Film: Mystic River

[MynameisnotDeja]

edit-removed quote from user at users request.

I love that vampire scene.

 

[Neural Shock]

^^^^^

1. You should know not to take academy awards as an indication of brilliance... and aside from that, it won awards for acting, not director \ best film.

2. It's a fairly run-of-the-mill thriller. Given the basic premise, could it have been any better?

3. Watch the scene containing the "vampire conversation" between David Boyle and his wife and tell me that scene isn't written and directed beautifully.

It's lit beautifully, and it's written so-so. And that's one of the better scenes.

1 star for me. Trite inane implausable shite.

 

[Neural Shock]

Fair enough, each to their own...

Although, can I ask you of another film of the same genre that harbours similarities to Mystic River (ie. run-of-the-mill-thriller style flicks) that you would regard as far better productions ("a 4 star for you" psychological-thriller), and explain where it succeeds as opposed to where Mystic fails?

I'm not suggesting you can't, I'm just curious as to get a scope of your taste in film...

-[X]

The Third Man, M, The Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile. I picked films that fit your crtieria, and with something vaguely in common with Mystic River. Or I could pick more with nothing in common.... The Usual Suspects for example.

I won't tell you where the above mentioned classics succeed (The Green Mile less so, but still superior) - see them yourself - but I'll list briefly where M.R. failed. And bear in mind this is just MHO (obviously). Firstly the plot is clunky - it has implausible coincidences (Robbins just happened to kill someone else on the same night as Penn's daughter) and a terrible conclusion (leaves you with many "why didn't he..." "that doesn't make sense..." "that character wouldn't do that..." feelings at the end). Which leads to my 2nd point - the characters behave implausibly at the conclusion. As a result, the parade scene at the end is trite though it craves to be meaningful. All the women in the movie are underdeveloped and cardboard - mere puppets for the lads. We get no time for sharp, stark or even subtle exploration of Robbins' wife at the end, for example. Nothing from any of them except loyal or stoicist bullshit. The script is haphazard - though undeniably engaging in isolated spots. The actors were very good, although Bacon and Fishbourne were underused (particularly Bacon). The pacing was at odds with a thriller - but that's okay if offset by character exploration and genuine mood setting but alas it was very unsatisfying in execution and let down by the ending. The whole movie leaves you feeling like a bad day where you've been told your dog's been run over and someone's pissed in your beer. It doesn't emotionally engage you so much as grate and snail along with half-assed attempts to show the stoic aspects of life via beer-bottle-clinking buddy-boy pseudo-philosophical wallowing. Mystic River ? More like dirty dishwater.

On the DVD extras (I rented only thank fuck) I noticed a trailer with that deep trademark voiceover like they do - but done by Clint himself. That just completed the wankery for me. And I do like Clint - Unforgiven is superb.

I'll tell you one thing great about the earlier mentioned movies - they stand up to repeated viewing.

 

[Neural Shock]

Having said that, the examples you gave of more successful run-of-the-mill thrillers aren't very well chosen, IMO.

I haven't seen The Third Man or M so I won't adress them, but the others mentioned don't compare in terms of structure or genre to Mystic.

I knew you would say that. I don't agree but go on...

Shawshank Redemption and The Green Mile are drama's and don't follow the progressive "mystery"-style narrative that typical thrillers like Mystic River do. They have mystical attributes, sensationalised characters, etc.

Nah, you're resizing the goalposts. Be fair. The other films have mystical attributes and are larger than life, sure. But that just proves my point about them. They are mysteries; full of "did he / didn't he" progressions. With "buddy" and "wrongful accusation" aspects. What do you want, the same plot ? Come on.

Mystic is less plausible than Shawshank, Green Mile and The Usual Suspects?!?

I said implausible coincidences. Two killings at the same time with two friends involved.... oh no wait...three because the investigator was another. Dear oh dear.

The latters may be superior films (except for The Green Mile which was utter shit), but they are certainly more "fantastic" and less realistic than Mystic.

The Green Mile's plot is way better. The pacing is dull and plodding, with another wrongful accusation story. But there are no plot holes or characters acting stupidly.

The situations in Mystic may be unlikely, but they aren't impossible and they have a purpose in the film... The co-incidence between timing of the killing of the child molester and Jimmy's daughter (for example) is neccesary to contextualize the inane and unreasonable manner in which Jimmy and his thugs deal with these sort of situations.

