Watch Sliding Doors For Free

Strong and Moving!

A Major Disappointment

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

I first found out about Sliding Doors when I heard it mentioned on the director's commentary from Run Lola Run, which of course is my fifth favorite movie of all time. I looked up the plot summary online and was intrigued. I wondered why I hadn't heard of this film earlier. Then I watched it, and within the first few scenes I realized why I had never heard of it. Simply put, it's not very good. But you know me; once I start something, I always try to finish it.Also, my girlfriend and I were fighting at the time that I watched this and she was mad at me in the other room, so I didn't want to move from my spot on the couch. I guess I could have put something else on, but maybe I felt I deserved to be tortured for a little while for upsetting my sweetheart, although I still maintain that she was probably just as much to blame as I was for whatever we were fighting about, which I can no longer remember. In any case, I watched it all the way to the end, including the credits because sometimes there's a skit afterward.The film is about a year in the life of an Englishwoman, played by an American actress, who gets fired from her job and takes the train home. Or does she? We see two possibilities of what could happen in her life depending on whether she catches the train on time or misses it by just an instant. It shows us two different outcomes of a seemingly trivial daily occurrence, something we never get the chance to see firsthand in real life, although we can imagine all we want.This premise of exploring alternate paths of fate seems fairly unique, but it's not totally original. We've seen it done before in 1987's Blind Chance, and infinitely better in the aforementioned Run Lola Run. But here the filmmakers could have had so much more fun with it. The plot is weak, despite the interesting premise. It feels like a typical, boring, forgettable romantic comedy and we almost forget about the whole double vision aspect. It feels like the writers wrote one draft and called it good enough and didn't try to make it any better. But it could have been so much better.This feels like the type of low budget, quickly-made British film that you'd find packaged along with five others you never heard of—all of them just as forgettable and of equally below-average quality—on a "UK Cinema" DVD for $4.99. Because that's the only way to market them on home video because none of them would sell individually. And even if you do end up buying the lot, you'll never end up getting around to watching more than two or three of them, and those only when you're in the mood for a "so bad it's good" laugh on a rainy Friday night, and always with the assistance of alcohol.In Sliding Doors the dialogue feels cheap and corny. Everyone speaks in phony, hackneyed expressions. All the characters talk more or less the same, with Gwyneth Paltrow delivering lines that seem more suited for John Hannah's character, but the writers probably stopped caring. The one saving grace is the acting. It's not the best acting I've seen, but it's not bad, especially considering the film's other shortcomings and bland pacing. That's another thing: the pacing. The film always moves at a consistently medium pace, which just feels so boring and not quite right.But back to the thing I was saying about the acting. The rest of the film is so bad that the acting actually seems really good in comparison, despite the fact that it is probably just average. It makes the film watchable and kept me from giving it a lower score. John Hannah—in one of the few roles in which I've seen him portray a leading man—almost makes us believe that he's just a quirky character who actually talks that way, rather than just a victim of bad writing.And the perpetually annoying Jeanne Tripplehorn appears here in the role she was born to play. I didn't like her in The Firm and I didn't like her in Waterworld. And I didn't like her in Sliding Doors, but for the first time I feel she was cast appropriately. In the aforementioned films I felt like the filmmakers made a casting mistake or maybe their first choice had to drop out. But in Sliding Doors we weren't supposed to like her. I don't think. It's hard to tell, but I think she's supposed to be an annoying pest of a mistress as well as a villainous type, comparable to Cruella De Vil and infinitely dumpable by her browbeaten boyfriend. And she knocks it out of the park! Man, she was obnoxious in this movie!And who would date her, you ask? Must be some loser of a boyfriend, right? Yes, he is, played quite well here by John Lynch, whose character is a bit of loser who cheats on Paltrow with Tripplehorn. He would be the bad guy if we didn't feel so sorry for him. He's a victim too. And yet we still believe that this pathetic fellow could potentially be with both of these women because, well let's face it, Paltrow isn't much of a catch either. Lynch's character is one we've seen many times before, but rarely quite so well as here, despite the poor dialogue and story structure. Lynch does a great job at making the character believable—like a real person you might know in real life—and I feel the filmmakers lucked out with him.I'm rapidly approaching my word limit, so I gotta go, but I will say that after getting out all my thoughts on Sliding Doors, I've decided that maybe I liked it a bit better than I originally thought. Maybe.

I liked this movie. I don't know why people are so critical of this movie. I've seen far worse. Gwyneth Paltrow is the main character so you know it can't be that bad. It's a story about fate and how things can change with a turn of fate. The acting and camera work were all good. I enjoyed the story and felt it made good time. Nothing was drawn out to long. All the scenes made sense. All in all it was a good story. It is a romantic, comedy , drama and that is exactly what it delivers. If you don't like that genre then you won't like this film. I didn't find it clich'e. Yes, it was somewhat predictable but If you've lived a little not to much can or will surprise you. It's a good film.

Sadly the excellent cast can do nothing to save this Titanic of a movie. It's not the premise of the story, preposterous as it is, but the totally wooden writing and the director's habit of dropping "clues" complete with flashing signs saying "look at me". Parallel fates I can accept, but don't ask to to believe that a woman who comes face to face with her boyfriend's mistress will not remember her the next time they meet. I hoped that beyond all the contrivances the story might move into some area of meaningful insight about the trials of men and women but no, everybody who is a woman (two doppelgangers, one mistress) gets pregnant. How could this have happened, we wonder, and why didn't it happen earlier since some of them (now I'm getting muddled) were in long-term, full-frontal relationships. Way over his head at this point, the director cleans up with a couple of miscarriages and a fatal traffic accident to leave us back where we started. Gwyneth, how could you?

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