Rating: 
Summary: Tsk, tsk, Clint
Review: This movie did not deserve the hype it got from artsy critics and lemming-like fans. I for one was deceived into seeing it by the hype. The trailers were enticing as well. But immediately after having seen it I was left with an emptiness and months later, I still find no quality in it that deserves the praise, "Best movie of the year."
Many reviewers here have already rehashed the plot and commented on the acting. Some have said it's a valuable critique of vigilante justice. I don't find that. To me, it seems as if director Clint Eastwood is getting more and more postmodern in his art and political musings. Eastwood's postmodern shift started most noticeably with Unforgiven, which I do regard as an excellent movie, but through the rest of the '90s and up to the present, Clint has left me dissatisfied with movies like True Crime and Bloodwork. Even the wonderfully filmed Bridges of Madison County left me uneasy with its ambiguous moral lesson.
Mystic River is a low point. It starts out well, with deep characterization and gripping emotions, but it fails to deliver what viewers want: resolution. Or are we supposed to be satisfied with an ending that makes right and wrong relative? That what happens to Tim Robbins' character is karmic destiny? I left the theater appalled at the lack of justice in the story. Am I being unrealistic? Don't we all strive for justice and are not satisfied without it?
Considering the socio-political leanings of actors Sean Penn and Tim Robbins, and to some degree Kevin Bacon, this was probably a fitting vehicle for their worldview.
Rating: 
Summary: NOT Eastwood's best...
Review: ...that title remains with Unforgiven.Mystic river is a good movie, not a great one. It has a great story and great characters - with a good screenplay by Brian Helgeland, based on Dennis Lehane's book. The directing is solid, while not really bringing anything special to the film, yet pacing it prefectly in building the tension around the murder. What is outstanding about this film is the acting. Sean Penn gives yet another inspired performance as a working class father from Boston who just lost his oldest daughter to a horrific murder. Although the scenes that most people seem to remember (and that are shown in the trailer) show his *exaggerated* response to his daughter's death, the rest of the performance is more subdued and restrained. Tim Robbins' performance is also of note, as Penn's disturbed boyhood friend who shows up covered in blood the same night of the murder, making his frightened wife (Marcia Gay Harden) start to doubt his story and to believe that he is in fact the murderer. The rest of the cast give solid performances in somewhat limited characters, Kevin Bacon and Laurence Fishburne as the cops asigned to the case, and Laura Linney as Penn's second wife. However, there are a few things about the film that rubbed me the wrong way; the whole sub-plot about Bacon's wife calling him on his cell phone and not speaking? What was that suppossed to bring to the movie? Or Linney's (apparently) sudden transformation into Lady MacBeth, telling Penn's character that he should do whatever needed to be done? Or the final parade scene? In short, while not a great film (certainly not Eastwood's best), it's a good one worth catching, and not as bad as some other reviewers will have you believe (certainly not Mistake River!).
Rating: 
Summary: This is a poor movie....
Review: I don't care how many good things critics have said about this movie, it's just plain awful. Between the non-acting skills of Sean Penn or the miscasting of Tim Robbins, this movie is disguised as an art film when in reality it's just a bag of hot air.
Rating: 
Summary: Solid film.
Review: This is one of those movies that as a fantastic cast and a basically good story. Without going into the details, I was a little disappointed in the way the story wrapped up and how it ended, but it wasn't bad. Sean Penn's performance was excellent and the talent all around really held the film up. I'm not sure if this movie is one of those that must be seen at the theater or not, but is certainly is a must see on dvd or tape. Having a surprise twist to it, it's one of those flicks that may not necessarily be one to own, as watching it over will only be to enjoy the acting as once the story is known, a lot of the suspense is going to be over.
I do have one complaint, without creating a spoiler here, that I'd like to express. In the beginning of the movie, there is a set up that involves a priest of some sort. He's a bad guy, which would have been fine if it actually played a part in the story later, but he doesn't specifically, just what he does matters. The situation is important, but having a "man of the cloth" was pure church bashing in the movie (I don't know if it had an importance in the book).
