Sidewalks of New York (2001)

There's a rough-edged elegance in the way six characters pair off in Ed Burns's urban dramedy Sidewalks of New York. The film's release was delayed by the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, but its observant perception of romance remains timelessly unaffected by the tragedy that struck New York after filming completed. As he did with The Brothers McMullen, Burns creates authentic characters who are likable despite their self-centered neediness and tenuous, often ill-fated connections. Even as Burns's focus on sex and fidelity grows redundant, he works wonders with his clutch of amorous New Yorkers, including a philandering husband (Stanley Tucci) whose affair with a young waitress (Brittany Murphy) leads his wife (Heather Graham) to consider romance with a real-estate client (Burns) who's been seeing the ex-wife (Rosario Dawson) of an aspiring musician (David Krumholtz) who in turn loves the waitress. Messy or neat, these liaisons have a charming appeal that lovers and would-be lovers will readily appreciate. --Jeff Shannon Amazon.com

Not great

I didn't like this movie very much. Most of the acting was fine, but the characters weren't very likable on the whole. I watched this with my teen-aged daughter and cringed at the over-the-top discussions of sex--how many partners each character had had (one claimed over 500) and at what age they first had sex. (The movie opens with each character discussing the number of partners.) And we have yet another movie relying on footage shot in New York to seem cosmopolitan or hip or something. Was it terrible? No. I watched until the end. Was it very good? No. February 4, 2008

You have the look of the new millennium.

I hate Ed Burns. I think Rosario Dawson could go back to acting school. I have always felt a nervous twitch come on whenever Brittany Murphy speaks (like fingernails on a chalkboard). Then, alas, Heather Graham is only worth watching when directed by either PT Anderson or by early David Lynch. So, with a line up like this, I thought this would be a simple, and rather disappointing, film to view. I couldn't have been more wrong. Sidewalks of New York captured my attention with its unique storytelling ability, the quickness of the character development, and the underused talent that Stanley Tucci brought to this project. I also believe that what me enjoy this film further than I have other Edward Burns films (i.e. I HATED The Brothers McMullen) is that it wasn't your typical Ed Burns film. It was obvious, from the opening scene that he was the center focus, but it just didn't have the typical Ed Burns feel to it. This film felt fresh, not so "in your New York face" or centered on ethnicity as the others have, but instead about romance, sex, relationships, and personal responsibility. For me, Sidewalks worked because the characters worked together. This wasn't just Ed Burns focusing the camera on himself, but allowing others to speak around him. It felt like a conversation with Ed Burns and his friends, not just Ed Burns. Also, how can you disrespect a film where Stanley Tucci gives a phenomenal performance (completely taking away the Burns spotlight)!

Pulled from an earlier release date because of 9/11, this film couldn't have made you feel more at home in New York than actually being there in person. I mentioned before that Burns fantastically takes the viewer away from you typical New York scenery and plants you IN New York (if that makes sense). He doesn't overpower you with the cliché images of the Empire State building, the Statue of Liberty, or other overblown New York images, but instead makes you feel like you actually live there. Burns, surprisingly, didn't develop the city as I assumed he would, but instead developed our characters. Burns' decision to make this film into a half-documentary, half-feature film was brilliant. New York is a fast pace town, and Burns captures that with his choice of direction. He jumps us quickly between characters, witnessing how fast a relationship can blossom in the city that never sleeps. One would normally think that this would be confusing, but for me, it kept me glued to the screen. Cylindrical storylines? Wasn't this technique so ... yesterday? Perhaps, but Burns is able to keep the flow moving and the characters fun, which cannot be found in most of the knock-offs post-Magnolia. I believe that for one of the first times, Burns demonstrated his directing chops extremely well. He went outside of his norm, while keeping with the patented Burns seal of approval.

When I first began this film I was upset with the choice of actors. It was obvious that Burns chose his friends to star in this film. Budget was tight and time was short, so why not. I have no trouble with this. My trouble is that his friends do not appeal to me as a film watcher. I have not seen (outside of Sin City in which Rosario and Brittany were animated) a worth wile film with a majority of our lead characters. Heather Graham flip-flops between decent and poor, while Brittany just seems like she isn't acting, but instead just playing "herself". I wasn't interested in the characters when I started this film, I just wanted to see how Burns would handle mediocre talent. I must admit, he surprised me. While Murphy, Graham, and Dawson were not "jump-for-joy" amazing, they worked well together. The script worked with these characters. There wasn't big shoes to fill, and I think even the low rung of the Hollywood ladder could handle this story, which kept me at ease. What really impressed me was that Tucci was jaw dropping. It was nothing that he would in an award for, but definitely the stand out talent of the film. For some very strange reason, he captivated me in this movie. I wasn't expecting the performance to be that good. I know, many of you think that this was a poor film, how could anyone's talent be that good? My thought is that Tucci stood out because nobody else was reaching the bar. The acting wasn't bad, it just felt sterile, but with Tucci that all changed. He kept Sidewalks of New York from sinking deep into the cinephile lagoon.

