as much (or more) about politics than content, anyway. Giamatti was just playing a variation on the characters he usually plays, but Church showed an ability to make his charater genuine, yet superficial, and Masden was radiant.
I’m not going to say everybody should like this film–it definitely has a kind of quirky humor that isn’t in line with your standard three-act romantic comedy–but I think it offered up a lot of story on many different layers, and didn’t make the mistake of tying everything up in the end, instead prefering to leave the story hanging…like real life. If you don’t find it amusing, you’re not “missing” anything in an intellectual sense; it just isn’t to your taste. (Although I think these kinds of films are a taste acquired through experience.)
Well, I laughed, anyway. I think that and The Incredibles, and bits of Eternal Sunshine were the best laughs I got out of film last year.
Stranger