Did anybody see this? Mystic River is the latest masterpiece from director Clint Eastwood who also created Unforgiven, an Oscar winner for Best Picture. Tim Robbins, Sean Penn, and Kevin Bacon play childhood friends from Boston who have grown apart over the years. A childhood tragedy which changed all of their lives is revisited, as a new tragedy occurs that bring the friends back together. Penn and Robbins give Oscar calibur performances, and Bacon is also very good. Laurence Fishburne also gives a good supporting performance. Holly Hunter is excellent in her small film time, despite her slightly southern-tuned Boston accent. The atmosphere is perfectly captured by Eastwood, and the writing lends itself very well to the story. The plot is very tragic, and powerful. This is not an uplifting movie. However, it is well worth a viewing. I give it a solid "A".
I haven't seen it yet, but I'm going to. I still have to see "Master and Commander". Finally got to see "Intolerable Cruelty", by the Coen brothers. We loved it and laughed like lunatics. Eastwood is brilliant. I thought "Unforgiven" was one of the best westerns ever... and there are a lot of great ones, which MacBeth's recent thread pointed out. We've been having trouble getting away from the kiddos to see flicks the last several weeks. Something always seems to come up that keeps us from leaving them with a babysitter. Enjoy your kidless freedom while you have it, those of you who are kidless, that is. You won't want to part with 'em, but they put a major crimp in your lifestyle if all your relatives live out of town.
I'd give it an A too. I had heard you really needed to read the book (which I had not) but I found the movie standed fine on its own.
My wife and I both thought that it was ok. We had higher expectations since there were so many "names" attached to the project. I thought that it may have been a tad slow and the ending was weird. ******Potential Spoilers******* They should have ended it when Sean Penn's character was walking down the road. The rest of it only made his wife seem like a freak.
Ugh, I really didn't like it. Overacting abounds and I didn't find the story all that compelling. Probably would've liked it better if I hadn't have heard all the kudos being thrown its way.
sorry, but Holly Hunter is not in the film "Mystic River". You are either thinking of Marcia Gay Harden or Laura Linney. i agree completely. I had a couple of problems with the ending. number one, they threw away the life of an innocent human being,Tim Robbins character, and they make it seem okay. number two, regarding the wives of Kevin Bacon and Sean Penn: the movie ends focusing on the wives rather than the male characters that the movie is about.
I felt that the sudden character development that we see at the end concerning Penn's wife is disturbing. We see next to nothing of her character the entire movie, and at the end she's calling him the king and telling him to run the neighborhood. Perhaps if they had hinted towards her thinking that way somewhere throughout the movie, it would have been easier to swallow. As it is, however, it just kind of leaves you thinking "Was all that really necessary?" I agree that they seem to condone the murder of Tim Robbins. Is it just me or did Penn basically admit to murdering him when Bacon was questioning him about the whereabouts of Robbins? Also, why did we need the Savage brothers? I thought brainless henchmen went out of style, or at the very least were reserved for cartoons and other such non-serious endeavors. The ending was bad, the acting was pretty good. I'd give it an A, also, simply for its thought-provoking value and the fact that it was interesting to see.
YIP; great ensemble interesting story, and i learned about the BaasTon accent paaAAk my caaAA in HaaAAvard YaaAAd
True, that was my bad. I was referring to Laura Linney. Also, I don't think the movie was condoning the murder. It wasn't saying "do this, or do that". It was simply presenting a story and its characters.
Maybe "condone" is the wrong word. It just seemed to me that they presented Robbins as the murderer throughout the whole movie, making you wish that he would get caught and/or killed. Yet when he does get killed, we find out he's innocent, and the movie does nothing in the way of making you feel regretful that you suspected him all along. It simply moves on to its surprisedly weak ending.
The movie would've been much more powerful, IMO, had the three main characters remained close throughout the years.
I liked the ending for the precise reason it wasn't Hollywood like (messy instead of clean and neat). They didn't condone the murder--but it was too late. What is Penn to do, it seems obvious it will be another demon he will have throughout his life, but life goes on and his family depends on him. They didn't show much about the women--but at least when they did they gave them a little depth. I am sure it is more flushed out in the book--but at least they did give the women some kind of presense. In sum, I don't think they should have done much differentially within the time frame of a standard movie, the best movie I have seen lately.