Was this a movie about sex or relationships? That is the ultimate question to ask yourself as you watch Burns' comedy/drama. It is a question I asked myself as I watched it, so I want you to ask it as well. Sex is the topic of choice, but I think what makes Burns' film stand aside of the others is that it deals with honest relationships. This isn't just your typical boy falls for girl, but girl doesn't want boy relationships. This film is more about the truthfulness of individuals and the passion they evoke. I liked the stories that Burns wove together for me. This wasn't top shelf cinema, but it did entertain. Burns stories that he wrote were comical, yet exciting at the same time. We felt for these characters (even if they were not played well by the actors ... outside of Tucci) and loved the city that they inhabited. This film reminded me of watching Sex & the City. That television program was exciting to me because of the city and because you believe anything can happen in that city. Love can be found in video stores, coffee shops, and real-estate visits.

Call me genuinely sappy, but Sidewalks of New York deserves a second viewing. Even if you hated it the first time, watch it for Tucci. That man can take paper-thin characters and turn them into gold!!

Grade: **** out of ***** July 10, 2006

Exciting

Entertaining romantic comedy with Edward Burns, Rosario Dawson, Brittany Murphy and others. Six New York people looking for the (n)e(u)rotic kick. Trials and tribulations in big town love life. January 2, 2006

Like Your Favorite Sweater- Funny, Warm and Fits Just Right

Ed Burns scored a home-run in this movie. If I didn't know better, I'd have sworn it was a Woody Allen film, it had that same combination of funny, warm, honest, dry, slice-of-life humor.

All the characters were believeable, realistic and perfectly cast. Stanley Tucci was perfect as the pathological philandering husband to Heather Graham, who played up the 'highstrung-ness that is characteristic of Allen's leading ladies (Farrow, Keaton)to a 'T'. Meanwhile, Brittany Murphy was admirable as the young and impressionable, but still remarkably self-sufficient love interest to Tucci.

Ed Burns handled his roles as director/actor/writer superbly, as the hot leading man to both Graham and Rosario Dawson. Dawson plays Burns' flaky and indecisively sometimey love interest well; her scene with Burns, outside Burns's house never fails to annoy me, which I guess just goes to show how well Dawson plays her role.

My favorite part of this movie hands down though, is the scene where Burn's older man-friend, played by Dennis Farina, gives Burns 'dating advice'. The way in which Farina confidently insists that Burns "put some cologne on [his] balls" never fails to have me rolling with laughter. What a leech. And what makes it funnier is that Farina really does believe his own advice. Clearly both men come from different schools of 'how to be win over the ladies'. Guess which one Farina comes from?

That this movie isn't all laughs lends to the Allen-esque feel and makes it more endearing. There are several touching scenes: the interactions between Tucci and Murphy in their disfunctional affair; the scenes between Graham and Tucci as she realizes what a ferret she has for a husband; the scenes between Burns and Dawson, where you almost what to slap Dawson out of her inertia; and the scenes where Dawson's ex husband, (played by David Krumholtz) plays guitar to himself in his lonely NY apt bathroom.

This is one of my favorite movies for all the same reasons I like Woody Allen's movies: You laugh, you cry, you want to reach out and hug/slap/shake one of the characters, but you ultimately end the movie on a high, feeling lucky -despite it's frequent ups and downs- to be part of this topsy-turvy, rollercoaster-whirlwind of a ride we call "Life". October 21, 2005

Not Burns' best work, but nicely done.

It's amazing how many people will trash Edward Burns' films -- but still watch every Ed Burns film. Um, if you don't like a director/actor/writer, maybe pick something else? (I mean, I don't care for Celine Dion, so I don't listen to her music. Make some choices, folks.) This is a talky, quirky film that follows six interconnected characters who live in New York. We get Burns as a disillusioned TV producer, Stanley Tucci as a cheating dentist, Rosario Dawson as a cautious schoolteacher, Heather Graham as a real estate agent with traditional values, Brittany Murphy as a college student, and David Krumholtz as a slightly grating but sincere doorman. Even though none of the characters were perfect, they all had real human qualities and imperfections. Even Krumholtz' annoying doorman character manages to show some emotional realism at several points. If you liked She's the One or The Brothers McMullen, or if you just like small, "indie" movies with good characters, this is worth seeing. It's reminiscent of Woody Allen (some reviewers think that's a bad thing..?), but Woody hasn't done a film this good (or as relevant to Gen-X/Gen-Y) in years. It's shot in a documentary style, with mock interviews sprinkled throughout in which the characters talk about their personal lives, including marriage, sex, and the complicated situations that can occur between people. Heather Graham actually has a monologue that's a little eerie, talking about how our society has nothing to worry about anymore, how we have no threats, etc., and as a result we spend our time worrying about our relationships. In another scene she talks about how her parents and grandparents made sacrifices, lived through wars, and yet managed to hold on to their values, keep their families together, etc. This all would've gone right by me had I not seen the WTC in so many shots. Definitely a snapshot of a pre-9/11 "safe at home" mentality, but the relationship themes are still universal. It's interesting to see that even 9/11 hasn't affected how people view relationships -- just how we view our world. November 22, 2004

More reviews at Amazon.com ...