Necessary maybe, and I don't mind one or two such coincidences if the movie works for me as a whole. But the extra coincidence of Bacon being the cop on the case is one too many.

What character's are you refering to here?

Sean didn't prosecute Jimmy because he is a an old friend and he feels sorry for him given his recent loss.

Bollox, if so. I guessed that was why, but it's so unclear that the viewer is left wondering what the fuck is going on ? The audience doesn't need to be spoonfed, it just has to work.

David didn't admit to killing the child molester until confronted because he is introverted and confused due to being molested as a child.

I have no problem with that. In fact, that thread is the stronger point in the movie. Although another molestor is just piling up the coincidences. It's like deux ex got in the front door of this script.

I thought, although being somewhat of a happy overly conclusive ending, the character's reactions were believable and "real". What didn't make sense to you?

The happy buddy bollox waving across the parade. The loyal-to-the-last wife of Penn's with her grinding speech to him. The other wife even turning up to the parade. No coverage of anything to do with Robbins - as in a funeral or something. Now there's a possible kick-ass scene. You could have left the interactions similar - except have something about Bacon needing to close the Robbins murder case. Fucking parade my ass.

It seems like you're trying to find reasons to dislike this film.. the women were second tier characters, the film obviously revolved around the three men and therefore the "underdevelopment" of their characters is appropriate.

Bullshit. To the core I hate this film. So much so, with genuine respect, I'm beginning to get pissed off devoting so much time to it. But it's clear you really like it and it means something to you. That proves to me (along with general critical ovation) that there is something in this movie. I just missed the boat. To be honest, I'm happy where I am.

There is definitely a subtle exploration of the character at the conclusion of the film, in the very scene that you refer to as trite.

Okay. The parade. Whatever, really. I just missed the ironicalist symbolismismism.

Did someone actually run over your dog and piss in your beer prior to you watching this film? or did you just need something to watch, so you could vent your contempt for an entire genre?

Okay, you're joking. But to be fair I have kicked your favourite movie of the week in the groin, and therefore you by proxy. Sorry, hope I didn't bruise too much.

Don't worry. It's possible to like a movie someone else doesn't like. I'm flattered that my opinion carries such weight but look it's just MHO.

 

[Neural Shock]

It isn't close to my favourite movie of the week, I just thought it was excellent for a run-of-the-mill thriller. Don't flatter yourself, this is just a discussion, not an uproar.

I know that I can like a film that others dislike, in fact I remember praising you for having the confidence to state your opinion against the masses. It's quite clear what you're trying to do here.

Cool. There's really no problem. I'm just teasing.

 

[young livers heal quick]

I found this to be one of the better than usual pieces of shit dvds we get out every few days. A MUCH better one.

Unfortunately it provoked a lot of conversation and we missed out on several key scenes so a second watch is in order for sure.

Firstly the plot is clunky - it has implausible coincidences (Robbins just happened to kill someone else on the same night as Penn's daughter) and a terrible conclusion (leaves you with many "why didn't he..." "that doesn't make sense..." "that character wouldn't do that..." feelings at the end). Which leads to my 2nd point - the characters behave implausibly at the conclusion.

Well real life is always full of implausible coincidences, why shouldn't a movie be? As for the 'Why didn't he, that didn't make sense' bits, they provoked some debate too. My man was saying he should be saying "fuck you I didn't kill her WTF" fight back and whatno (on the waterfront scene), whereas I remember a time of being subtlely accused of stealing a friends money... I wasn't guilty so didn't even bother defending myself. And as a result I suspect they think I did it. So I can relate to poor Dave, why should he protest his innocence when it should be obvious? He was extremely drunk at the time so he probably didn't even think they were thinking he killed the daughter.

I thought Dave was quite the hero killing that pedophile. I guess he kept it quiet because he didn't want others to know he'd been raped as a child.

I'd have liked the movie to go on a bit longer. Kevin Bacon's character obviously knew Sean Penn had offed Dave. Sure he pretended to shoot him with his fingers, but what the fuck. What happens next!!!

It makes for a good movie when you want to know what happens next instead of going 'thank fuck it's over'.

