THOUGH I HONESTLY DON’T UNDERSTAND THE TITLE, I LOVE THIS MOVIE
Having seen what I feel to be two of his best films, I can say with certainty that Paul Giamatti is currently Hollywood’s most underrated actor. In American Splendor, Giamatti plays the ultimate schlep, Harvey Pekar with such authenticity that when the real-life Pekar appears in the movie as its narrator he’s the one who seems to be acting. He anchors his latest film, the Oscar-nominated Sideways with his subtly poignant portrayal of middle-school teacher/frustrated novelist Miles (which was mysteriously overlooked by the members of the Academy). That he is the strongest element of this film is quite a statement given that the entire piece serves as testimony to director Alexander Payne’s brilliance.
The plot is simple enough to sum up in two sentences. Wine connoisseur Miles takes his buddy Jack (Thomas Haden Church) on a weeklong wine-tasting tour of Napa Valley, California, as a sort of send-off before Jack, a washed-up soap opera actor gets married on Saturday. While on the trip, Miles grapples with angst over his failed marriage, strikes up a mutual attraction with the waitress Maya (Virginia Madsen), receives news regarding the publication of his quasi-autobiographical book, and tries his best to rein in a horny, confused Jack, who starts a torrid affair with wine shop sex goddess Stephanie (Sandra Oh).
This is the kind of movie that works better without movie stars. Although it was distracting to remember that Haden-Church once played the obnoxious fiancé in the equally obnoxious George of the Jungle (which I’m sure he’s trying his darnedest to forget) for the most part I really loved the way the actors really got under the skin of these characters, especially Giamatti. There is a smooth, easygoing chemistry between the four performers here that doesn’t feel pre-packaged and truncated, the way movie relationships generally do. The movie works as a comedy even though it’s only gently seasoned with one-liners and broad humor (which breaks out around the third act) because of its spot-on characterization. I laughed out loud more than once at Miles’ loser-in-denial and Jack’s alpha-male, commitment-phobic jackass.
What might come as a surprise, however, are the heart-rending moments where Miles deals with the reality of his divorce, and more specifically the discovery that his former wife has been able to move on. The scene where, drunk on several different kinds of wine, he sneaks away from his and Jack’s double-date with Maya and Stephanie to call his ex-wife is like an emotional sledgehammer even without any music cues or overwrought acting. The same goes for another scene much later in the movie where Giamatti’s facial expressions alone should have nabbed him an Oscar nomination. The swaggering Jack likewise has a vulnerable moment late in the film, but his display of emotion is more overt: he gets to blubber and sob. These scenes kind of highlight the biggest difference between the two principal characters, who have been friends since college. One appreciates the subtler pleasures of life, while the other just goes for more hedonistic. The worst thing that happens to one of them that he gets his heart broken, while the worst thing that happens to the other is that…well, something else of his gets broken.
My hands-down favorite scene from the film is the one where Maya asks Miles why he prefers Pinot (“pee-noh”) to other kinds of wine, and in reply Miles talks about the fragility of the grapes used to make it, as well as the patience required to properly transform those grapes into wine. It’s not one of the film’s more subtle moments, given that his discourse is clearly a metaphor for how the most beautiful, memorable things in life are so delicately fragile that they are practically ephemeral, and must be nurtured in order to bring out the best in them. It is, however, a truly soulful piece of dialogue. Whether they were part of Rex Pickett’s book on which this movie was based, or of the script co-written by Payne and Jim Taylor, those lines are simply magical.
Giamatti and Haden-Church play off each other wonderfully, with the moroseness of the former actually complementing the crassness of the latter, and vice versa. (I can’t quite think of a 4J analogue for Miles, but imagine pulling a road trip with Miko Sales the week before he gets married, and basically you have Jack.) Madsen’s Maya is simply gorgeous. Madsen, I’m fairly sure, is at least 40, and although it doesn’t necessarily show in her face, the wisdom of her years shines through in her character. Oh’s Stephanie, despite being the least-developed character in the script, still manages to hold her own, and she makes her mark with some pretty potent sexual energy in her very first scene.
In such a character-driven opus, you would think the physical comedy that suddenly rears its head in the third act is a bit out of place, but it’s actually woven quite skillfully into the story and never feels gratuitous. When the belly laughs came, I nearly busted my gut. (And I wasn’t even thinking of Miko at the time.)
There is one word of caution I feel I must give, especially to those of you who watched and disliked Payne’s last movie prior to this one, About Schmidt. Payne seems to have a penchant for using onscreen nudity for shock value, perhaps as a tongue-in-cheek reference to Hollywood’s tendency to bare only the beautiful and nubile. In the aforementioned Schmidt, Payne blistered our eyes with a frontal shot of a butt-naked Kathy Bates stepping into a Jacuzzi with Jack Nicholson. Well, there is a similar scene here, although it’s eventually used to great comic effect. If nothing else, rest assured that Payne does not subject us to a naked Paul Giamatti.
Given the Academy’s history of passing up comedies in favor of big, loud and often weepy epics like Martin Scorsese’s The Aviator, I don’t expect this movie to grab more than a couple of Oscars at most out of its five nominations, possibly for the acting nods for Haden-Church and Madsen, more likely for its adapted screenplay. I will go out on a limb and say, however, that of the movies up for the Best Picture Oscar, this is the purest one, undiluted by concerns like accurate portrayal of true-to-life subject matter or controversial endings. This is a distinction of which Giamatti, with or without an Oscar nod, should be truly proud.
