Well I finally saw "Sideways"

[underpants]

Well most of it anyway. It was so depressing I just turned off the TV and went to bed. The humor was (as I should have expected) and the "oh I get it that is funny" not the "actual laughing" kind of funny.

The writer character was so despicable that I found it hard to care about him. The other guy, well I don't agree with it but I see why he would want to go on a "spree" like that.

Sorry just not my cup of tea....er wine.

[rwork]

1. We recently watched it.

Really expected it to be very funny. Slow moving. One of the last scenes was pretty funny. The couple having sex with the TV on during a bush* Rumsfeld press conference.

[KurtNYC]

2. Thank you

Some relatives have been all but demanding that I see that film. The same relatives told me years ago that "Roger and Me" was "funny" (as in funny overall not just moments of black humor) so I am leary.

[Lorien]

3. I felt pretty much the same way about it

I didn't have much sympathy for either of the characters. I'm kind of surprised that it won such acclaim from the Academy.

[9119495]

14. I don't think you were supposed to have sympathy for them

I think the cool thing about the director's movies (he did "Election" and "About Schmidt") is that they are people that are not lovable and not worthy of sympathy--Think of Schmidt. They are probably like most people that way. I think sometimes we have to watch movies about people we are somewhat repulsed by to ground us a bit. People do scheme, lie, make mistakes; they are unhappy with their lives and they compound their problems with varying degrees of alchoholism.

All that said, I didn't really care for the movie. The acting was good but I found the story to be quite weak. Are we supposed to be impressed that it was a road movie where there was no cliched "triumph over adversity" at the end?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

4. I wasn't that impressed either.

Absolutely pretentious dialog, unsympathetic characters, a plot that pretty much went nowhere. The only redeeming factor was Paul Giamatti's acting, which I did think was superb. Can't believe the other guy got an Oscar nom but he didn't.

In a related story, I felt pretty much the same way about the other movie that won a ton of acclaim this year - Ray. Jamie Foxx did a great job, but the movie itself was horrible.

[Roland99]

5. Oh, I loved it!

[commander bunnypants]

6. waste of seven bucks

CB

Now VanDiesel-thats an actor

CB

[valis]

7. I loved it. Great movie.

[matcom]

8. we saw it last weekend

liked it. thought the sex was a bit out of place and really wasn't needed. sort of ruined it (not that i don't like sex, just wasn't really expecting it)

not great but ok.

[vi5]

9. I think the mistake was marketing it as a comedy....

Like you said it wasn't a comedy in the traditional sense even though there were some funny parts.

I thought it was well written, well directed, and well acted. I really felt bad for the Paul Giamatti chracter (the writer) and really loathed the Thomas Hayden Church character (the actor). That says something for how they were written and acted.

And I think the two female characters definitely conveyed that sense of hopelessness that must come from getting older, living in a small town area, and worrying about life passing you by.

I could see where people wouldn't like it but I thoroughly enjoyed it.

[NV Whino]

15. It wasn't comedy...

it was life. The acting (by all) and the script were superb. And the humor may have passed by a lot of people who are not into wine or don't live in the wine country.

[vi5]

16. I agree and I don't know anything about wine....

But like I said, true to hollywood number crunchers, they tried to market it as something it wasn't (a comedy) and as such I know a lot of people that didn't like it. I liked it a lot.

[NV Whino]

18. I agree.

I went into it prepared to have a good belly laugh and came out very touched. Definitely a good film that overcame bad marketing.

And it is a shame the entire cast wasn't up for Academy awards.

[kick-ass-bob]

10. I just watched it a week ago too.

No - the writer was not a guy I could like very much either, although I enjoyed it when he drank all the wine from the spittoon (or whatever you call it).

Did you see it when he recovered his friend's wallet?
That was funny/scary (not an image I needed) :P

I didn't see the mass appeal either.

[GalleryGod]

11. Well-that's why Carvelle's has all them there flavors !?

I saw it in first release and found the foursome of Madsen-Oh-Church-Giamatti to be all "Oscar Worthy " .

FWIW- if you can give an "empty suit of armour" the Best Actor award...this foursome deserved at least their nominations.

"Sideways" was a tiny film...that did a HUGE boxoffice...somebody must've liked it.
:popcorn: :applause: :popcorn:

[RubyDuby in GA]

12. I thought it was the worst piece of crap I've seen in years

Nothing, I mean nothing with the exception of Sandra Oh beating the crap out of the lying whore was funny.

Pretentious doesn't even begin to cover it. I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one who didn't think it was the greatest thing since sliced bread.

[JanMichael]

13. Trashy "everytown USA" bar customers

captured on film for posperity.

I only felt sorry for the girls for not recognizing those jackasses for who they were.

And sad for the US that we find this film noteworthy.

[jackelope72]

17. Although the pacing could have used some work

I thoroughly enjoyed the film. It's better than most of the "feel-good" drek (and I like feel-good drek) that's out there. I found the story to be hopeful. The writer, while not a likable guy, has the chance for salvation in the form of love. He has the potential to be something greater than what he is.

[FrankBooth]

19. I loved it

Thought it was very well done and entertaining.