Sid?????
Am I the only one who thinks that Sid was just useless, pointless and just kept getting in the way?
share[deleted]
Sid was needed to watch Scottie.
Wonderland Exile
MovieChat Forums > The Descendants (2011) Discussion > Sid?????
Yes.
shareThe character was clearly shoehorned into the movie by the filmmakers for comedic effect. No man on earth would bring along his daughter's whatever Sid was to tell his in laws that their daughter is never waking up. Completely unrealistic.
BE YOUR OWN FANBOY
[deleted]
I didn't realize that this movie was based on a book. That aside, he apparently was watered down in this movie by the filmmakers because he comes across as little more than comic relief. IN THE MOVIE, it comes across like his older daughter browbeat him into allowing Sid to come rather than she wanted Sid to come so she would feel better in that harsh situation. And when I mention breaking the news to his wife's parents, it's not so much that I thought he should be worried about how they feel as much as this is a very solemn and serious situation (i.e. having to be the one to tell someone that their daughter will never wake up) he is in and not the appropriate social situation for random bring-alongs.
How exactly would Sid not coming cause more heartache for either of his daughters? She never stated that Sid being there would make her feel less bad as if he would be a support system for her. More like she would be more civil because she would be getting what she wanted.
Personally, if I were in that situation I would rather leave the daughters and Sid at home and break the news to Liz' parents myself rather than bring along this random person for this situation. If you honestly would do differently, that is fine I guess.
BE YOUR OWN FANBOY
[deleted]
"And isn't that part of the main theme.... Matt is a man who is a successful atty & most likely a person who needs control and because of the accident he suddenly he find out how little control he really has."
----The thing of it is is that he had a choice. He could have left her at home if she was unwilling to leave a boy that neither he nor his in-laws had ever met. Bringing someone who he has never met before along to tell his in-laws that their daughter is going to die just so he could have his own teenage daughter there for "support" is an absurd, unbelievable decision and no reasonable adult (and I imagine that would include you) would make such a decision in that situation.
"IMO, his FIRST priority was making his girls know that they are in this together. They need him & he need them near him for strength.
If Sid's part of the deal because it makes it easier for Alex, then he's not going to shut that door. "
----Leaving his daughters at home for a little while while he tends to some important business doesn't shut any doors to his daughters need for him. he knows that and demonstrated that earlier in the movie. He left them at home to go question his friends about his wife's affair. I don't see why he wouldn't see doing the same to go tell his wife's parents that their daughter is going to die would be any different.
"Sid was much more than comic relief. Remember when he told Matt that his father was killed by the drunk driver? It was then that Matt understood Sid covered his hurt with wisecracks but understood the loss & pain his family was experiencing."
----This just makes him comic relief with a bit of a backstory. Still lifts right out of the story if the filmmakers had wanted him to.
"Throughout the whole week, he got his strength from his girls & from Sid. Alex shattered his world when she told him his wife was unfaithful BUT together they built a stronger bond while dealing with all the pain. "
----Doesn't mean he couldn't stand to not be around them for a little while. As I said, he left them to go confront his friends about his wife's affair. Being forced to bring Sid along just so his daughters would be there is frankly inconsistent storytelling.
"As I said, I think the reason he took all the kids to see the grandparents was because he knew very well that her mother was incapacitated & her father was going to react badly no matter who was there or who wasn't. He NEEDED someone there who was on his side.... someone who didn't hate him & blame him. "
----He needed his daughter SO BADLY that he was willing to bring along a complete stranger??? even given the fact that he needed no one to confront his friends about the affair. a grown man doesn't need his daughter that badly because his father-in-law is going to yell at him. Just doesn't hold water.
In sum, the decision to bring Sid (a boy he had never met before) to tell his in-laws that their daughter was going to die is not only an absurd decision that no reasonable adult (and again, I think I can include you) would make but it also contradicts actions that the character made earlier in the movie.
The book sounds great but the movie is flawed due to Sid's inclusion given the movie's narrative storyline.
BE YOUR OWN FANBOY
I get where you are coming from, but i don't get why that scene and the characters bothers you so much? in a way that turns you off the movie.
I mean, yeah he's a bit of a comic relief character, but only at times and even then he brings some balance to the family in that difficult time.
I get that you would not act in that way at all, but to dislike the movie just because they don't make the same decisions that you would. It's part of cinema, we watch to be distracted and experience something new/different. As looney's character I guess it would be a lot easier to let Sid come along and help him deal with his daughter with whcih he was having trouble connecting or just leave them at home and have a boring scene, or two, dealing with Clooney and his father-in-law and some dumb situation at home with Sid.
For me Sid made this movie that much better. His take on the situation even when it was some stupid comment, was a breath o fresh air in the sadness of it all. I don't see him as a flaw, I see him also as a catalyst for change, true change.
Also this decision does not contradict the character at all, it reinforces him. At the beginning of the movie, CLooney's character seems completly detached from the situation of his family. He can't control Scottie, his older daughter is off on some boarding school so they don't have to deal with her "problems", which basically where with her mother infidelity and lack of attetion. The Sid decision makes whole lot of sense here.
I can also say, you shouldn't judge unless you have been in this exact same situation before and that the wonder of cinema, we get to see another perspective on life. Enjoy, don't hate it just because it doesn't fit into your life choices.
[deleted]
It's not that I wouldn't act the way Clooney's character acted, it is that NO reasonable person would have brought Sid along. No one who has defended the movie has said that they would have made the same decision. Not surprising at all to me.
BE YOUR OWN FANBOY
[deleted]
Anyone that would take a complete stranger to tell their parents-in-law that their daughter is going to die is not reasonable. There was no indication in that movie that George Clooney's character had lost the ability to be reasonable. That said, the decision makes no sense within the context of the movie.
