Trigger

Wow... guess age isn't it. Just because a film has something in it representing a statement about something else, that doesn't mean it's automatically great. Good points - glad I'm not alone.

Eternal Sunshine: got it, loved it.
Talented Mr. Ripley: got it, didn't care
Magnolia: got it, loved it.
Eyes Wide Shit: got it, hated it.
Lost in Translation: got it, liked it
Virgin Suicides: got it, didn't care

Dr. DVD

Well since we're on a roll:

Eternal Sunshine:got it, loved it
Talented Mr. RIpley:got it, liked it
Magnolia: think I got it, liked most of it
Eyes Wide Shut: eventually got it, liked it once I did
Lost in Translation: got it, okay
Virgin Suicides: got it, didn't care for it
Punch Drunk Love: got it, okay
U-Turn: didn't get it, didn't care to get it
Mulholland Drive: got it, boy did I love it!

Now for some more high profile movies
Manchurian Candidate: got it, couldn't understand the praise
Ali: got it, aside from the last twenty minutes, was bored stiff

Trigger

Punch Drunk Love: got it, loved it
U-Turn: got it, liked it okay
Mulholland Drive: sort of got it, meh
Manchurian Candidate: what's to get?, thought it was okay
Ali: didn't see it but I got it
What Slop101 just said: got it, 3/5 - *slop edited his comment a few times and then deleted it and moved it down a few posts below mine... now it still gets a 3/5

more:
Naked Lunch: got it, loved it
Brazil: still get something new after each viewing, love it
Fear and Loathing: got it, loved it
Lost Highway: almost got it, meh
American Beauty: got it, didn't like it

Dr. DVD

You pretty much summed up my thoughts. Most people probably do "get" the movies, they just don't like the way in which the story is told. Some people wanting a thriller in Talented Mr. Ripley would have probably preferred a route akin to Usual Suspects or Basic Instinct. A different approach can be taken, and some people might not like it.

On a side note, you illustrated why a lot of people don't enjoy certain movies; they don't want to put effort into understanding them. I don't mind doing it sometimes, but not all the time.

slop101

Why does everyone think they get (or understand) everything...

I'm not saying you have to understand something to like it, but it sure helps.

For example, I didn't care at all for Mr. Ripley, I also didn't understand what they were going for, nor did I want to... Is that my fault? Would I like it better if I put some more effort into it? My theory is that I think so, but I choose not to.

Also, being a form of art, films can mean different things to different people - if a certain film means nothing to you, you just won't appreciate it as much as if it did mean something, which can only come from some sort of understanding.

IOW, you will like something if you connect with it, and you can only connect with it if it means something to you, and it can only mean something to you if you understand it.

And no, the above is not specious reasoning like: "God is love, love is blind; Ray Charles is blind, therefore, Ray Charles is God."

I hope I came across as I intended, as I'm not trying to be arrogant, or insult anyone.

Randy Miller III

Man, I love the Power Glove. It's so bad.

slop101

I was trying get my idea across clearly (while also having a converstion with my wife, while eating lunch) and the original post got too jumbled.

here are some contradictions:

Videodrome: I do NOT get it, but still kinda like it for it's creepy atmosphere alone.

American Beauty: I get it, and though the performances and photography are excellent, I hate it for it's simplistic, cliched, thin and unrealistic characters.

Dr. DVD

slop: out of curiousity, what's your opinion on Fight Club?

slop101

Re: Fight Club

I enjoy it and it is very entertaining (Fincher's style helps). And though I sort of lose interest in the second half (about when they start "project mayhem"), I feel that the first half is one of the more interesting and engaging (and cynically hilarious) American films I've seen in a while, or since.

Trigger

Videodrome: haven't seen it in a long time, but - got it (from what I remember), liked it (as far as I can remember)... it used to be one of my favorite films.
Fight Club: got it, loved it

American Beauty: I agree with slop's assessment- that's pretty much how I felt about it.
The Wizard: got it, didn't care for it... probaby because I was anti-nintendo at the time.

Dr. DVD

Didn't know so many people didn't like American Beauty.

slop101

It's homage to Three's Company where the entire climax hinges on a ridiculously contrived misunderstanding doesn't help...

Crocker Jarmen

That was the one thing that I really didn't like about that other wise fine movie. Never thought of it in those terms before.

slop101

Not to get too off topic, but I just remembered -
Go here: http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showpos...5&postcount=19
For my favorite review of American Beauty - it's a doozy, and they don't even mention the 3's Company thing.

Now, how 'bout that Sideways, huh?

Crocker Jarmen

I went to see Sideways this afternoon and enjoyed it. Smelling the backlash in the air, I was a little hesitant, expecting a disappointment on the scale of About Schmidt, a movie I did not care for.

I liked Sideways, it was what I like to think of as the perfect 'matinee movie'. For some reason, I don't feel comfortible exiting a movie theater unless it is dark outside (why I dislike going to the movies in the summer), but there are some films that just feel suited to watching in the afternoon. Sideways was a movie that entertained and relaxed me.

