Oscar Rant No. 1: Dude, 'Sideways' is so totally overrated
The Oregonian asked me to help kick off a series of deliberately provocative
"Oscar
Rants" by various writers. And
so:
I
enjoyed "Sideways," Alexander Payne's adult-contemporary indictment of the
modern American snob's refusal to engage life. It was a solid film about the
perils of hiding in cushy prisons of "good taste," with three great anchoring
performances by Thomas Haden Church, Virginia Madsen and especially
Academy-snubbed Paul Giamatti.But come
on: Best
Picture?A.O. Scott put it beautifully in The New York Times: "The
near-unanimous praise of ['Sideways'] reveals something about the psychology of
critics." Because so many of us in the crit trade see ourselves in Giamatti's
sedentary snob, Scott argues, "the critical praise is out of proportion to the
quality of the film."I couldn't agree
more. Imagine if Woody Allen filmed
the "Sideways" script circa 1980. Woody plays Giamatti's role; Tony Roberts
plays Church's; Mia Farrow, Madsen's. Though the intellectual sex-satire vibe
would still work, Woody's "Sideways" would be considered a middling entry (at
best) in his miraculous streak of '70s and '80s films -- many of them Oscar
nominees or serious loci of critical fawning.
(They'd also rip "Sideway"'s lite-FM
soundtrack to shreds -- which, I swear to God, sounds like the underscore from
an '80s straight-to-video sex
comedy.)I'd also wager that, in
another context, many critics would also see that whole "pinot noir is life!"
exchange that Giamatti and Madsen have on the back porch for what it is:
well-delivered but baldly over-symbolic stage-play dialogue. (Giamatti's
character loves pinot because it's high-maintenance and totally dependent on an
understanding, smart woman -- er, vintner?
Shocker!)Has cinema fallen so far that
critics and Academy members must fawn all over a film of such modest
rewards?Oscar Rant: Slipping 'Sideways' toward an Oscar
(The Oregonian, Jan. 29,
2005)
Posted: Sun - January 30, 2005 at 10:30 PM
|