I Didn't Like It - Sex, Lies, and Videotape (1989) Discussion

[–] Frockgirl 22 years ago

I couldn't stand the movie either. Boring? Yes, very. I have found that I really do not like James Spader, but he wasn't the only problem the whole movie was a waste of time.

reply

[–] namos333 22 years ago

C'mon. You have to realize the importance of this film even if you thought it sucked. It was a major factor in starting up the "indie revolution" and pics like Pulp Fiction might not have been made without it.

reply

[–] Frockgirl 22 years ago

The English have been making brilliant independent films for years, so I don't think it started anything. Pulp Fiction (and others)would have been made regardless. There was absolutely nothing important about Sex, Lies and Videotape. Originally I thought it was because I was only 18 when it first came out, however as it was on telly recently I made a point of watching it to see if I'd missed something - I hadn't.

reply

[–] RashaTheGreat 22 years ago

This movie was so mind-numbingly boring, I can't concieve how it could be the cause of any movement, and how in the hell does a unemployed impotent broke goofy-lookin' douche-bag who doesn't want to get an apartment because it would be "too many keys" get droves of women to make sex tapes for him?

reply

[–] cascade_ice 21 years ago

The reason why you people found it so boring is because you didn't take the time to see the movie past the title and the scenes for what it really is. To understand this film, you have to use your noodle and actually THINK about it..pay attention to what's going on.

Not that you don't have your right to dislike it, because you do. But when people claim that it's "boring", it seriously makes me wonder the level of their intelligence and depth. If you didn't like this film, perhaps something along the lines of a Disney film, or 'Crossroads' with Britney Spears, is more your cup of tea?

reply

[–] neil_mc 21 years ago

Some people class this film as boring because after hearing the reviews and reading the plot summary, they are expecting everyone to get their kit off every 2 minutes. I must admit, I did.

But Soderbergh is better than that, he doesn't make the film explicit like other films that deal with the same themes of sex and sexual repression. Instead, he constantly cuts away from the 'action' scenes and shows through intimate discussion the sexual awakening of his characters.

The financial success of this independant alone may have played a big part in the revolution that has been talked about.

reply

[–] Frockgirl 21 years ago

Cascade Ice, I find your post offensive. When this film first came out I was very keen to see it as at that time in my life I made a point of only viewing non-mainstream cinema, and this film just fell into that category. However, as I have said previously I found it boring, I am not sure whether it is because of James Spader (I have recently seen Secretary and I very much enjoyed that, so it may not be just down to his acting). I guess that I was expecting something better, it just didn't live up to my expectations, and it has nothing to do with me not THINKING about the film. By the way I would consider Woody Allen and Alfred Hitchcock my favourite directors, so I really don't think that a Disney film is something I am going to rush out and see and at 33 with my favourite band being The Smiths, Britney Spears certainly is not my cup of tea.

No, I mentioned the bisque!

reply

[–] slayemail-buffy 20 years ago

Hey, vanessawilson, I'm siding with Cascade Ice. This was an excellent movie. People who don't like it TEND to be mental midgets (not that you are). If you look in the movie collections of these folks you'll find Yu-Gi-Oh!--The Movie, Resident Evil, the Cat in the Hat, or anything with Vin Diesel. People like this are not looking for story or acting; they're just looking at the screen. Again: NOT calling you a mental midget, especially since you're into the Smiths, Allen, and Hithcock. You've got something going for you.

Sex, Lies, and Videotape is NOT boring. There is little to nothing in this movie that is extraneous information. Even the smallest bit of dialogue is character-revealing. Perhaps, maybe, you thought it was boring because it wasn't straightforward. . .? The screenwriter didn't kick his audience in their collective head and say, "This is what I mean." Soderberg presented us with unique and telling lines.