There were some spots that troubled me though. I was completely annoyed by the scene where they are sitting on the pourch discussing wine, and their diolouge is a heavy handed metaphor for the main character's life. I'd seen the clip of her speech about a dozen times on TV, and it just seemed so cheesy. It played no better in the context of the movie. I really wished they could have captured that conversation better, because the payoff to it was heartbreaking, when he comes out of the bathroom and goes to kiss her, and it is awkward because the moment has passed. He needed to make that move outside, but he has uncorked that bottle of wine too late, and missed the moment.

The final section envolving the retreival of the wallet was fantastic. It was incredibly tense and suspensful when he was sneaking through the house, and after experiencing that level of tension, the following laughter is ever so sweeter. Send me out of the theater with your best material, I appreciate it.

Perhaps I shouldn't admit this, but I chose seeing Sideways over Hotel Rawanda on questionable circumstances. In the paper's movie ad, Sideways had the highest Adult Rating, with warnings of 'Suggestive Scenes' and 'Explicit Nudity'. I figured between seeing something despressing and seeing something with sex and naughty parts, I'd go with the naughty bits. I feel that the rating boards should clarify what the nudity is however; I was expecting to see Sandra Oh topless, not the Wings guy's butt and some 50 year old's wang slapping up against a car window.

I don't know if I 'got it', but I enjoyed this movie and look forward to seeing it again.

OldBoy

did just about the same thing with the matinee...what a sweet, enjoyable movie!
that scene on the porch was exactly what it was supposed to be and the kiss afterwards was absolutely supposed to be awkward. i mean you hit those two scenes on the head with how they were supposed to be portrayed imo and i think that is the very essence of the movie. the wine is all supposed to be the metaphors.
how did you like the film as a whole if you did not like those scenes? to me that was "Sideways" in a nutshell. the penetrating glances when something key was said was the heart. that scene i believe is also what gave Virginia Madsen her nomination.

Crocker Jarmen

I found the film as a whole very entertaining. I thought it was a great portrayal of a "functional" alcoholic.

What I didn't like about the porch scene was I thought it was very cheesy and over the top (reminded me of the sort of film that was made fun of in Ghost World, "The Flower That Drank the Moon"). I just thought that for such a pivital scene, I could have been more sophisticated.

But I am definately in the "Yay Sideways!" crowd.

Josh H

Finally saw this last night. Excellent movie. Maybe a tad overhyped by some, in that I think it's deserving of its praise and oscar nominations, but shouldn't win any and is over hyped by those saying it's best of the year IMO.

But it was a good script, funny and moving in places, well acted and kept me interested from start to finish. Only thing that sucked was the fire alarm went off and we had to leave the theater and come back, wasting about 30 minutes of my time. But we can take the stubs back and catch another movie for free, so no big deal Just sucked because it was late already as it was a 9:50 showing.

Anyway, Right now it's 4th on my 2004 list behind The Aviator, Eternal Sunshine, and MDB.

OldBoy

And what is it supposed to do?

Cygnet74

xanax, used to treat panic attacks, anxiety disorders, etc.

OldBoy

one article i read said Vicodin, but Xanax would fit much better, no?

Cygnet74

yeah, it does make more sense than vicodin. i've seen the movie 6 or 7 times now at work so i know it pretty well. its said during the "if anyone orders merlot, I'm leaving" exchange between between miles and jack. jack flat out asks, "did you bring your xanax?" and miles produces the bottle from his coat pocket and rattles it matter of factly.

OldBoy

yeah that is when i thought of it too...so it is to quell his nervousness and social anxieties, correct? and, aren't you not supposed to mix that stuff with alcohol, especially large quantities of alcohol on a continual basis?

Perkinsun Dzees

(* Contains spoilers for SIDEWAYS and ABOUT SCHMIDT)


http://www.scriptmag.com/earticles/earticle.php?405

Sideways: A Misogynistic Mess

Author: Rob Tobin

March 12, 2005

Screenwriter Rob Tobin presents a very opinionated view of Sideways and discusses the film's portrayal of women.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I know this article is going to stir up a hornets’ nest of controversy and I’m glad that it will, so let’s just dive in. Sideways is not just a badly written, badly directed and badly acted film that should never have been made, much less amazingly nominated for an Oscar®, but it is another in a long string of dangerously misogynistic films that is helping to negatively and, perhaps even dangerously, shape our view of women.

Consider the basic outline of Sideways: two middle-aged, physically and personally unattractive men, their lives in shambles, drive north to the wine country where they meet two physically and personally beautiful women who are years younger than they are. The men lie to the women, act like buffoons with them, and not only get to bed them, but somehow make them fall slavishly in love with them overnight for no apparent reason (other than the screenwriter decided that it be so).

