Sergio Leone Web Board

Other/Miscellaneous => Off-Topic Discussion => Topic started by: DJASh on June 28, 2004, 03:25:27 PM

Title: Mystic River
Post by: DJASh on June 28, 2004, 03:25:27 PM
Clint Eastwoods new directorial effort. Pretty good, and Sean Penn is excellent as ever.

ELI WALLACH makes a cameo appearence, plus theres one sequence where Penn converses with two heavies (the Savage brothers) and their mannerisms, faces and dialogue are pure spaghetti western. Right down to a good hearty spit . Look out for it !
Title: Re:Mystic River
Post by: shorty larsen on June 29, 2004, 12:53:18 PM
Congratulations for Eli, who is already 89 years old!
Title: Eli Wallach in Mystic River
Post by: DJIMBO on July 14, 2004, 01:58:34 PM
Until i watched rented copy of Mystic River never realised our old friend eli wallach has a typically eccentric role as a shopkeeper interviewed by Kevin Bacon and Laurence Fishburne. Great 2 see old eli still soldiering on aged 85, especially in a clint eastwood film!!

He is uncredited tho - dont know why.

Mystic River - interesting film. Great performances, difficult subject matter, slightly botched pace but otherwise touching.
Title: Re:Eli Wallach in Mystic River
Post by: Blueberry on July 15, 2004, 02:49:13 AM
I seem to remember that it was one of this very board's "best movies of 2003". And it was. Eastwood's best since Unforgiven, no doubt.

And Eli: - yeah, it's good to see old friends again, especially when they come from so far away and have so much to talk about.
Title: Re:Eli Wallach in Mystic River
Post by: mortimer on July 15, 2004, 06:56:28 PM
Yes, great to see Eli again. Also a pleasure to see a well acted film not loaded with CGI .
Title: Re:Eli Wallach in Mystic River
Post by: Bill Carson on August 10, 2004, 02:59:32 PM
 8) now I DEFINITELY have to see this film
Title: Re:Eli Wallach in Mystic River
Post by: Two Kinds of ... on October 21, 2004, 07:05:06 PM
I think it was Clint's best directing job.    I got goose bumps when Eli showed up.
Title: Re:Eli Wallach in Mystic River
Post by: David Aaronson on October 22, 2004, 04:05:18 AM
Yes, great to see Eli again. Also a pleasure to see a well acted film not loaded with CGI .
Most well acted films aren't loaded with CGI...
Title: Re: Mystic River
Post by: titoli on September 20, 2006, 06:06:52 PM
This is really dejecting. I had heard (even on this board) good things about it, but it is a very good illustrations of what Hollywood may think is a "serious" movie. This is just a cheapie thriller based on characters who must pervert their appearance to make the story flow: the character played by Sean Penn is the more absurd (and he plays as usual making me wonder all the time, like Nicholas Cage does, how he ever got into movies): a family man or some kind of boss who kills people cool-bloodedly with a nice wifey who loves him all the more for this. The character played by Robbins (at least he's good at it) could be interesting but it must be subservient to the needs of the plot which is a series of coincidences that makes those noted about GBU in another thread look like an exercise in realism. The fact that somebody takes this trash seriously is what really makes me wonder...
Title: Re: Mystic River
Post by: Tucumcari Bound on September 20, 2006, 08:00:06 PM
This is really dejecting. I had heard (even on this board) good things about it, but it is a very good illustrations of what Hollywood may think is a "serious" movie. This is just a cheapie thriller based on characters who must pervert their appearance to make the story flow: the character played by Sean Penn is the more absurd (and he plays as usual making me wonder all the time, like Nicholas Cage does, how he ever got into movies): a family man or some kind of boss who kills people cool-bloodedly with a nice wifey who loves him all the more for this. The character played by Robbins (at least he's good at it) could be interesting but it must be subservient to the needs of the plot which is a series of coincidences that makes those noted about GBU in another thread look like an exercise in realism. The fact that somebody takes this trash seriously is what really makes me wonder...

