Sid and Nancy
October. 03,1986 RJanuary 1978. After their success in England, the punk rock band Sex Pistols venture out on their tour of the southern United States. Temperamental bassist Sid Vicious is forced by his band mates to travel without his troubled girlfriend, Nancy Spungen, who will meet him in New York. When the band breaks up and Sid begins his solo career in a hostile city, the turbulent couple definitely falls into the depths of drug addiction.
Similar titles
You May Also Like
Reviews
Sorry, this movie sucks
Good , But It Is Overrated By Some
Fantastic!
Best movie ever!
Sid and Nancy is a very silly film that wants to be taken seriously. I'm a huge punk fan and own some of Alex Cox's films. With the exception of Repo Man his films are patchy. Sid and Nancy is no exception, the script is underwritten and nothing more than a patchwork of various events with no real characterisation.Worst is John Lydon played by Drew Schofield who not only looks nothing like him, he manges to imitate some of Lydon's tone, but can't disguise his scouse accent. Lydon might be larger than life, but to portray him as eating baked bean and drinking champagne and laughing at farting negates the fact behind the red hair and eccentricity is an intelligent man. Gary Oldman as Sid Vicious looks the part and captures his penchant for violence and excess, but misses his naivety. Glossing over the fact Nancy Spungen was said to be Sid's first girlfriend. Chloe Webb is pretty good as Spungen, but a really annoying and dislikeable character. David Hayman as Malcolm Mclaren looks the part, but ignores the Svengali aspects of his life and makes him quite an affectionate character.The best thing about the film was the cinematography by Roger Deakins. Best known for working with the Coen Brothers later on. Which considerably raises the production values on what is a grimy and sleazy film.
If you are looking for historically correct, look elsewhere. Passionate, heart breaking, and beautiful. A great foreshadowing of how amazing Gary Oldman is. Chloe Webb- such an underrated actress. These two perfectly embody the Sid and Nancy we "knew." It's a great film to watch for style inspiration as well- fashion, art, music. Just beware the romanticizing of such a dangerous lifestyle... it seems so fabulous from outside the box. Nothing better than a tragic love story....
This starts with the death of Nancy Spungen (Chloe Webb) leaving Sid Vicious (Gary Oldman) catatonic as the police question him. The couple had met more than a year ago. Sid and Sex Pistols bandmate Johnny Rotten (Andrew Schofield) are on the streets doing minor vandalism. They find Nancy with another friend. She becomes a groupie. After a little time, they become a couple addicted to heroine. The band implodes during the disastrous US tour. Sid tries to go solo with Nancy managing but their desperate addiction leads to the eventual self-destruction.These are two amazing performances. Gary Oldman and Chloe Webb go into the gutter of the soul of these characters. It's raw and powerful. This is a Romeo and Juliet on heroine. I actually find Webb the wilder performance but the combination is undeniable.
Version I saw: LoveFilm Instant streamActors: 7/10Plot/script: 6/10Photography/visual style: 5/10Music/score: 6/10Overall: 6/10Sid and Nancy is a very punk film. Shot in a very low-tech, rather shambolic style, it begins (in Sunset Blvd. style) with a dead person and then tells the story of how they got there.The dead woman is Nancy Spungen, paramour of Sex Pistols bassist Sid Vicious (Gary Oldman). It's clearly a great performance by Oldman in a breakthrough role in his career, but the character he is portraying is shown to have no talent, no musical ability, no virtues whatsoever except a somewhat greater mastery than most of punk's aggressive swagger.What follows is a difficult piece to assess, because it is a ruthless, efficient character assassination of the central pair. It is arguably a mark of the success of the film that they are shown to have nothing notable or interesting about them, and are merely loathsome individuals with very mundane, everyday flaws.However, it does make you question why you did or would want to spend 112 minutes looking at them. I am broadly a fan of the punk music style, but this is a lot more about the punk ethos than punk music. It fizzes with passive-aggressiveness which it directs primarily at its subjects, sneering viciously at their weaknesses and failings. I suppose that exactly like it's subject, the film is brutally passive-aggressive, a bit pointless, a bit self-indulgent, self-destructive and very, very punk.