Actually the cast is more well known than you think. Thomas Hayden Church you may know from TV, he was on that frightful sitcom failure Ned & Stacey (starring Debra Messing, no doubt you may know her) and he was also on Coach.

Paul Giamotti has been all over, most recently in American Splendor. He's a good actor.

I always thought Pittsburgh was kind of a big city; I'm surprised this movie's not playing there. And, my geography knowledge is lacking--do you really drive into Cleveland sometimes to see movies?

So nobody's seen it yet? I'm surprised, on this forum. I of course almost never see any grown-up movies at the movie theater. For example, we went to see The Incredibles on Friday.

Paul Giamatti is such a charismatic actor; I'm glad he's gone up into lead status. It's so unusual for a homely, chubby guy. He was wonderful in American Splendor. The first big part I'd ever seen him in was a movie about a karaoke contest. It is kind of a "B" movie, but what a hoot! Gwyneth Paltrow and Huey Lewis also appeard as a father and daughter, and they sang what turned out to be a single on the radio: "Cruising" Anyway, Paul Giamatti can SING!

Can't wait to see "Sideways." (Not to mention I went to acting school in Chicago with Gina Madsen; she was just a little younger than me, a little prettier than me, and I know my soon to be ex-boyfriend was sweet on her. Just a bit of trivia!)

Rose

It just seemed like something was missing, or maybe not missing when it should have been.

Most of the cast was very familiar to me...although I couldn't place them right away. Some have had parts on major tv shows. Thomas Hayden Church was on "Wings", Virginia Madsen on "Fraiser", Jessica Hecht on "Friends"...

In retrospect, it's probably worth renting when it comes out on DVD, but I wouldn't drive any major distance to see it. Then again, that's just me...and I'm a tough critic...most people will probably love it.

I saw "About Schmidt" and loved it. (It was far superior to Sideways, IMHO) I haven't read the book, but I don't really think the ethnicity or the region Nicholson's character came from was the reason it wasn't tops at the box office. The "story" had nothing to do with these things. It was very universal and dealt with an aging person: not an aging Jew or WASP.

I'm guessing "About Schmidt" was never intended to be a box office smash. It was low key and had a very "independent" type feeling (similar to Sideways). I think it opened at art house type theaters. I'm not sure the general public would really like it because there wasn't enough high end drama, action or resolution. In other words, it was a little slow moving and maybe a little too deep.

Box office means nothing to me. I would never consider it a bomb. It was one of the best movies of the year!

You should check it out; I bet you'd still like it even with the main character changes :)

p.s. Payne did "Election" too

I don't know how it did at the box office; I didn't realize it didn't do well. The money earned in proportion to the money spent on the project, though, would determine if it "bombed."

Reggie, if you like Nicholson, you must see "About Schmidt"!

And re: "Sideways," I am even more inclined to see it in view of the director and his previous work.

Rose

It sounds like you felt the same way I did about "Sideways". What didn't you like about it?

I don't know? The more you think of the movie, the more it gets better. I was just expecting something else. What? I don't know. OK. A nomination, but certainly not number one.

Regarding "Sideways"...I could see it up for a nomination or so but I really don't think it should win much...although this does appear to be a weak year.

I don't think I liked the writing in Sideways..the first part was almost unbelievable...(slight spoilers ahead) First off, a family of that much money wouldn't still be deciding on a cake a week before the wedding. Jack also wouldn't be allowed to go on a week long trip the entire week before the wedding coming home the day of rehersal, and if he chose Miles as his bestman and agreed to go on a big wine trip, I'm pretty sure he would have already drank wine with him before and Miles would have shown him how to previously. There were just so many scenes that relied on unrealistic material, IMHO. (Spoilers) I also didn't like how they portrayed Stephanie as a "HO" and trashy (you know how she slept with him the first night and enjoyed strange positions) but Maya, who, wow, waited for the 2nd (or was it 3rd) date, to drop her draws, was considered marriage material...In my world, they were both a little too easy but because we didn't get to see Maya and Miles doing the deed backwards, it made it more wholesome? It was just too stereotypical....I just don't like that sort of movie writing...where they try to trick you into feeling a way about a character. The movie also didn't seem to know how to end...I thought it ended too happily and hopeful for the type of movie it was...I would have preferred it to end in the hamburger joint with Miles drinking his price wine with fries.

Will give "Closer" a close look. Thanks!

Finally saw this tonight and enjoyed it very much. I laughed aloud frequently and clapped a couple of times - the merlot line and the naked running man. (Hmmm. I guess I should say the 2nd naked running man, because we really didn't see the first one, did we?) I do agree with Carla about the ending, though. I thought it was a cheat. Anyone else head to a bar immediately after?

Yes, some of the premise stretched believability, but I didn't have a problem just going with it. The guys didn't strike me as two who were a regular part of each other's lives, but as two with an old but important connection. I took the trip as a way for them to reconnect after a long time apart, thus Miles' anger at being abandoned for a chick.