That whole bit about having the one key and needing a car, for instance. John thought it would be good to have a car "in case you have to leave someplace in a hurry." Graham countered that point: "Yeah, or go someplace in a hurry." This sort of writing deserves your attention. In very few words it defines the separate worldviews of these men, and it foreshadows their future relationship--they will be at odds. But what's so interesting about this is that John and Graham are battling each other throughout the film without spending more than a scene together before the climax. The conflict between them is acted out through the two sisters, Ann and Cynthia.

The movie is loaded with subtle gems such as these. Vanessa, I have no doubt that you're an intelligent person. And that is why I would love for you to watch the movie again. (Yeah, I'm biased. This is my favorite film.) It bothers me to think that excellent writing and acting can be so easily dismissed. Of course, I also liked House of Sand and Fog. . .what did you think of that one? Boring?

In the end, we're all entitled to our opinions, and there are plenty of movies out there that bored me to tears and would have caused another movie-goer to label me a mental midget for disliking them. It just saddens me when I see a tightly delivered movie such as Sex, Lies, and Videotape get passed over, when it really deserves a second viewing.

Thanks for reading.

reply

[–] Frockgirl 20 years ago

slayemail-buffy

To a certain extent I find your post offensive as well as Cascade Ice.

Quote:

People who don't like it TEND to be mental midgets (not that you are). If you look in the movie collections of these folks you'll find Yu-Gi-Oh!--The Movie, Resident Evil, the Cat in the Hat, or anything with Vin Diesel.

End Quote.

Okay, I know that I am not a mental midget, and if you did look in my collection you will see nothing of the above. Stop generalising. I did not like this movie on the first (1989) and second (2002) viewing, yes I found it boring, so can we leave it at that. I don't have to like it, the world will not be a better place if I decide to start liking this film. As I said previously I was really looking forward to seeing this film when it was released, as at the time I basically refused to see anything that was classed 'mainstream' - it was disappointing, very disappointing. I have also studied cinema, so I do know how to look at a film in depth, rather than "just looking at the screen". Just for you info, I have not seen The House of Sand and Fog, so I am unable to comment.

I am not a James Spader fan and Soderberg is definitely not one of my favourite directors, so they may be part of the reason for not liking the film. Also, I usually prefer English films to American ones, I find that even when American films are labelled "indie", they are not indie enough for my liking. And just to let others know I wasn't waiting for the characters to take their clothes off!!!

So I have given this a second viewing, it is not getting a third!!!!!!

No, I mentioned the bisque!

reply

[–] slayemail-buffy 20 years ago

Okay. You didn't like it a second time. I appreciate that you bothered to take the effort. Thanks.

We just disagree. :)

I'm good with that. I don't question your intelligence. I do question the intelligence of those I've debated before now.

Take care.

reply

[–] artiste_feminin 21 years ago

Right on, Cascade. Too many people these days go to see movies and have everything spelled out for them. If it isn't, they still don't have to consider much by the time the credits roll. But when it comes to a movie like this, you don't have everything spelled out for you.

Jesus was killed by a moral majority.

reply

[–] Salon_Kitty 21 years ago

I, too, felt this movie was a masterpiece. It has the honor of being in my Top 5 favorite films of all time. Spader was absolutely MESMERIZING and has remained since on a short list of actors I will watch a movie to see. I think Cascade said it best with "the truth sets everyone free". This film is just as relevant today as it was in '89. In fact, I think it's virtually timeless.

Spader + Kinky Sex= AWESOME movie (see:slv, Crash, Secretary)

But you didn't say God Bless You when I sneezed.....~Dogma

reply

[–] rsuther104 20 years ago

I saw Sex, Lies and Videotape when it was first released. I loved it, and will surely add it to my DVD collection. You know, we all do have different taste in film. I am always a little surprised when a movie can mean so much to one person while another finds it completely boring. I have friends with both intellect and taste, who didn't get this movie. Go figure. It spoke novels to me, about the importance of honesty in love, friendship, and life for that matter. My life experiences took me down similar paths, and I could identify with one of the characters while some of the others were carbon copies of people I know. I thought it was superbly acted, directed, and it had something important to say, which most American movies seem to lack these days. It definitely ranks somewhere in my top 50, at least. Cascade is right, the trust sets everyone free.

