New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Bruce Hall: If this movie is ever going to make a splash financially, it'll likely be on home video. It's gotten largely favorable reviews, and while the buzz surrounding Soderberg's supposed swan song appeals mainly to film enthusiasts, it'll no doubt help sales. I think this is the kind of twisty psychological thriller that would appeal to more people than saw it, but an underwhelming marketing campaign made sure very few people were aware of it.

Edwin Davies: I find it interesting that not only was the film kind of a tough sell because it twists and turns and because it's not really clear from the trailers who the main character actually is (I've seen two trailers for the film, one of which suggests that it is about Rooney Mara's journey and one suggesting that it's all about the effect she has on Jude Law) let alone what the movie is about, but also because Soderbergh himself is such a mercurial talent that it's hard to think which of his past works to use as a reference point for audiences. Contagion was the one that was prominently featured on the promotional material, which is probably the closest in tone, but you could have just as easily slapped Ocean's Eleven or Magic Mike on there to get more people interested in the concept. Those people would have been apoplectic at being sold a movie completely unlike those films, but it's indicative of how much of an obstacle being prolific and varied can be when trying to sell a movie to people.

With all that it had going against it, I think this is a pretty solid result. The film probably didn't cost all that much - despite the star wattage on display, I imagine most of the actors did it for a chance to work with Soderbergh one last time (or for the first time, in the case of Mara) rather than for a big pay check - and the reviews will either help it eke out a decent profit in theaters, or convince people to check it out on DVD. It's kind of subdued an end to Soderbergh's career - assuming he really does stay away for good - but by no means an embarrassment.

Reagen Sulewski: This is kind of reflective of changing tastes in film. There's just not an audience for thrillers anymore of the non-hyphenated variety (i.e. action-, romantic-, etc.) or that aren't based on a wildly popular book. And then you tell people it's about pills and *yawn*. Now, Soderbergh knows how to keep a budget down, so the film is likely to be okay financially. Is this a little sad? Probably, but at $13 a ticket, you'd better be bringing something special to audiences to get them to come.

Felix Quinonez: I think this opening is perfectly fine. Sure it would have been nice if Sodenbergh's (supposed) last movie was as big as, I dunno, Magic Mike, but I don't think that was ever in the cards for Side Effects. I just don't think a movie like this really appeals to mass audiences and the marketing campaign was a bit confusing. And while people who know and appreciate cinema respect Sodenbergh and his work I don't think he was ever a huge name with general audiences.

Kim Hollis: I think I mentioned once before that the marketing for this made it look like a TV movie of the week rather than something that was truly engaging and thrilling. I also think it's the kind of movie that people figure they can wait for on home video and then watch, because what's the hook to make you run out and see it in theaters? I'm not sure Soderbergh's "retirement" has even been well publicized (or that most movie-goers even care).

Continued:       1       2       3