Cutaways, Take 3

The biopics just keep on a-comin'. The most recent I've seen, "Beyond the Sea," is the Kevin Spacey do-it-yourself vanity project (he starred, directed, produced and co-wrote) depicting the life of crooner Bobby Darin, the Sinatra Lite of the 1950s and '60s who gave us such hits as "Mack the Knife" and "Splish Splash." It's an agreeable -- if unremarkable -- showbiz musical, as far as it goes.

Nevertheless, one's appreciation of the movie ultimately boils down to whether you can accept the 45-year-old Spacey as Darin, who hit stardom in his early 20s and died in 1973 at the age of 37. While the film does reveal Spacey to be a surprisingly gifted singer, his unsuitability for the part is a constant distraction. It's a little weird and embarrassing to watch Spacey trot around courting Kate Bosworth as Sandra Dee, who was 16 when Darin pursued her on the set of "Come September." Want some candy, little girl? In the sequence, Dee's domineering mother (Greta Scacchi) quips to Darin that what he really needs is an older woman; and you've gotta wonder: Like who? Rue McClanahan? Spacey is an excellent actor, but he just doesn't pass muster as a 22 year old.

***

The New York Times' movie critic A.O. Scott, whom I generally like, must have received a big fat load of coal in his Christmas stocking. He has decided to boldly call "Sideways" the most overrated film of 2004.

Scott writes:

"I don't just mean that the critical praise is out of proportion to the quality of the film. While that seems to me to be true -- beyond the movie's occasionally slack pacing, I would cite a coy ambivalence about its main characters as its principal flaw -- it would most likely be true in any case. The accumulated passions of people who are paid to have opinions about movies can sometimes place an undue burden of expectation on both the objects of those passions and the readers to whom they are communicated.

"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.

"In 'Sideways,' a good many critics see themselves, and it is only natural that we should love what we see. Not that critics are the only ones, by any means, but the affection that we have lavished on this film has the effect of emphasizing the narrowness of its vision, and perhaps our own. It both satirizes and affirms a cherished male fantasy: that however antisocial, self-absorbed and downright unattractive a man may be, he can always be rescued by the love of a good woman. (What's in it for her is less clear.)

"There is nothing wrong with entertaining this conceit, and 'Sideways' does it artfully enough. And of course, the critics respond to other stories as well. Or do we? For the most part, the groups that did not choose "Sideways" -- the Village Voice Poll, for example, and the Washington film critics -- selected "Before Sunset" and "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind," both variations on the theme of a moody, cerebral fellow graced by the kind of romantic love he probably doesn't believe in and can hardly be said to deserve. Film critics, for our part, clearly have plenty of self-love to go around."

Huh. Interesting. He sure is ... what's the word I'm searching for? ... oh, now I remember: a dickhead. Yeah, that's it. It seems to me that A.O. Scott, who led the charge of misogyny against James L. Brooks' "Spanglish," has resolved to view these films from the narrowest of male-bashing viewpoints -- perhaps guilty of precisely the same myopia he is accusing his fellow critics of indulging.

I will grant him that there is a good deal of Miles' downtrodden schlemiel lurking in the hearts of many -- maybe even most -- critics (your humble reviewer included), but I would venture to say that audiences respond to all types of characters, provided they are well-drawn, believable and even remotely sympathetic. "Maria Full of Grace" has received glowing notices, too, and not because the majority of film critics are pregnant drug mules from Colombia. Scott attributes the praise of critics based on his own preconceived notions of what moves people, a notion which is probably more telling of his own smug superiority than it is of the people whose secret hopes, dreams and aspirations he purports to know intimately.

And I would also suggest that the most negative aspects of Miles' persona -- pompous, sociopathic, fearful and self-pitying -- might just apply to millions who aren't critics. Gosh, isn't some of that part of ... what's the phrase I'm wanting? ... the human condition? Yeah, that's it.

The bottom line, I suspect, is that Scott is simply trying to be the turd in the punch bowl, stirring up the dnader of critics by making a ridiculous and overblown statement.

***

Oh, and speaking of creepy movie freaks, Ain't It Cool News' Harry Knowles unveils his list of 2004's best 10 flicks. And guess what? The top pick isn't "Sideways."

***

Dallas Morning News film critic Chris Vognar caught up with movie writer-director James L. Brooks to talk about the severe backlash to his latest effort, "Spanglish."

"Mr. Brooks isn't buying into any misogyny arguments," Vognar writes. "Yes, Deborah (the Tea Leoni character that has drawn the brunt of criticism) has some rough edges. But her creator sees her as more unhappy than unredeemed. 'There's not a mean bone in her body, nor is there a secure bone in her body,' Mr. Brooks says by phone. 'Everything you see is a result of her own insecurities and the moment in life that she's in.'"

Maybe A.O. Scott will weigh in on this, too.