Many viewers love a film in which the protagonist is an "Everyman" with human foibles and sins that perhaps he never overcomes, but you root for his human goodness ever the more because of them.
Sideways is a film in which you get to watch the stumblings of a gluttonous, self-obsessed, miserable, rotten turd of a human being. Yet instead of recognzing him for what he is, I can't help feeling that the film just expects me to root for him as an Everyman because of this. Like, he's so despicable that he's really an Everyman, mirite? Wrong.
A grown man barely eeks out a living writing emo crap novels about his childhood that no one will publish. He steals from his mom to fund the most ridiculously pretentious wine-snob lifestyle. He helps his loser child-man of a best friend explore sexual and romantic escapades that are at best adolescent and at worst ruinous to the lives of everyone involved. He casually does his crossword and stops for coffee, only to demand that the barrista "Make it fast, because I'm running late." I could write two or three paragraphs alone on what an asshole character one must be in order to effect that single sentence in that single scene that lasted only seconds. He drunk-dials his ex. In short, he is pathalogically despicable and expects the entire world around him to cater to every pathetic dilemma that his despicableness wreaks.
A despicable main character is not a problem by itself. I can handle that. But what really twists me is that it seems the entire film, and every scene, is constructed in such a way as to imply that we are supposed to sympathize and identify with this sack of shit, not despise him. The film does not seem to recognize him at all as despicable, but rather simply as human. When he throws a disgustingly infantile tantrum upon finding out yet again that no publishers are interested in his crappy emo novels, that scene and the one immedately following it seem to be almost begging me to view this man not as a pitiful and pathetic loser, but rather as a romantic hero struggling through the tragedies of a cruel world. No thank you.
Any conversations I've had with others about this movie seem to verify this. People who love this movie seem to genuinely love the character. They consider him so "real" and accuse me of just wanting Hollywood-perfect heroes. They even view him as trend-setting and follow his taste in clothing and wine and allow it to shape their own. They seem to be aware only of one or two minor unethical choices the guy may have made, but otherwise completely oblivious to the overall wretchedness that is his existence. Again, the entire film seems to be oblivious to this, which is what drives me batty.
Here's a little psychoanalysis for you: If you like this movie and this character, it's probably because deep down you know you might be a despicable person yourself. You like seeing a shitheel get the girl because you identify yourself as a shitheel. Or, more specifically, you like seeing a movie treat a total fuckstick as if he is your everyday hero, because it validates that your own self-absorbed, immoral, wretched existence might also be at least human, if not heroic. It isn't. But it's only because of your own wretchedness that you are unable to see what tool this guy really is.
And if you think that Pinot Noir is the best and Merlot is crap because of this guy, you are really a sad sack of farts. The character invented that bullshit as nothing more than a way for him to appear even more snobby than he already was. But my local sommelier has assured me that Merlot sales plummeted and Pinot skyrocketed after this move became popular, so I already know there are a lot of lowly, vapid cows out there.
Yar on
0
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
edited February 2007
I've not seen Sideways, but I saw something on TV about the production of As Good as it Gets. He said that when they first ran the movie to test audiences, they hated Jack Nicholson's character. Just fucking loathed him. So they edited the movie to put fun, bouncy music and sound effects in the background when Nicholson was on screen. In the next test screening, people found him amusing and sympathetic.
Maybe Sideways had some similar production tricks.
Let's face it... unless you plan to live in a monastery from pubescence to old age, the romantic comedy is an inevitable facet of modern life. It's as unavoidable as death, taxes, sleep deprivation, and the eight-hour workday. If you're going to resign yourself to a fate, you can at least make sure that your fate is pleasant.
No equivocation is possible or even necessary: Music and Lyrics is an archetypical romantic comedy. You have Hugh Grant in typical form, straddling his tightrope between tongue-tied and witty; Drew Barrymore being charismatic as ever as the slightly quirky female lead; one of our lovers has a mysterious secret that threatens to tear the union apart before it even gets started; and in the end love saves the day.
