"SIDEWAYS" ..... the movie. The Academy Award Nominee... what the HELL

were they thinking?

What a lame, trite, useless, pointless, over-acted, over-rated, under-achieving, wasted, irrelevent piece of celluloid.

How in hell did it get nominated? What for? WHY???? WHY???

OHMYGAWD! I've never in my life seen such a yuppie inflated story about people I honestly couldn't care any less about. They were all, individually and as a group, the most collectively irrelevent people I would never, ever, in my life or on film, want to meet.

The story was cliche, pithy and tragically devoid of reality -- or what one imagines as passing for reality. I honestly hope there really aren't any people who live their lives like this, or upon whom this film is based... worse, what the hell was the writer thinking to imagine that anyone would give a crap about a pile of mediocre losers who can't even afford the wine they're whining about?

Holy mother of god, is the director or the writer dying or something? That put into motion some sentimental albeit misplaced urge to even nominate this pile of crap for an ACADEMY AWARD????

**thanks, I'm done now...**

It's too bad Return of the King came out during a year of good movies, because pretty much any of last year's nominees for best picture could've taken this year's award easily.

genuine attention...

I can't remember them of course... but I KNOW there were some good films, far better than this malevolent pile of crap.

And I would never nominate either for an Oscar. Everything else was either craptacular to begin with or extremely disappointing. Just my opinion, of course.

On edit: I stand corrected by a later post. Eternal Sunshine was a GREAT movie. Excellent story, excellent acting, excellent direction, orginality, philosophically deep. I forgot it was a 2004 movie for some reason though.

was a FILM.

Bright, brilliant, relevent, passionate.. and a wildly unusual story.....

The ads reminded me a little of Royal Tenenbaums, which I love.

So was "The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou".

Neither were as good, or certainly not as real, as "Sideways".

Tarantino needs to reedit it, cut it down to size, and rerelease it as the single film that was orginally intended. Then it will be a masterpiece.

Eternal Sunshine was wonderful.

it works fine for me, and there's nothing that i'd want edited out.

and I actually liked Sideways. Perhaps one needs to be of a certain age to appreciate it.

That pic of Cheney pinching his man boob is truly horrifying.

but when you described this the only thing I could think of was the cast of Seinfeld (I know it was a great show and yadda yadda yadda) but that just summed up what I thought of the characters on Seinfeld.

<<OHMYGAWD! I've never in my life seen such a yuppie inflated story about people I honestly couldn't care any less about. They were all, individually and as a group, the most collectively irrelevent people I would never, ever, in my life or on film, want to meet.>>

all losers...

The "Sideways" cast was irretrievably mediocre in its finest moments.

Are people identifying with it because of the loser quantification?

Sorry you were disappointed kiddies.

I thought both were great movies.

My two favourites of 2004 for sure.

and you have a great set of Best Picture nominees.

I LOVED that movie! I guess the fact that nothing explodes and no one dies is really a drag for some people.

and I thought this movie sucked out loud. I hated everything about it, right down the the way it was shot.

I will never in my life understand how this piece of shit was nominated over Hotel Rwanda, which is a fantastic film.

This was another baby boomer movie. Some of the baby boomer stage of life movies I enjoyed. The Big Chill and Easy Rider were fine films. This was shallow and pathetic.

which stunk, big time.

The rest of the mominees are biopics.

Million Dollar Baby doesn't even do justice to "Rope Burns", the collection of shorts from which it was plucked.

Thanks,Lisa

Who gasped aloud at all the telegraphed scenes as if they were surprised?

And why on earth wouldn't she 1) look up what Macushla" meant when everyone was shouting it at her; 2) know what it meant; or 3) why wouldn't he tell her? I began to think it must meant something other than what I thought it did, but no.

It wasn't a complete waste of two hours, but it sure wasn't a memorable movie. I mean, are we supposed to feel sorry for a guy that steals money from his mother?

out the impressions.

My Winery (Moore Brothers! Thanks, Ramsey!) told me that Sideways has started "A Nationwide Run" on Pinot Noir and Pinot Grigio!

