 | |
List Price: $9.98 | | Label: Paramount
Salesrank: 3230
Released: December 1, 1998 |
| Our Price: $4.59 |
| Used Price: $3.22 |
|
MPAA Rating: PG-13 (Parental Guidance Suggested)
Media: DVD |
|
Editorial Review:
A London young woman's love life and career both hinge, unkown to her, on whether or not she catches a morning train back to her apartment.
Genre: Feature Film-Comedy
Rating: PG13
Release Date: 7-JAN-2003
Media Type: DVD
Description of Sliding Doors:
Nice concept, shaky execution--that about sums up the mixed blessings of British actor Peter Howitt's intelligent but forgivably flawed debut as a writer-director. It's got more emotional depth than most frothy romantic comedies, and its central idea--the parallel tracking of two possible destinies for a young London professional played by Gwyneth Paltrow--is full of involving possibilities. It's essentially a what-if scenario with Helen (Paltrow) at the center of two slightly but significantly different romantic trajectories, one involving her two-timing boyfriend (John Lynch) and the other with an amiable chap (John Hannah) who represents a happier outcome. That's the film's basic problem, however: The two scenarios are so romantically imbalanced (one guy's a total cad, the other charmingly sincere) that Helen inadvertently comes off looking foolish and needlessly confused. Still, this remains a pleasant experiment, and Howitt's dialogue is witty enough to keep things entertaining. It's also a treat for Paltrow fans; not only does the svelte actress handle a British accent without embarrassing herself, but she gets to play two subtle variations of the same character, sporting different wardrobes and hairstyles in a role that plays into her glamorous off-screen persona. --Jeff Shannon
Sliding Doors Reviews:
Seriously? 
2008-08-13 - Did anyone seriously not see the end of the movie from the beginning? Super predictible. Paltrow seems to rarely impress. I generally am not - watching films in the romantic comedy genre - however I recognize when a movie is romantic or comedic. This film was neither.
Subtitle please! 
2008-07-25 - This movie is so original, and for $7 bucks it's worth every penny! I remember seeing this movie preview long ago, but it didn't appeal to me then. One of my co-worker brought it up and explain the movie what if scenario to me, and I took a chance and bought it. I'm so glad I did, because it's such a great movie. You have to see the ending to see why! I promise you will not regret it. Oh~ I gave it 4 stars, because I didn't understand what the bloody hell they were talking about at first, because of the British accent. However, subtitle helps!
A sweet glimse into the choices we make 
2008-07-14 - I really enjoy this movie. A bittersweet movie definitely for women as most men I know would be asleep ten minutes in. A glimse into a woman's life showing two different paths and where her life would lead if she took one versus the other. You have to pay attention or you'll miss a few key things but it's one for chick flick nights or to watch alone when you need a girlie movie to pick you up.
Great date movie 
2008-06-06 - I really enjoyed this movie. It's interesting to see what happens IF.
It's an exciting look into what we always think of: How things could have
turned out if we would have chosen a different path or if fate would have had something different in store for us.
I think it's a great date movie.
A discenting opinion
2008-05-27 - Though the reviewers here seem to have a basically high opinion of the film, I found myself bothered by a lot of things. Mainly the male POV prevalent throughout that two female characters, presumably both intelligent and attractive, would bother wasting themselves on someone who doesn't deserve their time of day: namely two-timing boyfriend Gerry, who is living with Paltrow's "Helen" while she supports him totally as he is supposedly writing a novel. Right there, immediately the film came to a grinding halt for me. I already have to think both Helen and the pre-Helen girlfriend who is back in Gerry's life are self-destructive, low self-esteem types who will take any man on a platter that is given up to them: This Gerry isn't attractive, either physically or emotionally, to explain away his appeal to these women. And without some blinding charismatic trait of Gerry's to make this plot seem feasible, this means the screenwriter just has a low opinion of females in general. Or the male lead was badly cast. Probably a combination of the two.
And Helen's second romantic prospect isn't that great at final glance either, as it turns out a very important piece of information about him isn't revealed to Helen until near the end of the film, meaning though we're meant to assume he's her knight in shining armor (she needs rescuing from Gerry, at least the screenwriter gives us that) he can be kind of casual in the honesty department.
And Gerry? In the dual-plot he manages to make both his official and unofficial girlfriends pregnant, meaning he's not likely to be that responsible when it comes to you-know-what. So he's stupid on top of everything else.
My final dissatisfaction with the film is a general disgust with a certain cliche used in films, that the rebound romance is really the romance you've been waiting for. The cliche evolved probably to give broken-hearted audience members hope for something better, but in real life, a rebound romance is a needful one, and a part of the grieving/separation process, but a rebound romance that turns to an offical partnership, such as marriage, is nearly always doomed to failure. But here, in this film, in whichever reality, we're seeing Helen necessarily getting her wake up call and ditching Gerry only to fall immediately into a love affair with James, the not-as-honest-and-sweet-as-we-want-to-think-he-is. But it's understood in Hollywood parlance that Helen and James will live happily-ever-after - because they were fated, you know?
For a comedy there were very few laughs, in fact I don't remember any. So perhaps this film is mistakenly labelled as such. Otherwise, for nitpickers, Paltrow definitely looks better as a sophisticated blonde than as a casual brunette, and there seems to be an extreme shortage of goodlooking men in England. We really needed Jude Law in this one in order to make it work. In fact, the male casting could have been Daniel Craig and Jude Law - either man in either part - and it would have worked a lot better, along with a touchup to the script.
Instead of a film, this would have been better as a single episode of a television one hour anthology series. Because in movie length, it is tiresome.