But like a well-crafted pop song with a catchy hook, Music and Lyrics finds its charm retreading familiar ground while reinventing the superficial details. The typical "chick flick" storyline is injected with just enough loving 80s camp to give a laugh to anybody old enough to appreciate the heady days of Wham! and Duran Duran on MTV. Note to the new wave fans: one of the musical consultants for the film was Martin Fry of ABC (Look of Love, Poison Arrow), whose vocal and dance stylings were obviously highly influential on Hugh Grant's performance as an 80s pop icon now playing small venues for 30-something valley-girls-turned-soccer-moms.
Music and Lyrics is also refreshingly self-referential: throughout the film, various characters discuss the difference between writing feel-good pop music and serious art; these discussions could easily apply to the differences between a feel-good "chick flick" and serious film. Hugh Grant is getting a little long in the tooth to be a romantic leading man, making him the appropriate butt of a few subtle and not-so-subtle jokes at the May-December nature of the coupling between him and Drew.
Don't expect any surprises, though. The plot is strictly by-the-numbers, from the blueprint boy-meets-girl introduction to the love-conquers-all denoument. The pleasure is entirely in the journey, not the destination.
Rating: two and a half out of four Hugh Grants.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
0
DynagripBreak me a million heartsHoustonRegistered User, ClubPAregular
I've not seen Sideways, but I saw something on TV about the production of As Good as it Gets. He said that when they first ran the movie to test audiences, they hated Jack Nicholson's character. Just fucking loathed him. So they edited the movie to put fun, bouncy music and sound effects in the background when Nicholson was on screen. In the next test screening, people found him amusing and sympathetic.
Maybe Sideways had some similar production tricks.
My friends callled As Good as it Gets my life story.
Posts
I loved City of God. There were one or two cheap shots, but overall an awesome movie.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Because of my height and build, I've been able to convince several people that I used to work as Matthew Lillard's stunt double.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
http://www.twobitentertainment.com/leo-fst.html
http://www.twobitentertainment.com/leo-tro.html
Maybe Sideways had some similar production tricks.
Let's face it... unless you plan to live in a monastery from pubescence to old age, the romantic comedy is an inevitable facet of modern life. It's as unavoidable as death, taxes, sleep deprivation, and the eight-hour workday. If you're going to resign yourself to a fate, you can at least make sure that your fate is pleasant.
No equivocation is possible or even necessary: Music and Lyrics is an archetypical romantic comedy. You have Hugh Grant in typical form, straddling his tightrope between tongue-tied and witty; Drew Barrymore being charismatic as ever as the slightly quirky female lead; one of our lovers has a mysterious secret that threatens to tear the union apart before it even gets started; and in the end love saves the day.
But like a well-crafted pop song with a catchy hook, Music and Lyrics finds its charm retreading familiar ground while reinventing the superficial details. The typical "chick flick" storyline is injected with just enough loving 80s camp to give a laugh to anybody old enough to appreciate the heady days of Wham! and Duran Duran on MTV. Note to the new wave fans: one of the musical consultants for the film was Martin Fry of ABC (Look of Love, Poison Arrow), whose vocal and dance stylings were obviously highly influential on Hugh Grant's performance as an 80s pop icon now playing small venues for 30-something valley-girls-turned-soccer-moms.
Music and Lyrics is also refreshingly self-referential: throughout the film, various characters discuss the difference between writing feel-good pop music and serious art; these discussions could easily apply to the differences between a feel-good "chick flick" and serious film. Hugh Grant is getting a little long in the tooth to be a romantic leading man, making him the appropriate butt of a few subtle and not-so-subtle jokes at the May-December nature of the coupling between him and Drew.
Don't expect any surprises, though. The plot is strictly by-the-numbers, from the blueprint boy-meets-girl introduction to the love-conquers-all denoument. The pleasure is entirely in the journey, not the destination.
Rating: two and a half out of four Hugh Grants.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.