Miles knew Jack, his best friend, was a player. And that Jack believed every word he told Stephanie in the moment at which he spoke. That can be incredibly difficult to watch, subverting one's sense of decency for one's loyalty. I saw this as part of Mile's angst.

I didn't read Maya as more virtuous than Stephanie, but rather Miles as inept in seduction. (I really couldn't see him as having an affair on his wife.) To me, Stephanie's points were lost by her casual treatment of her daughter. That is where the character was safely demoted to a brief meaningless fling.

I did not expect to like this. I saw it because it was touted as an important movie. I liked it a lot.

Santa Barbara is south of this particular wine country in central California. Not a lot of room for grapes in Santa Barbara with all the big estates, ranches, and mountains just to the east.

Grapes are now (last 30 years) being grown in mass in the Central Valley. It does get really hot there, but apparently they survive. Enough anyhow to get into the Gallo bottles, that come with the convenient screw top. :)

And the Smothers Brothers are located on Ice Cream Grade in Bonny Doon. In the hills above Santa Cruz.

Miles seemed comfortable and familiar with the region. His true niche, so to speak, in spite of his aspirations.

The plot just leaves Stefanie hanging at the end. She finds out that Jack is a louse and then slaps him around and then she just dissapears from the movie. Maybe that is part of the plot. Jack is so selfcentered that only hours after her emotional breakup with him, Jack is always figuring out how to hop into bed with chubby Gammie and how to fib to his fiance and he has not one ounce of guilt in him. But I would still like to know what happens to Stefanie.

Reggie, earlier you wondered how Stephanie turned out. I think the movie tells us. She will end up just like her mother.

Hmmm. Reggie, I didn't particulaly like Jack, though I like Church as an actor. How about the rest of you? Am I alone in this?

I’m not 100% sure Cammi and her husband were actually planning the event to happen (I’m not sure how they could know she would run into someone at work she could bring home), but I do think they ended up using the "affair" to their sexual advantage to help spice up their sex life. I took it their marriage was very well in tact and that they had probably done this sort of thing before.

Personally, I didn't really care what happend to Stephanie. I thought she was used as a prop to serve as an example of how weak Jack was. Stephanie appeared to me to be the type of girl who casually slept with men while her mother was raising her child...I didn't really have any sympathy for her. Plus, many women have been lied to and cheated on by men...but the women don't usually respond by beating the @rap out of them with a helmet...What ever happened to ignoring the phone calls, or a simple slap across the face? I takes one tough women to beat someone like that (come one, she knew him less than week, if she got that worked up over him, it was partially her fault too) ...she could have gotten jail time over that sort of abuse! Stephanie was so stereo-typical trailer trash (even down to the bowling alley) it was funny... and yes she was very attractive, but I took her as the kind of girl you fooled around with, not the kind you married....From the little I saw of Christine, I thought she was too good for Jack. (So, of course, I thought Jack and Stephanie would make a better couple because I saw them as both somewhat pathetic). I'm surprised you (reggie) seem to think so much more of Stephanie. I guess we just each take in and interpret things differently... or maybe it's just a guy thing :)

Mary

When I hear the word sociopath, I think of people who can fool lie detector tests, not people that cheat on their wives. I think of cult leaders or Charles Manson.

I saw Jack as a selfish dolt. He picked up and slept with Stephanie so easily, probably not because he was oh so charming, but because she was oh so desperate. Plus, no matter how ludicrous, I believe he truly had feelings towards Stephanie, and could have ended up with her if things had turned out differently. Also, a true sociopath would have been able to convince Stephanie not to be mad at him or at least calm her down enough to have a glass of Kool-Aid (LOL).

I think the only reason Jack was able to have a hold on the other characters and some might see him as manipulative was mainly because "the other characters" were so lonely, or messed up themselves, not because he had some great talent at controlling people. I think that was the whole point of the story. (If there was suppose to be a point). I don't think a normal, less desperate person would have been all that impressed or persuaded by Jack.

Does Jack have sociopathic tendencies, sure...but I wouldn't define him as one.

reggie, you mentioned something that bothered me about the movie and that was the relationship between Maya and Stephanie. Since I did find Stephanie trashy and Maya not so much so, I did find their friendship odd and unrealistic. I would have never thought those two women would have been close friends.

Then again, I wouldn't put Miles and Jack together either. And, I wouldn't have put Cammi and Jack together for a night either...nor would I have expected Cammi's husband to respond the way he did. I didn't believe Christine would marry Jack, nor could I imagine Miles had the makings of a man that had an affair (I think Chris may have mentioned this in an earlier post). For a rather uncomplicated relationship type movie, I found almost all the relationships rather unbelievable and hard to take. That's probably why I didn't seem to enjoy the movie as much as many others. I know people like each of those in the movie, they just usually don't associate with one another so closely. The only releationship I found realistic was the rushed in-the-moment relationship between Jack and Stephanie and, I agree, it probably wouldn't have lasted anyway, but sadly, it was the only one I found even halfway believable.

I did love the woman who played the mother.