reply

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] zachypoo13 19 years ago

dude.
the mighty fiction was not influenced by this trash.
theres my statement, prove it wrong.

reply

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] tcoffman 21 years ago

This was a wonderful movie about the devastation that the truth can bring to lives in denial. Spader's character, as a recovering "pathological liar," never lied. About anything, even his own fetish, which most people might think he should dissemble about. His entry into the world of lies and self-deceit and "too many keys" disrupted all the facades and illusions which were going on. By the end of the movie the truth had set them all free, though the process had been painful.

Truly a masterpiece.

reply

[–] ada1crs 21 years ago

I think it's a masterpiece, visually, verbally, and aesthetically but I know tons of people who don't like it. My mum rented when it came out and it bored her to death, my step sister thinks its dull as hell, I showed it to a friend and he turned it off after five minutes.

It reminds me of the Blair Witch Project, a film critics adored and audiences hated.

'garbage, all i've been thinking about all week is garbage'

reply

[–] londonlondoners 21 years ago

I was curious about it and finally got the dvd. I thought that after 15 years I should not expect much. But I was not expected the fastidious session I endured. My sensation is that I was watching "Blow Up" again - and I found Blow Up boring, no matter how "revolutionary" some critics see it. The same for Sex, lies... the film is boring to death... the acting is plain, there is nothing special about the four characters... it is not a masterpiece verbally, not visually, not aesthetically... with or without sex scenes, it would still be boring... like the terapeutic session that starts the film... The lover destroying the tapes was as ridiculous as it could get.. the dialogues are...pueril... English is not my first language but I don't thing it would make a difference if I had seen it in my owm language.... so, just to double check I rented the Full Frontal and Julia Roberts is not the only thing boring in this last... again another film that insteat of talking about adult sexuality just gets lost in blabbering... Maybe some credit for the structure, but no much for the story, drama, plot, etc...

R

reply

[–] ada1crs 21 years ago

I have to disagree, but everyone is entitled to his or her opinion but I still believe it's a masterpiece which stands on a par with Peeping Tom (check hat out, you might enjoy it).

'Tell me why Graham? Why?

reply

[–] peyton_27104 21 years ago

There is a reason why this movie swept all of the important awards at the Cannes film festival - it's a masterpiece, plain and simple. As is the case with most masterpieces, especially the movies that try something different, a certain number of people simply don't get it. That is particularly true with this movie because of its reliance on the dialogue. If you don't like the movie, maybe you could just say "I didn't get it" rather than trashing the movie. I didn't get Magnolia, a movie even more highly regarded than this movie, but I don't trash the movie. I simply admit that I didn't get it.

My favorite line from the movie, from Graham. "Problems? Do I have problems? I look around in this town, and I see you, and I see John, and I see Cynthia, and I feel comparatively healthy."

reply

[–] ada1crs 20 years ago

What do you mean, as i said in my previous posts, I love the movie, it's just no-one I know likes it.

'The object of your obsession is invariably something of which you have no control over'.

reply

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Krustallos 20 years ago

I liked it very much but a friend of mine didn't. But it wasn't because she wanted to be "led around by the hand". She just thought the insights about sexuality and relationships were banal.

But then she was a hooker by trade, so it may have been a case of coals to Newcastle.

reply

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] PessimisticGrace 20 years ago

I guess we're even, then. I didn't see the big deal about Pulp Fiction. It was an absolutely beloved movie on everybody's top 10 list, but I watched it and came away with a shrug. My conclusion? Everyone has their own "thing." Labeling something "boring" is erroneous, because I thought Pulp Fiction was ho-hum. Instead of calling it terribly "boring," why don't you say you just didn't enjoy it? Because I bet you'd be irritated if someone called Pulp Fiction boring.

