Side Effects

I can tell you one thing is for DAMN sure:

I am never ever going to be a psychiatrist. 

Side Effects is the newest, and supposedly final, movie from director Steven Soderbergh. He was the man responsible for Contagion, Haywire, and Magic Mike, all of which were excellent in my opinion. Personally, he is one of my favorite directors presently. His movies are never blow-your-mind awesome, but I have never been disappointed by one and I usually am surprised with how much I liked it. He has a knack for not only telling intricate and realistic stories, but I think that his talent behind the camera is fantastic. I love how he edits his movies and the way he warps the camera to show what he wants. I can't explain it very well through words, but if we were to watch the movie together I could point out what I mean to you. Specifically I love how he uses the foreground and the background during shots and how he plays with what the audience can see clear in view and what is blurred. A bit of an off-topic tangent I know (and speaking of off-topic tangents, go VOTE in the user poll on the right side of your screen! It takes 5 seconds), but the guy is talented. There is no doubt about that.

Anyways, Side Effects is no different. It's not as dark and dreary as Contagion, nor is it as much fun as Magic Mike. But it whoops both of those movies' butts when it comes to story. And my word is the story in Side Effects scary...for psychiatrists that is.

I love Steven Soderbergh's shooting style. It's VERY effective

I can't tell you too much about Side Effects' plot without ruining it. The non-spoiler version is that a very sad young woman cannot get over her depression and starts taking a new drug since none of the others work for her. A side effect of this drug leads to an...incident...and the movie continues from there. There is a twist near the end that explains everything and at first it seems a little far fetched, which compared to the rest of the movie I suppose it is, but for me it worked well. It's a long, winding road to the end, but I had fun for most of the way and I was very satisfied with the final resolution. That being said, Side Effects certainly is not for everyone. I liked it because to me it seemed very, very plausible and I have a passing interest in psychology and why some people are the way they are. If you have no interest in that type of stuff I would imagine that Side Effects will bore you. And unlike Contagion, I would not recommend everyone to see this. Where that movie was powerful because it is about a sickness that would affect everyone, this film really is just the tale of a small group of people. 

Rooney Mara's Greatest Acting Challenge:
acting depressed while being married to
Channing Tatum

Speaking of that small group of people, Side Effects is really well cast. As much as I like Channing Tatum, I think he is probably the only miscast one of the film, but he does well enough. I know Soderbergh is practically in love with the guy (he has been in all of his previous three films: Haywire, Magic Mike, and now Side Effects) so it's really no surprise he was cast. But other than that ever-so-small hiccup, the rest of them deliver powerful performances. Rooney Mara can act her butt off so it's no surprise that she is super convincing as a depressed 20-something despite the fact that she is married to Channing Tatum. Catherine Zeta-Jones is also good here (and a bit shocking...if you see the movie you'll understand what I mean) as Emily's (Rooney Mara) past psychiatrist. The standout is Jude Law, whom I usually really dislike for some reason or another. He plays Emily's current psychiatrist and by the middle of the movie I was really rooting for him. His character is well written and acted even better by Law. 

"Aren't you glad that neither of us was in Movie 43?"
"I know! I heard that movie got a 0 out of 10 from Rath's Reviews."
"Ooooo ouch. Those guys' careers are over. You will never
recover from a bad Rath Review."

Reading back over this review it seems as if I loved Side Effects. In reality, I wouldn't say that I loved it. I haven't loved any of Soderbergh's movies to be honest. But I do enjoy them immensely. It's really just the same thing with all of his films: I am happy that I watched it, I enjoyed my time with it, but I would never watch it again. Not because it is a bad film, none of the ones that I have mentioned previously are remotely close to being bad, I suppose it is just because one time of viewing it is enough for me. A second viewing wouldn't do much to further my opinions on the film, nor would it provide me with any "Oooo" or "Ahhh" moments. 

Confused by my rambling? Take this advice: if you have a free afternoon or evening now or sometime in the future, you really won't be disappointed with having watched Side Effects, or any of Soderbergh's films for that matter.

Just remember to ingest Rath's Reviews once weekly through the eyes and brain* 

*Side Effects may include saving money at the theaters, impressing all of your friends with your movie knowledge, awesomeness, mild muscle growth, reverse hair loss, increased sex drive, increased metabolism, a sudden and deep attractiveness to the opposite gender, an expensive car, the ability to avoid hangovers, and an indescribable lust for the author of these reviews (I'm single ladies!)*

Pros:

• Soderbergh's style is phenomenal and this film is no exception. I don't want to use the word magical, but the tricks and shots he uses with the camera really keep me involved
• Side Effects's story is intricate and fun to follow. It had me guessing almost all the way to the end and the fact that I could actually see this scenario happening makes it all the more intense. Strong twist and resolution
• Great ensemble despite the miscast of Channing Tatum (who still does well here)
• A really good original score actually. It added a lot to my experience and fit each scene perfectly
• The script is good and adds to the realism of the movie

Cons:

• Drags on a bit longer than it needed to. It felt like it was over 2 hours long when in actuality it was only 106 minutes
• I was lost for a while, wondering if I missed something. Turns out I didn't, but I don't particularly like the "I feel dumb" feeling. That being said, Soderbergh takes care of everyone in the end and it turns out that he wanted me to be as confused as I was
• It's a one-time view movie. A great one, but a one-time view nonetheless

Rath's Review Score: 7.5/10