That aside, this was a good movie and I give it a thumbs up.
Rating:
Summary: Pointlessly convoluted plot..
Review: This is a classic case of a movie being seriously overhyped by both critics and movie-goers only to prove the classic axiom "don't believe the hype" once again true.
That said hype though is not all non-deserved.
"Mystic river" has things going for it that should've made it a great film were it not for a small lil thingie missing: a competent script. But let's start with the good news first. The cast in this movie is superb as are the performances. Kevin Bacon is not only "as usually good" but gives one of his finest performances. Tim Robbins shows once more his tremendous talent in depicting difficult characters. Lawrence Fishburne, more of the same even though he's not given too much to work with. Sean Penn, well, I happen to like his acting quite a lot, but i think he's the only one that seems to be going through the motions. But the rest of the cast too, the so-called "second characters" are all major quality-acting contributors. So doesn't "Mystic river" go on then to be a great film? Uhm, no it doesn't.
From the very beginning you have the obvious impression that this is going to be a "whodunnit" flick with some very in-depth social commentary. But that's exactly the problem. As the film progresses you realise it has no depth at all, in fact the more it goes on the shallower it gets and that, mind you, is for a full 2.5 hours which is assumingly the reason the director or the scriptwriter gave themselves that much time: to develop the characters and the plot. But no. The characters, with zero exception, are all painfully underdeveloped, glass figures acting superbly yes but acting a plot that's not really there (more kudos then for the acting). The story suffers on a multi-level basis. First of all there are serious plotholes and secondly since depth is never achieved the movie also drags and becomes predictable at the same time because you know way too early on that the "killer" the director is trying to trick you into focusing on is indeed innocent and that someone else has done it. By that time though, you dont really care who it is. You cant identify with any of the characters (only exception here being that of Tim Robbins but that's like shooting the proverbial fish in the barel because of the character he plays, someone who was molested as a child). The plotholes, could've been "overlooked" had the depth and the development of the characters of "Mystic river" been achieved. But instead, the scriptwriter makes a pointlessly convoluted plot that feels deep but when you ask all the questions during and after the film they all come up unanswered: "who are really these people" and "do i care?". Finding its setting in a typical "working-class" neighborhood where the murder of the daughter of one of the main characters spawns not only the investigation of the police but that of the community as well, and where archetypical concepts kick in such as the urge for revenge, Mystic river should easily have been the vehicle for a an intricate critique on human nature and the dynamics (positive and negative) of human relationships through tragedies. But no again. Whether you'd read about such a story in the papers with the lightweight analysis usually accompanying them or saw this film is one and the same: superficiality is the main dish. All in all a pity considering how many aces the director (Clint Eastwood) holds up his sleeve but i think that Clint -when behind the camera- has shown that he's mostly willing to give life as lived by humans a very simplistic and rarely convincing look. And it's this simplistic, borderline-superficial approach that ultimately ruins the whole thing.
Two stars for the great cast and the even greater acting. An extra minus star for the generic and terribly boring soundtrack written by the director himself...
Rating:
Summary: Dark and Brooding
Review: "Mystic River" is a dark and brooding story of evil and its consequences. The film is set in Boston and largely covers the lives of three characters who were boyhood friends but whose lives drifted apart in later life only to come crashing together again in the worst of circumstances. The three boys are played as adults by Sean Penn, Kevin Bacon and Tim Robbins. Penn is the small time hood and shop keeper, Bacon is the detective and Robbins is the underemployed underachiever. When Penn's daughter is murdered, the ultimate consequences are grim and the film portrays a number of shattered lives where fate deals a very poor hand.