And as for James.. I honestly don't know how anyone could dislike him. He's a brilliant, versatile actor who inspires admiration in the most low-key roles. He's not an action star or your average leading man, yet he infuses such depth and thought into each of his roles. I like blockbusters like anyone else, but it takes very little thought to play an action hero or a typical romance movie. But he takes roles that are *very* subdued, yet captivates audiences. Clearly not you, clearly not some.. But you don't win Cannes with a "boring" movie. Just say it was "too slow and uneventful." Because obviously, many people didn't find it the least bit boring. it's refreshing for me to see a movie in which there's no gunfight, no gore, no gratituous sex scenes and no.. well, Hollywood! Somebody called him a "dorky-looking douche-bag." I personally think James Spader is one of the most attractive celebrities I can name, and I don't even date men! I'll take him over Brad Pitt, George Clooney, Matt Damon or Keanu Reeves *any day of the week*! I'm not attracted to hunky and muscled and manly. I think he's absolutely gorgeous, largely because of his eyes. I watched an episode of Boston Legal lately in which, following a love confession by a woman, he said nothing for what seemed like two or three minutes. Yet he conveyed shock, wonder, disbelief and confusion, without speaking a *single word*. Eyes that can do that will always win out over "handsome hunks" for me.

reply

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] nottheingenue 20 years ago

I love this movie. There are some movies that I can watch over and over again, and this happens to be one of them. I think the dialogue is very interesting, it may not be very deep but it seems sincere and reveals a lot about the characters. I'd have to agree that it is up there with Peeping Tom. I don't understand how someone could find this movie boring. Also, the sound is amazing! The scene with Graham and Ann at the end is wonderful. I really love the mood of the room and the fact that Soderbergh decided not to use overpowering music was a great choice. Because that scene was so much about the characters and not necessarily what was happening in the scene, I thought the music really emphasized the emotion. I usually watch that movie while I paint, it's wonderful just to listen to. The very last scene is beautiful.

Also, I did see House of Sand and Fog, and though I didn't think it was boring, I would not compare it to SLAV. I found "House" to be rather dramatic. It could have been much better had it been more understated.

As for James Spader, I love him. I happen to like Stargate, but maybe it's simply more of a sentimental thing or maybe I'm just too keen on sci-fi.

reply

[–] kid-8 20 years ago

...I was channel-surfing last night, and happened upon this movie, which I had seen on the big screen when it came out in 1989. Watching it again, I was reminded of its brilliance. Yes, it is like a play, but in movie form: long scenes, but mostly character development stuff. In those long (some say boring) scenes, we come to know (and care) about the characters. I felt like at the end of the film, I really knew these people.

My take, simplistic though it may be, is that this is a story about the insidiousness of lies:

Ann and John fall in love and marry. Ann has never experienced an orgasm; John is too self-centered and insensitive to notice, or even care.

Ann's sister is much more open sexually, but her openness manifests itself in an insecure way: by having an affair with her older sister's husband, her sister whom she's always felt inferior to, looks-wise, intellectually and morally.

Graham, one of John's old school friends, shows back up in town. Graham was much like his friend John--a liar, a philanderer--and as a result lost his first love, never to be retrieved. Graham and Ann meet; instinctually, they are drawn to one another, but at first don't quite understand why or how. When Graham "interviews" Cynthia (Ann's sis), and we later see him watching the tape of that interview, rather than be turned on by it, he turns away in pain, because he sees in John's betrayal of Cynthia his own self-loathing: for his lies and deceit in the relationship with his former love, Elizabeth.

When Ann finally figures out that her sister and husband are having an affair, she goes to Graham, whom she has conflicted feelings about, and confronts him with this news. Graham already knows John's a liar, and already knows what she tells him...and in their revelations to one another, during Ann's "interview", they connect--emotionally, at first, and then physically (off-screen).