Then the women seem to realize how badly they’ve been treated. The one jerk ends up wedding a third woman, the most beautiful woman you can imagine and also years younger and miles smarter than he. The other whiny, pathetic, overweight, physically and personally unattractive man ends up with one of the two original beautiful women—a smart, ambitious, gentle, loving woman who can’t help but beg this overweight, overaged and underattractive loser to have her, as if she is some kind of rummage sale castoff who should be grateful that anyone is even interested in her.

None of my description of the film is an exaggeration. This is the actual storyline of Sideways. It is not coincidental that the film was directed by the same guy who directed About Schmidt, a film in which an old, physically and personally unattractive man treats his loving and kindhearted wife like crap. Then, when his wife finally dies, this jerk (played by Jack Nicholson) attends his daughter’s wedding intent on treating her like crap, too. Not content with just that amount of woman-bashing, however, he then treats Kathy Bates’ incredibly generous offer of sex as if she had tried to infect him with Syphilis. Oh, and along the way, he comes on to a married woman half his age whose only crime was to show him some friendship. He spends the rest of his time actually whining about his life to a third-world orphan who probably has one or two problems of his own. Yet, in the end, this mean-spirited, self-centered loser is vindicated and experiences a catharsis that does not include the realization, apparently, that he is a waste of good foreskin.

This kind of misogyny is an astonishing and troubling phenomenon, and one that has gotten much worse over the past few years. Why are these films so critically acclaimed? Because the men acclaiming them—the middle-aged, frustrated, self-centered, arrogant critics and producers—see themselves in these jerk heroes and wish they had it half as good. These women-hating losers want to be able to treat women like crap and yet still end up with supermodels. This not only demeans women, and objectifies them, it makes for crappy screenplays and crappy movies. It should be objectionable to all of us that women are treated this way onscreen. It should be objectionable to us that a stunningly beautiful and talented woman like Halle Berry has to give herself sexually to a physically and personally repugnant man like Billy Bob Thornton’s character in Monster’s Ball, in order to win an Oscar.

It should also be objectionable to us that there are such obvious implausibilities in these films.

Look at it this way: If the lead character of a film was a three-foot tall, physically uncoordinated and lazy man who makes it to the NBA, would we applaud the screenwriter? Or would we object to the implausibility that takes us out of the story? Yet that is exactly what Sideways does. So why the hell is THAT okay?

What does it say about us that we believe women, no matter how smart, how pretty, how educated and how classy, will go for any man who shows even the slightest interest?

Women MUST be offended by this and men SHOULD be offended by this. Most of all filmgoers have a RESPONSIBILITY to be offended by this type of empty-headed and empty-HEARTED film. If not, we’ll descend only deeper into the current misogynistic morass of female objectification.

And as for Giamatti’s acting? Rent any movie that Paul Giamatti has been in and try to discern the difference between any of the characters he plays.

Sideways should have been called Upside Down, because it turns the world of decency and sexual equality and motion picture quality upside down. Gimme’ a break ... a break from these misogynistic pieces of crap.

ABOUT THIS AUTHOR
Rob Tobin is an award-winning screenwriter, screenwriting teacher, author of How to Write High Structure, High Concept Movies, former development exec and frequent guest lecturer at film festivals and conferences around the country.

Jackskeleton

Rob Tobin is full of shit and should just get the sex change already.

How about this. Look at any commercial on tv today and you will see that it appeals towards women. You have the stupid husband who can't do much of anything. Hell, if you believe the ads on tv you will think that men will starve if it wasn't for fast food places like Carl's Jr. Men are always played as the morons on tv because guess who watches those shows. Women. Men have been slowly declining in deciding ratings for a while now. Men don't seem to watch or care for the same level of television as women do. So those ads are tailor made for them.

It's marketing. This film is suppose to appeal to those men who are in their middle age/mid-life crisis stage and I see no reason why they shouldn't play it up.

This writer makes it sound like it was pretty flat of a story. The women fell in love with them because regardless of their unattractive looks, they lied about their success. One acts as if he is coming out with a book and the other acts as if he is an established actor. That is success. Unlike women. Men attract others through being successful and by presenting that money and power aspect. They could be ugly as all hell, but that is the good thing about men. It's not about how they look when they are that age, but what level of success they are in.

As for the females. Yes, these are the pick of the prime.. a single mother and a waitress. Were they attractive? to some degree yes, but it was a pretty decent job at looking like the regular plain folk. Only difference is they all had the thing in common which was wine.

Decency and sexual equality upsidedown? This moron really likes to use the word Misogyny. I don't see how this was a hatred of women picture. The guy who played the female got the shit beaten out of him and had a broken nose. The other one's ex-wife seemed perfectly happy. The current girlfriend was graduating and till the end, it looked like our hero was up shit creek drinking some aged wine with burger and fries.

I really don't see how it's women hating or how this is exclusive to women in movies. Lets look at HITCH. A film all about making the women happy and having the man be the lap dog. This film is target towards men of that demographic. I see no reason why not to appeal to that target audiance. Much like Hitch appeals to the target audiance who is mainly women going for a date film.

This guy sounds like a real *****.