However, although Penn's acting may warrant an Oscar nomination, the film itself moves ponderously at times and seems uncertain when it should draw to a close. The end is somehow less than totally satisfying. See the film if only for Penn's acting and in tribute to Clint Eastwood who directs, produces and writes some of the film's music. Although now in his seventies, Eastwood shows little sign of slowing downm.
Rating: 
Summary: Mystic River is superb!
Review: Great story and the cast is PERFECT for each role! The suspense keeps you on the edge of your seat. This story is so well-written, you feel that you actually know the leading characters intimately! MYSTIC RIVER IS A MUST SEE!
Rating:
Summary: Greek Tragedy, Murder Mystery.......and Melodrama.
Review: Dave Boyle, Jimmy Markum, and Sean Devine were pals when they were boys. They grew up together in the blue collar neighborhood of East Buckingham in Boston. One day Dave got into a stranger's car and didn't return for four days, and that event would prove to change the course of his life from that point onward. 25 years later, Jimmy (Sean Penn) is a shop owner, a reformed ex-con, and a family man. Dave (Tim Robbins) is married and has a son himself. And Sean (Kevin Bacon), who left the old neighborhood to become a cop, is now homicide detective. When Jimmy's teenaged daughter is found murdered and Sean is assigned to the case, the lives of these three childhood friends become intertwined once again. And the past proves not to be so distant after all. "Mystic River" was adapted by Brian Helgeland from the novel of the same name by Dennis Lehane. The film was directed by Clint Eastwood. This is a character study and a Greek tragedy masquerading as a murder mystery. Unfortunately, it's also a melodrama. The cast is all very talented, and the performances are competent, but the characters are overwrought to say the least. Even Sean, the least histrionic of the three men, manages a bit of exaggeration. The most impressive performances come from Marcia Gay Harden as Dave's wife Celeste and Laura Linney as Jimmy's wife Annabeth. Annabeth's startling speech and Celeste's behavior in the last minutes of the film do more than anything else to bring home the story's major ideas. But too many idiosyncratic characters and behaviors make "Mystic River" seem contrived and pretentious. And too much melodrama makes it insipid. So, in spite of this talented cast, I have to say that the film has the most success with its murder mystery. The murder is mysterious; the detective work is interesting; there is real suspense; and when we finally understand what has happened, it is truly affecting. I haven't read the novel on which "Mystic River" is based, so I don't know if the mystery or the character studies are its focus. But in the film, the mystery serves as a vehicle for gritty melodrama. And the vehicle proves better than its objective. Critics swoon whenever an actor demonstrates competence at any craft other than acting. Consequentially, "Mystic River" has been somewhat overrated because Clint Eastwood directed it. Eastwood did a good job, but the film isn't earth-shattering. Sean Penn's performance has been widely praised, but this isn't even close to being Penn's best work. "Mystic River" has a lot to recommend it: A talented cast, a good mystery, excellent supporting performances. But be prepared for manipulative and overwrought characterizations. Still, the film is very worth seeing.
Rating:
Summary: oscar's best friend
Review: this movie is a masterpiece and a gem. i loved this movie because of the strong performances. Sean Penn makes another great career move. Horray.
Rating:
Summary: Mystic River
Review: THIS MOVIE IS AWESOME AND GRIPPING FROM BEGINNING TO END.
SEAN PENN WAS COMPELLING, HE HAS MY VOTE FOR AN OSCAR.
TIM ROBBINSIS EASILY BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR AND KEVIN BACON,
NO WORDS CAN EXPRESS. THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST FILMS I SEEN
THIS YEAR. MY HAT IS OFF TO CLINT EASTWOOD! HE NEVER LETS ME
DOWN. HIS WORK AS A DIRECTOR IS CAPTIVATING.
LADIES ALL I HAVE TO SAY IS SEAN PENN! THIS IS NOT FAST TIMES AT
RIDGEMONT HIGH. THIS MAN IS AWESOME!!!!
ENJOY THE SHOW.
| 