Graham, the reformed liar, and Ann, the innocent, her eyes now open to her husband's betrayal, come together, to form a relationship based upon both emotional and physical intimacy, as well as integrity.
THE END...or in Graham's and Ann's case, THE BEGINNING....

It seems pretty clear to me.

reply

[–] shayneferry 20 years ago

This movie is very slow, but I thought It was pretty good, I think its a little overrated, but still good.

reply

[–] Radiant_Rose 19 years ago

Excuse me, donniedarker, but "Stargate" was great until they started all the boring fighting. "Supernova" I also like very much despite rather than because of a whole load of stuff. I especially like the ending of "Supernova".

reply

[–] Radiant_Rose 19 years ago

Hallo, donniedarker. If you like the first two acts of "Stargate", do you agree with me that the fighting bit spoilt it? I think amazon.co.uk lists it as the best selling item with Spader in it.

There is also too much fighting in "Supernova", but I like it anyway. I like it almost in spite of itself, as it could have been so much better.

reply

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Martina_Helene 20 years ago

i have mixed feelings about this film-it's a very strange movie-but I sort of liked it. I really didn't like what was going on, with the affair between john and cynthia, it was just so wrong-and I think Anne was so sweet, I just felt so sorry for her.

I thought the whole videotaping the women thing was very strange, and i thought that graham was strange in general-sweet? yes! strange? defenitly!?!

~But that's just me~

reply

[–] thecellomistress 20 years ago

I liked the move ALOT! Infact, I think it may be my favorite! Besides the fact that I absolutely ADORE Spader, The movie is alot like real life. It's not glamorized and overdone like alot of movies. Plus, the subleness of the acting gives the film a big meaning.

reply

[–] triassicdan 19 years ago

Don't people use boring to describe a film they don't understand because they're not intelligent enough to criticise it in any kind of constructive way?

I would say so, but in this case i can see why some people would describe it as boring, it seemed like a film that should have been 'boring', the seemingly exploitative premise, the grim sets, steven soderburgh who has made a host of bad movies and lack of music and James Spader who was in the abysmal Crash all convinced me that this wouldn't be the greatest of movies. But despite the grim canvas that the movie is set against, there is something about it that sparks it into life - the performances are superb, i found myself really sympathising with ann's husband for some reaon cheating aside and i like the ambiguities that exist in all the characters. i like the fact that its a movie about sex with no gratuitous sex scenes that ruin so many a movie. I liked the fact that it was trying to say something different, but what bugged me was that the point it ended up making about relationships wasn't a very good one. Although there are a lot of ambiguities in meaning, it seemed like it was trying really hard to say something profound but ultimately failed. There are a lot of interesting ideas in the movie, but some which could have been explored more, some which could have been toned down (the sexual awakening of ann which seemed to be the central theme was well handled, but an unoriganl and cliched idea i felt) It could have been a great movie, instead it was just a good one.

reply

[–] Radiant_Rose 19 years ago

It was interesting the way it suggested that watching pornography could be more damaging than appearing in it.

reply

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] fog-9 19 years ago

the purpose of the movie was to highlight that it is not always advisable to live in the boundaries of what constitutes a "successful" life by the standards of society... that you need to explore what makes you happy, even if it is difficult and it takes time...

and this movie does it with restraint, that builds to a devastatingly powerful conclusion...

~~^^~~^^~~^^~~^^~~^^~~^^~~^^~~
Things mean alot at the time
don't mean nothing later

reply

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Radiant_Rose 19 years ago

donniedarker, I think that you get that the pornography comment was NOT about "Stargate"!!!!! Happy Solstice/Merry Xmas/Happy Chrismukkah (if you watch "The OC" you'll know that Chrismukkah is a mixture of Christmas and Hannukah). Funny how Peter Gallagher is quite fanciable in "The OC" when he does absolutely zilch for me in SLaV.

reply