:toast:

Never like Pinot myself. It's too damn sweet. Though I'm nowhere near what you would call a wine coniesseur, I'll take a ten dollar bottle of French Merlot over fancy Pino Grigio anyday. Or just a bottle of Bushmill's for that matter.

movie. And I make NO pretense at being a wine snob. I don't know nuthin... I know what I like is all.

and to the restaurant there. And as with Rocky Horror Picture Show - horror - visitors there use expressions from the movie like no Merlot or looking for that Barely Legal magazine.

Deal with it :P

Giamatti's Da' Bomb!


:hug:

I thought it was well acted. I thought Paul Giamatti was brilliant. I hae always had a thing for Virginia Madsen.

Anyway, I will disagree with you. Sideways was very entertaining and a well produced film.

Recall her and Don Johnson in "Hot Spot" in the earlie 80's?:evilgrin:

at age 18. God I love that woman.

As I am frothing at the mouth.

if you just pause it at the right time, oh I love that woman.

Having been in similar situations, let me say this movie hit it dead on

It was a great film

I thought it was hilarious. Not best picture quality, but it was good.

My personal favourites from 2004 were Garden State, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and I <3 Huckabees.

As for best picture, I'm a big fan of Hotel Rwanda.

I should also not that the Oscars are and have always been a farce.

Great film.Great acting. Shocking and emotion evoking.

Their inclusion of Sideways but not Hotel Rwanda convinced me that a majority who vote on the awards are shallow self-centered morons.

It reminds them of their own pathetic lives and their own shallow Southern California personalities. Every middle aged film critic who can't get his lame book published and got divorced in the last 10 years loved it.

I felt exactly the same way you did about this movie. The fact that this would get nominated over something like Hotel Rwanda shows that the people who vote on the awards are a bunch of self-centered egotistical jerk-offs who would rather see a movie about their own meaningless lives than something profound.

This movie is like a baby boomer sequel to the easy rider road trip movie if easy rider had settled down in southern California, realized none of his dreams, and became a shallow figure that forgot everything he used to be. Perfect for the baby boom generation.

Not as bad as House of Sand and Fog, but still not worth my time and money.

Saw Finding Neverland this last weekend and loved that.

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v3.0
==================



This week is our first quarter 2005 fund drive. Democratic
Underground is a completely independent website. We depend almost entirely
on donations from our members to cover our costs. Thank you so much for
your support.

I walked out of SIDEWAYS after 5 mintues, but for purely personal reasons.

You see, I am a mid-30s, slightly overweight, falied writer living in Souther California trying really hard not to kill myself while I pound the pavement in the film industry.

As SIDEWAYS opened, I watched Paul Giamatti, a fat, mid-30s failed writer struggle out of bed in his tiny Southern California apartment, an absolute wreck, late for an appointment -- and I just couldn't bear to sit through 2-plus hours of my life, condensed on the screen.

So I snuck into AVIATOR instead.

Then I felt guilty, because **EVERYBODY!!!** loves that stupid film. I have not seen it. I refuse to see it (I'd rather live).

So, I'm glad to hear someone intelligent who can write well and has a point of view, actually not like the movie.

Thank you.

**whew**

It's never enough to merely dislike a film, we have to publicly destroy it.

Yawn. How infinitely dull.

"Because I am a screenwriter/director of equal or greater calibre!"

:eyes:

:hi:

Damn, I wish you lived in Chicago! We'd have a lot to talk about at the get together on Sunday. ;-)

IT SHOULD WIN.

I don't know what reality you're living in, but this film, in my opinion, was one of the most honest depictions on middle-age angst and "male bonding" that I have ever seen. The scene near the end (SPOILER WARNING) in which Paul Giamatti drinks an expensive bottle of wine in a fast food burger joint was the funniest, saddest, most poignant, truest, and BRAVEST movie scene of the past 20 years.

While I'm happy for you that you don't know anyone like this, I have to believe you live a fairly sheltered life. See it again.

Those of us who are irrelevant like to see ourselves depicted HONESTLY on screen every once in a while.

Rowr...

I liked it quite a bit.

I guess that's a rhetorical question. Michael Moore got punked, in my opinion.