If we use your logic, any character can do anything whenever because you never know how someone will react. Poor logic. You have a particular character who hasn't lost their mind. They are going to make reasonable decisions. It was a flaw in the movie. No big deal.
BE YOUR OWN FANBOY
[deleted]
We're not talking about making all the "perfect moves". We're talking about not making a decision that NO REASONABLE PERSON (including, I imagine, you) would make. It's one thing to do something weird that most or at least some of us would do but doing something that NO ONE could see themselves doing just doesn't hold water.
The fact that Sid wasn't present for the event of telling the granddad that his daughter wasn't waking up is hardly relevant. Bringing Sid into that solemn situation at all was a very unreasonable and frankly disrespectful act when I think about it. It wasn't a social event like a random pop in where one could bring strangers as afterthoughts.
And taking Sid on that whole other adventure was weird but once the story jumped the shark with Sid all bets were off and I figured they would do what they want with him regardless of how reasonable it was.
I find it telling that you try to defend this decision but don't say that you would make a similar decision in a similar situation.
BE YOUR OWN FANBOY
Not only that, I was totally expecting Matt to order Sid out of the car on that first car ride. Ugh!
When you think of garbage, think of Hakim!
I could handle the ridicolousity of having a sid coming around after alex was deemed to be a sexual free 15 years old since I saw almost famous.That movie rocks but you have a rock hating mum who burns rock lp's alouding his 14 years old son to go on tour with a rock band.during school time.
shareI see why you would ask this question. I didn't read the book, but my guess is the movie makers didn't do such a great job incorporating his role into the movie.
There is a point in the movie when Matt (George Clooney) can't sleep and he has a conversation with Sid about his daughter and how she is going to develop after her mother dies. Sid reveals that his father died a few months ago in a drunk driving accident. I think the whole point of his character is to show Matt that other people can be hurting on the inside, are going through terrible experiences just like his, and that he doesn't recognize that his situation is not singular. He doesn't respond by saying "Thanks for being a shoulder for my daughter to lean on in our current situation [when I was emotionally unavailable to her]" or "You must understand what my daughter is going through" or even "I'm sorry that happened." Instead he just goes to bed. Matt should have probably realized at that moment that his journey to meet the man his wife cheated with was pointless--that his wife was going to die anyway, so there was no real reason to confront the man or possibly ruin his life and just bring more turbulence to his teenage daughter's life--but he continues on without blinking. After that scene I felt like Sid was a necessary character in the movie for that reason alone. But I agree with everyone else that no father should allow a teenage boy to accompany his daughter on a trip to find a man her mother cheated with, but the family was dysfunctional to begin with, so I just pressed the "I believe button" and moved on and enjoyed the movie for what it was.
I disagree.
shareAt first I wanted to punch him too. But then he says some humorous things, and eventually you find out his father died a few months ago. It was interesting how the movie flipped the way you viewed the characters. Like at first the wife was perfect, then you find out the shenanigans she had been up to. At first you hate the daughter, then you discover why she was being so bitchy. And Sid, he seems like such a brainless douche, then at the same time as Clooney's character you find out the punk had this horrific thing happen to him just a few months ago and is dealing with all sorts of issues of his own. It was nice how they showed you the good qualities of characters you initially hate, and bad qualities of characters who would typically be portrayed as angels. It was an interesting dynamic going on too between Sid and Clooney. Clooney first thinking NOTHING of Sid, then his face just dropping when he found out this dumb kid had just a couple months past already gone through all the trauma Clooney was currently facing. Suddenly the kid had all this humanity to him, and with his experience dealing with losing a parent suddenly seemed like the perfect person for Clooney's daughter to be hanging with, whereas just a few minutes previously you felt exactly the opposite.
shareAt first Sid did seem like a stoner and all but actually he was a very smart kid who understood what Matt, Alex, and Scottie were going through with his dad's death months earlier. I am rather surprised that he didn't appear in the final scene with the family considering how he spent the whole film with them.
share
There are some good comments here. Overall, my vote would be that Sid "works" because ...
(1) One of the aspects of the movie (I do not know the novel) is the Portrait Of A Man Being Crucified By The Egotism, Greed, And Utter Emotional Cluelessness Of Those Around Him. Sid certainly helps with that, in the earlier parts of the movie.
(2) Another aspect of the movie is the Disconnect Between The Generations. In Sid's answer to Matt, in the hotel room, about "How would _you_ handle my daughters?" Sid's answer - that they don't deal with their issues by direct speech, but by (basically) just sharing time together, brings some relief to Matt; he realizes that the "younger generation" is not any stronger than he is.
(3) Sid has no mockery or cruelty in him. He is a nice fellow to have on your side, once he has pulled his head out of his tukhes enough to wrap his head around what is going on with you. And, like 95% of the people you will meet, he does not pull his head out of his tukhes instantly - it takes a while. In this respect, he is a highly realistic character.
I thought he was a wonderful character and far from "comic relief".
Ringo (above) is spot on in his analysis. I too thought he was an irritant when I first saw him, but towards the end when he tells Matt's father in law where to get off, I was really rooting for him. He was someone who had his own private tragedy but didn't let it define him and only mentioned it when it was natural and appropriate to do so - he maintained a positive attitude and didn't use his father's death as an excuse to act like a victim. He was fearless (despite being assaulted by the ignorant old oaf) and was devoted to Alexandra.
I thought his character was brilliantly drawn and in the end was quite heroic compared to (for instance) the father in law and the greedy cousins.
I'm a Prick With a Fork.