Sideways

Paul Giamatti, Thomas Haden Church, Virginia Madsen, Sandra Oh

2004
Fox Searchlight Pictures

My wife would classify this movie under "one of my boring talkie movies" because the majority of it is dialogue driven. But I like that, and this movie is no exception. The characters occasionally meander toward being overly self-absorbed to the point of annoyance (and I'm talking about the male characters - the females are far more sympathetic) but we still on some level want to see them succeed.

What really impressed me most about this film actually was the portrayal of the settings. Usually in movies when they have a setting in a small apartment or a "regular joe's" house, you can tell that someone has constructed the set to look that way. In this movie, Madsen's apartment looks like a waitress's apartment - and the trucker's house looks like a trucker's house. I'm sorry if I can't explain this concept with more precision, but these are the best words I can use for the situation.

Overall, I wouldn't consider this to be the best movie I've ever seen, but it is notable for the satirical portrayal of wine afficionados (whom most of us, I would presume, consider to be horrible snobs!) - that aspect has some humourous moments.

VG

How a fraction of a second can really tick me off . . .

I'm sitting here watching The Reaping and it's fairly decent although not as intense as I thought it would be, and at about minute 53 Hilary Swank is having dream in which she is again walking through the desert sands of Africa (which I won't delve into detail because that would be a spoiler, but suffice it to say this has intense personal meaning for the character - in fact, it's the primary impetus for her character) . . .

however, after this frightening dream, she wanders to the kitchen, pauses at the sink before she fills a glass of water, and turns around to see sandy footprints behind her. As she lifts up her skirt to look down at her sand-caked and scarred feet

and then, there is a split-second of footage (ha! nice pun! didn't even expect that one myself!) of her feet walking across the sand. Now, remember, we had JUST BEEN SHOWN that very same footage only one minute before. The insertion of the footage at this moment was to cement in our minds the knowledge that the sand on the floor is a physical manifestation of her dream. However, we'd just been shown the dream - and her feet being sand-caked and scarred was sufficient to make us go "AH! YES!"

but to be shown again an image that we had been shown previously is, frankly, an insult to our intelligence.

One fraction of a second and this entire movie, for me, which had been on shaky footing (there's that double-entendre again!) to begin with, and now I'm not even sure if I want to finish it.

VG