|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
my usual schtick is to not read reviews of a movie i plan to see until afterwards, so it's not till now that i'm reading the praise of "sideways" and a. o. scott's talk about its overratedness (which i agree with [note before knee-jerking: this means i liked it but was not overwhelmed with its perfection. you know when the "wings" guy fucks cammi, the sizzler waitress? the movies of 2004 were the sizzler restaurant, and "sideways" was cammi. incidentally, how much would it suck to answer the casting call for an overweight sizzler waitress? and be chosen as the person who fits that model? maybe i'd shut my mouth after seeing the paycheck.]):
the reaction to "Sideways" is worth noting, less because it isn't quite as good as everyone seems to be saying it is than because the near-unanimous praise of it reveals something about the psychology of critics, as distinct from our taste. Miles, the movie's hero, has been variously described as a drunk, a wine snob, a sad sack and a loser, but it has seldom been mentioned that he is also, by temperament if not by profession, a critic.i think he's right. and it sorta bothers me that i feel myself changing into this critic type just a little bit, that my tastes are getting all complicated and i can't get to the point when i talk about things the way i used to.
The contrast between him and his friend Jack is partly the difference between an uptight, insecure epicurean and a swinging, self-deluding hedonist, but it is more crucially the difference between a sensibility that subjects every experience to judgment and analysis and a personality happy to accept whatever the moment offers. When they taste wine, Jack is apt to say "tastes good to me," and leave it at that, whereas Miles tends not only to be more exacting in his judgment ("quaffable but not transcendent," which is about how I feel about "Sideways"), but also more prone to narrate, to interpret - to find a language for the most subtle and ephemeral sensations of his palate.
This makes him, among other things, an embodiment of the critical disposition, and one of the unusual things about "Sideways" is that, in the end, it defends this attitude rather than dismissing it. Yes, the film pokes fun at Miles's flights of oenophile rhetoric—all that business about asparagus and "nutty Edam cheese"—but it defies the usual Hollywood anti-intellectualism in acknowledging that, rather than diminishing the fun of drinking, approaching wine with a measure of knowledge and sophistication can enhance its pleasures. There is more to true appreciation than just knowing what you like.
- a. o. scott, "The Most Overrated Film of the Year," new york times January 2, 2005
also, movable type is wicked slow as i'm gradually moving old hand-coded posts into the system.
posted January 14, 2005 in delivery, film, print. 2001