I'm sorry, I don't agree with you. This is defiently an above average film. The direction by Clint Eastwood is top notch and the acting couldn't be better. I've seen all these actor's in past movies and they defiently stepped it up for this film, especially Sean Penn. You also gotta love the music score that was written by Clint Eastwood. This guy is a genius! This was defiently an unforgettable and powerful film that you should watch again.
Title: Re: Mystic River
Post by: Jon0 on September 20, 2006, 08:02:25 PM
I like it a lot.
Title: Re: Mystic River
Post by: titoli on September 21, 2006, 09:57:33 AM
Quote
This is defiently an above average film.


Oh, well, on that I agree.

Quote
I've seen all these actor's in past movies and they defiently stepped it up for this film, especially Sean Penn.

It may very well be possible, especially as for Penn: it wouldn't be so difficult.

Can't remember a single note of the score.
Title: Re: Mystic River
Post by: dave jenkins on September 21, 2006, 10:05:50 AM

Can't remember a single note of the score.
An indictment if ever there was one. When someone recommends a film to me but they are unable to say anything positive about the score I know not to take their recommendation seriously.
Title: Re: Mystic River
Post by: marmota-b on September 21, 2006, 10:11:58 AM
An indictment if ever there was one. When someone recommends a film to me but they are unable to say anything positive about the score I know not to take their recommendation seriously.

Hm... that could be right. Score usually is one of the most noticable things in good fims.
Title: Re: Mystic River
Post by: titoli on September 21, 2006, 11:02:37 AM
I wouldn't say that not remembering a score or even vaguely being impressed by one is necessarily a negative factor for the final judgement on a film. But surely, when I like a music, or at least it is well-made,  I usually remember at least the refrain.  It just didn't happen this time.
I think that the main fault of the movie lies in the contrived plot, that to make ends meet forces the characters to behave irrationally or contrarily to what we are shown about them. The movie is shot professionally well (Eastwood has been at it so many years it would be nonsense if it weren't) but I couldn't name a single image or sequence that impressed me. To me this is run-of the-mill Hollywood thriller stuff. But if one thinks this is great cinema I won't discuss it.
Title: Re: Mystic River
Post by: titoli on September 21, 2006, 11:08:50 AM
And I'll add: it still bears a strong smell of Malpaso cheapie.
Title: Re: Mystic River
Post by: marmota-b on September 21, 2006, 11:13:12 AM
I wouldn't say that not remembering a score or even vaguely being impressed by one is necessarily a negative factor for the final judgement on a film. But surely, when I like a music, or at least it is well-made,  I usually remember at least the refrain.  It just didn't happen this time.

Actually, I haven't seen this film, so I'm speaking only theoretically.
I didn't mean that one should remember the score. I also don't (like with score to Akahige, which is wonderful, but was replaced in my head by another piece of music, which is a bit similar and which I know for years.)
Remembering the score after the first hearing usually means for me it's quite crap, made only to be remembered... not everytime, but such songs you have to remember and that stay in your head for days are really terrible.
Title: Re: Mystic River
Post by: titoli on September 22, 2006, 07:24:43 AM
That could mean you're not discriminating. I think that if a tune stays in your head it is for good reasons (read: craftsmanship) in spite of the movie. For example, Nicolai's tune for They Called Him Cemetery: I remember little of the movie (though it was good) but the whistling tune stayed in my head as soon as I heard it. I liked it. The same goes (I name the first that comes to mind)  Watch out We're Mad or Borsalino. As bad as a tune can be, if it stays in your head at first hearing it must be for good reasons, though you may not know it. Many times those good reasons are not to be found in the movie.
Title: Re: Mystic River
Post by: marmota-b on September 22, 2006, 07:37:57 AM
There are tunes that stay and are really good, yes, and I love them; but there are others, that... you know, they're good only as craft, but nothing else in them for me... it's hard to explain it, but such simple catchy songs you cannot get rid of, though you know they are stupid, that's a terrible thing. If you know such songs...
But I really always enjoy good score.
Title: Re: Mystic River
Post by: noodles_leone on October 02, 2006, 05:56:24 AM
An indictment if ever there was one. When someone recommends a film to me but they are unable to say anything positive about the score I know not to take their recommendation seriously.

I love the movie. COncerning the score:
Am B G Am

There is only ONE tune during the whole movie, a very powerful one. And the repetition makes it become ever more powerful. If you don't remember it, listen to the music of the trailer (the trailer is avaible everywhere on the web)...

Teaser: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCAnJa14-KM
Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGZ1dZntcFY

makes me shiver...