P.S. If someone finds out/figures out what the title means, please let me know. It doesn’t feel right to not understand the title of a movie I enjoyed so much.
The plot is simple enough to sum up in two sentences. Wine connoisseur Miles takes his buddy Jack (Thomas Haden Church) on a weeklong wine-tasting tour of Napa Valley, California, as a sort of send-off before Jack, a washed-up soap opera actor gets married on Saturday. While on the trip, Miles grapples with angst over his failed marriage, strikes up a mutual attraction with the waitress Maya (Virginia Madsen), receives news regarding the publication of his quasi-autobiographical book, and tries his best to rein in a horny, confused Jack, who starts a torrid affair with wine shop sex goddess Stephanie (Sandra Oh).
This is the kind of movie that works better without movie stars. Although it was distracting to remember that Haden-Church once played the obnoxious fiancé in the equally obnoxious George of the Jungle (which I’m sure he’s trying his darnedest to forget) for the most part I really loved the way the actors really got under the skin of these characters, especially Giamatti. There is a smooth, easygoing chemistry between the four performers here that doesn’t feel pre-packaged and truncated, the way movie relationships generally do. The movie works as a comedy even though it’s only gently seasoned with one-liners and broad humor (which breaks out around the third act) because of its spot-on characterization. I laughed out loud more than once at Miles’ loser-in-denial and Jack’s alpha-male, commitment-phobic jackass.
What might come as a surprise, however, are the heart-rending moments where Miles deals with the reality of his divorce, and more specifically the discovery that his former wife has been able to move on. The scene where, drunk on several different kinds of wine, he sneaks away from his and Jack’s double-date with Maya and Stephanie to call his ex-wife is like an emotional sledgehammer even without any music cues or overwrought acting. The same goes for another scene much later in the movie where Giamatti’s facial expressions alone should have nabbed him an Oscar nomination. The swaggering Jack likewise has a vulnerable moment late in the film, but his display of emotion is more overt: he gets to blubber and sob. These scenes kind of highlight the biggest difference between the two principal characters, who have been friends since college. One appreciates the subtler pleasures of life, while the other just goes for more hedonistic. The worst thing that happens to one of them that he gets his heart broken, while the worst thing that happens to the other is that…well, something else of his gets broken.
My hands-down favorite scene from the film is the one where Maya asks Miles why he prefers Pinot (“pee-noh”) to other kinds of wine, and in reply Miles talks about the fragility of the grapes used to make it, as well as the patience required to properly transform those grapes into wine. It’s not one of the film’s more subtle moments, given that his discourse is clearly a metaphor for how the most beautiful, memorable things in life are so delicately fragile that they are practically ephemeral, and must be nurtured in order to bring out the best in them. It is, however, a truly soulful piece of dialogue. Whether they were part of Rex Pickett’s book on which this movie was based, or of the script co-written by Payne and Jim Taylor, those lines are simply magical.
Giamatti and Haden-Church play off each other wonderfully, with the moroseness of the former actually complementing the crassness of the latter, and vice versa. (I can’t quite think of a 4J analogue for Miles, but imagine pulling a road trip with Miko Sales the week before he gets married, and basically you have Jack.) Madsen’s Maya is simply gorgeous. Madsen, I’m fairly sure, is at least 40, and although it doesn’t necessarily show in her face, the wisdom of her years shines through in her character. Oh’s Stephanie, despite being the least-developed character in the script, still manages to hold her own, and she makes her mark with some pretty potent sexual energy in her very first scene.
In such a character-driven opus, you would think the physical comedy that suddenly rears its head in the third act is a bit out of place, but it’s actually woven quite skillfully into the story and never feels gratuitous. When the belly laughs came, I nearly busted my gut. (And I wasn’t even thinking of Miko at the time.)
There is one word of caution I feel I must give, especially to those of you who watched and disliked Payne’s last movie prior to this one, About Schmidt. Payne seems to have a penchant for using onscreen nudity for shock value, perhaps as a tongue-in-cheek reference to Hollywood’s tendency to bare only the beautiful and nubile. In the aforementioned Schmidt, Payne blistered our eyes with a frontal shot of a butt-naked Kathy Bates stepping into a Jacuzzi with Jack Nicholson. Well, there is a similar scene here, although it’s eventually used to great comic effect. If nothing else, rest assured that Payne does not subject us to a naked Paul Giamatti.
Given the Academy’s history of passing up comedies in favor of big, loud and often weepy epics like Martin Scorsese’s The Aviator, I don’t expect this movie to grab more than a couple of Oscars at most out of its five nominations, possibly for the acting nods for Haden-Church and Madsen, more likely for its adapted screenplay. I will go out on a limb and say, however, that of the movies up for the Best Picture Oscar, this is the purest one, undiluted by concerns like accurate portrayal of true-to-life subject matter or controversial endings. This is a distinction of which Giamatti, with or without an Oscar nod, should be truly proud.
P.S. If someone finds out/figures out what the title means, please let me know. It doesn’t feel right to not understand the title of a movie I enjoyed so much.
posted by Jim Arroyo at 7:53 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home