Sliding Doors (1998)

Wonderful Movie

Good start, but then it gets ruined

Absolutely Brilliant!

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

Helen (Gwyneth Paltrow) gets fired from her PR job for taking home all the booze. As she tries to go home, she misses the subway train... then in another storyline, she catches the subway train. The difference leads to two different stories. In one, she goes to the hospital after a purse snatching. She doesn't catch her boyfriend cheating, and her miserable life continues. In the other, she meets talkative James (John Hannah) on the train and finds her boyfriend Gerry (John Lynch) cheating with Lydia (Jeanne Tripplehorn).Written and directed by Peter Howitt, this movie is one gimmick but I'm not sure there is much more than that. His style is competent if somewhat uninspired. Gwyneth is talking with a British accent. John Lynch has no screen presence and his character has the personality of a slug. The stories lack any excitement. John Hannah is quite charming, but the happy storyline doesn't really have enough drama. In the end, I don't care about either road traveled. It's a missed opportunity to write something amazing. It needs somebody with that sensibility like a Charlie Kaufman.

Romantic Comedies are not my thing. But this is an interesting take on it. Instead of the one main storyline to follow, we get two. What would occur if this event happened vs. how it would be different if a different event happened -- two visions of a woman's path. Gwyneth Paltrow is the lead and I found her to be very unappealing. Her character is not very interesting in the least. The male lead is John Hannah who was quite refreshing. Jeanne Tripplehorn is fun to watch, adds a little flavor to it all. Overall, this will be remembered because of the way the film presented itself but it's rather just mediocre otherwise. Love story yada yada yada. Barf. What some would call a "chick flick." 6.1 / 10 --Zoooma, a Kat Pirate Screener

This film could have been told along two different plot lines. Instead, they cleverly told the story along both plot lines...a sort of "what if" approach. I always give films extra points when they do something different...and this is a different kind of film. As we move back and forth between the two possible plot lines, sometimes it gets just a little confusing...at least briefly...which plot line are we in now? But that never lasts long.This is also very much a film dependent on strong performances. And there are some. I've long thought that Gwyneth Paltrow is one of those actresses who will be around for a long time; this film only bolsters that opinion. I'm not very familiar with John Hannah, but I enjoyed him a lot in this film. John Lynch (who shares my last name) stutters around too much in this film, but I suspect that was the way he was directed to act; I did laugh when Paltrow accuses him of acting like Woody Allen. Jeanne Tripplehorn comes across as a total (fill in the blank) here; nasty roles can be juicy, but I tire of an actor when he or she often plays the villain. The rest of the cast here are truly just supporting actors...important to film, but none stand out. You'll focus on the 3 primary characters...and they each have a lot of screen time since they are part of 2 different story lines.This is one film where the two endings allow you to be satisfied one way or the other.

For want of a nail the shoe was lost. For want of a shoe the horse was lost. For want of a horse the rider was lost. For want of a rider the message was lost. For want of a message the battle was lost. For want of a battle the kingdom was lost. And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.This is a famous rhyme that resonates deeply within so many of us as it spells out to what extent a single simple incident can affect the whole course of a person's life or even the course of history. This movie examines this very idea by putting Helen(Paltrow), the protagonist, in a situation where her entire life is influenced by whether or not she catches a train. In the original scenario, she misses the train. But there is an alternate scenario outlining what could've happened had she caught it.Many people, particularly those who are facing a rough patch in their lives, spend a lot of time brooding on the question "how would my life have turned out if I had done this or that differently?" But rarely do we ever wonder "is it destined to be so?" The Kingdom might've fallen for want of a horseshoe nail, but was its time passed? This is what, by alternating between the two different scenarios, the movie tries to say. In the end, the Helen who caught the train ended up more successful but also ended up dead while the Helen who missed the train survived and could put her life together in future. Thus, instead of brooding over what could've been and what's lost, it's better to count your blessings, if any and make "what is" better for yourself. It might not be easy but if it's meant to happen, it will. All in all, while the movie is not exactly Oscar material, it's got depth and should be seen despite any and all flawsMy rating-8/10