Brandi Smith
The film, Sideways, was adapted into a screenplay
by Alexander Payne and Jim Taylor from the novel of the same name by Rex
Pickett. The screenplay itself is one of
this film’s shining stars. The adaptation was nominated for and won several awards,
including an Oscar, a Golden Globe, a BAFTA Film Award, and an Independent
Spirit Award.
Sideways was released in theaters on October 22, 2004 and was in release for 210 days. It was later released on DVD in April of 2005. During its’ release, Sideways earned 71,503,593 domestic dollars and 38,203,338 foreign dollars for a total of $109,706,931. The production costs were budgeted at $16 million, so the film profited by $93,706,931. Not too shabby! That’s nearly 6 times the money spent to make it.
Sideways was released in theaters on October 22, 2004 and was in release for 210 days. It was later released on DVD in April of 2005. During its’ release, Sideways earned 71,503,593 domestic dollars and 38,203,338 foreign dollars for a total of $109,706,931. The production costs were budgeted at $16 million, so the film profited by $93,706,931. Not too shabby! That’s nearly 6 times the money spent to make it.
I absolutely couldn’t believe that when I looked up the awards it won, there were literally 10 pages of nominations and awards! A majority of the pages were smaller Critics Awards from various cities, such as Kansas City, L.A., Boston, Chicago, San Francisco, etc. There were some other international ones like London, Marrakech, and Toronto. I narrowed the field down to some of the most popular awards ceremonies.
Sideways was nominated for 5 Academy Awards! It won only one and lost the other four. It won for Best Writing, Adapted Screenplay (Payne and Taylor). Now, I was extremely curious about the ones it lost, and wanting to know who won. You see, I have absolutely no recollection of ever knowing that this film existed. I don’t remember ever hearing of it or seeing any previews or trailers for it. I was pretty busy in 2004 caring for a two year old child and helping my then husband readjust to civilian life after coming home from Iraq, so I had to look up who won in those categories to see if they were films I had at least hear of before. It lost Best Motion Picture of the Year to the film Million Dollar Baby. Alright, I have heard of that one. At least I didn’t miss all of 2004! Thomas Haden Church lost the Best Supporting Actor award to Morgan Freeman for his role in Million Dollar Baby. Virginia Madsen lost the Best Supporting Actress category to Cate Blanchett for her work in The Aviator (I actually saw that film). Finally, Payne lost Best Achievement in Directing to Clint Eastwood for Million Dollar Baby.
Sideways was also nominated for 7 Golden Globes. It won 2 including: Best Screenplay, and Best Motion Picture- Comedy or Musical. It was nominated for 1 BAFTA award for Best Screenplay- Adapted, which it won. The cast won at the SAG awards for outstanding performance (Thomas Haden Church, Virginia Madsen, Paul Giamatti, and Sandra Oh), and was nominated in four total categories. Sideways cleaned up at the Independent Spirit Awards, winning all 6 awards for which it was nominated. These included: Best Feature, Best Director, Best Screenplay, Best Male Lead, Best Supporting Female, and Best Supporting Male.
Overall, it looks like Sideways was well received by the public, by the critics, and by the awards organizations. Bringing in nearly 6 times the amount that was spent to make the movie shows that the public wanted to see it. Most of the critics gave it excellent reviews. It was nominated for 10 pages worth of awards, and it won many of them. In my opinion, this was a very successful film.
Works Cited
“Sideways Awards”. IMDb. Web. 4 June, 2014. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0375063/awards
“Sideways (2004)”. Rotten Tomatoes. Web. 4 June 2014. http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/sideways/
Audience question: because of the highest acclaim for the film, the author, Pickett, wrote a second novel with the same two characters. The character rights are still held with the production company and offer to make the sequel with Payne as the director. He declined. What do you think would be a viable reason to why he didn't take the offer to direct the sequel?
ReplyDeleteI really do not see that a sequel would have made it. Unless the author really had a bombshell for the second or the director felt it had to be done. The way the film ended gave it closer and showed that Miles had found himself again. It just took getting his best friend married. Maybe that would have been the second movie. "The life and times of Jack!" I just do not see the studios backing the second film.
DeleteI agree, Paul. I really felt that the film had closure. Yes, it could go on and tell what happens with Miles and Maya, but there really isn't a reason to since we see that Miles finally has closure from his divorce and he now has the courage to live again.
DeleteI think it is awesome because I am doing about the director Alexander Payne and I was just as shocked how many awards the film had won! It was one of his most successful films! My answer to your question Blue would be that I think the movie just needed to end the way it did. I think making a sequel like most kinda weaken the story line if you ask me. Most sequels I watch aren't as good as the first and I just think that maybe the reason he did not do it was that the movie was a huge success he just did not want to risk that success.
ReplyDeleteFollow up audience question: I see you point however Payne won most of his awards for Best Screenplay. This was his best film, wouldn't a sequel be more beneficial for Payne?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSideways is still probably his most popular film, and though it enjoyed a modest success (especially in relative terms for its modest budget), the overall numbers on the film's theatrical run would not impress many Hollywood execs. That's why it's not surprising that Brandi missed it the first time around despite the critical acclaim. Usually character-driven films like this one (i.e., films where nothing explodes) only stay in town for a week or two. I think Sideways did hang around slightly longer when it came out initially, and may have resurfaced during Oscar time, but even so the success of such films usually comes from the home video audience, where quieter films are often discovered and become widely known.
ReplyDeleteI feel as though this film would have had greater critical success if it would have been made in the 90s. Everything from the low key characters to the niche topic of the specific region of wine growing would have been a huge hit. Compare it to some of the the other movies we have seen and it really does not seem to specifically need to be any more recently made than the 90s and that is only because of the minimal usage of cell phones. What do you guys think? would Sideways had possibly done better had it been made sooner?
ReplyDeleteFor what it's worth, it couldn't have possibly been made in the 1990s since Pickett's novel came out in 2004.
DeleteI understand what you are getting at, Gentry. The movie does seem like it should've been from the 90's. The cinematography, wardrobe, (as you said) flip phones and lack of use, the car, etc. I was surprised at the year it was filmed. Perhaps the 90's theme was to appeal to an audience close to the age of the main characters. It seems realistic for a middle aged guy who is struggling with a mid-life crisis to be a bit "stuck" in the 90's. Makes the movie more relate-able.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeletePayne may not want to direct the sequel since sequels usually are not as popular. Sequels usually lack the quality that the first film had. Payne my have also thought the sequel was not as well written as the first novel and therefore did not want to have his name on the new film as the director.
ReplyDeleteI think its a real shame that the sequel got squashed. I think to often we unfairly compare sequels to their predecessors instead of judging them on their own merit. Especially in the case of a film like this that was universally hailed, and as a result we are robbed of what could have been a very enjoyable film.
ReplyDelete