As for the implausible acting at the end, well yeah I thought it was all a bit weird too. But then again, Dave's wife was clearly a moron so I'm not surprised she acted so clueless. Sean Penn's wife loves him and knows he's an ex-crim and doesn't want to know any gory details. She's like a typical mafia wife, happy so long as the man comes home, naturally acts like all is well. And Kevin Bacon's character was just showing he's not as stupid as the others instead of actually doing anything that means a lot of paperwork and going against an old friend.

Maybe.

I gave it 4 because it's a lot better than most of the other crap out there.

 

[silvia saint]

i think the parade should have been chopped. seriously, i can't understand why it was left in. there is no denying that penn and robbins possess talent, and they do put in good performances here, but in regard to the oscar wins i can't help but think that the subject matter helped them seem more spectacular than they were. an ok film but certainly not great in my eyes, i sussed out who did the murder quite early into the film and believe me, i can get sucked in quite easily. 3 stars

 

[Medi57]

this movie is the best 6 degrees of kevin bacon linker evAr!

also quite good

 

[mariacallas]

lol i will buy the vcd of this tommmorow :D

 

[Beatlebot]

SPOILER WARNING








OK, so I guess that most people have seen this movie by now. My opinion is that the performances were great but it was shoddy direction and plot planning that let this movie down. I think that this whole movie could be recut and made into a masterpiece.

The biggest problem with it is that noone I have spoke to ever believed for a minute that Tim Robbins character killed the girl. Much of the dramatic tension is supposed to come from this uncertainty. If this movie could have made the audience believe that MAYBE Tim Robbins did it, then this movie could have worked. It would be easier to believe that his childhood friends might think that he did it, and that his wife thinks that he did it.

The female characters are underdeveloped. It's been mentioned that they are not the main characters and so they do not need more development but considering the major role Tim Robbins wife played in his death, then maybe they should have made her more of a main character. Focusing on the faded relationship of the three men may have been a mistake. perhaps this movie could have been made stronger if it focused on the families involved.

Yeah, it was just to all over the place to make a good film in my opinion.

 

[michael]

this movie is the best 6 degrees of kevin bacon linker evAr!

no it isn't. sleepers is.

 

[psychetool]

First time I watched this movie I wasn't impressed, the second time around I was literally blown away. In fact thats why I came back to post. I'm not sure what the difference is, why I can identify or appreciate this movie now, but I really disagree that the preformances were 'phoned in'. The scene where sean penn finds out about losing his daughter for instance, you can feel the anguish and pain. It's an ugly situation that those people went through and they portrayed how people deal with the death of a loved one (especially someone who is murdered) quite well. I'm a sucker for penn and robins anyways, but they did a great job here. It's moving up my movie list to the 4 (out of 5) star section.

 

[drEaMtiMe*@#]

i thought that this movie was shot well, that the acting was good (penn and robbins did particularly great jobs, imo), and that the story was interesting to follow too.

i liked it.

4/5 stars.

 

[L O V E L I F E]

I didn't particularly like this movie (3.2 stars out of 4.0 on the LL-O-Meter, and I would estimate that the average relatively-intelligent movie-lover would give it a 3.6, or perhaps, even a 3.7), but that's not the reason I'm posting in this thread.

At the risk of publicly kissing your ass, Neural Shock, you are one of the most eloquent, logical, enjoyable-to-read (and I'm guessing on this next part - forgive me if I'm wrong) amateur movie reviewers I've ever read.

Kudos.

 

[glowbug]

I found the film moderately enjoyable, but I wouldn't rate it as a "must see".

Of all the cast I thought Penn's performance was strongest, but then the role wasn't really that much of a stretch from other "bad boy" roles Penn has played.

Truthfully, it wasn't that any of the ensemble's performances were notably weak...it was just that nothing in the plot really pulled me in and held me.

It may also be that I'm not a particularly huge fan of Eastwood's efforts. Granted, I haven't yet seen MDB, but I think MGGE was by far the better of these two.

 

[mariacallas]

Holy shit.....I just saw this on DVD tonight. Despite dragging quite a bit in some parts it still left me with this heavy distraught feeling and I was at the edge of my seat for the most part. I kind of felt manipulated needlessly tho.....the conclusion wasnt as satisfying as I expected it to be and so I give it 3 stars.
Stellar acting from everybody and Sean Penn was wonderful like always. This may seem a bit trivial but the actress who played his daughter irritated the f*ck out of me despite having such a short screen time They should've picked a better looking actress goddamit