Mystic River - 10/10 *Spoilers* - Page 2

Paulie · 10-23-2003, 03:17 PM

I actually didn't figure out what was going on till late.

But that's how I watch movies. I'm like a kid in a toy store sometimes.

Google · Sponsored Links

Zaius · 10-28-2003, 02:00 PM

I really liked this movie because it made me so damn mad at the characters. I recommend everyone to go see it because it adresses a lot of interesting issues and gets you thinking about them, and that's what movies are about right? (Well sometimes they're about neat stuff blowing up and flashing lights...)

I agree Mosaik that the score was somewhat misplaced at times, but I tried to let it work, and it eventually did for me.

I do have some spoiler material that I was wondering if anyone else interpreted the way I did.

***REST IS SPOILERS***

Was anyone else dissapointed with Sean (Kevin Bacon's character) simply not caring a bit about bringing Jimmy in after finding out he killed Dave? Jimmy tried to explain what he did by saying "last time I saw Dave he was lead away in that car". Maybe that's how you rationalize things Jimmy, but Dave was still a person, however troubled, and he isn't someone you use as a vengeance punching bag. Jimmy is a bad, violent person though, so I can understand that. But the way Sean simply accepted it and instead of bringing him to jail, simply made a cute little "gun gesture" at Jimmy in the parade is dissapointing. It seems Sean was so selfish that when his life got better by finally apologizing and having his wife back, Dave's killing seemed unimportant.

By the way I am fully aware that Dave too did something horrible by killing that man.

What surprised me the most was the people's reactions about this when I left the theatre. The way Eastwood handled this, he never explicitly said to us "shouldn't Jimmy go to jail?". He let the movie end from there, only adding Jimmy's wife's monologue, and showing Celeste's inner-troubles. It seems the people I went to see the movie with were either fooled by Eastwood's handling of the end, or they don't have the same moral outrage I have for this sort of thing, because they didn't feel the ending was outrageous.

Oh and another thing, why did the boyfriend's brother act mute? I was led to believe that he could indeed talk from the 911 tape, but I can't understand what would motivate a young boy to lie about being mute his entire life, even preceeding any of these horrible events. A bad mom and dad? I understand how horrible that can be, but can that be enough of motivator to act mute so well that your own brother doesn't know, day-in day-out?

MollyRose · 10-28-2003, 11:45 PM

I agree with you Zaius. I thought the movie was well acted, directed and shot, but it was depressing and had a questionable moral message. I thought Sean was the one of the boys who had made it to adulthood fairly sane and mature, but then he just lets Jimmy go knowing he's murdered two people! Plus, Jimmy didn't seem all that conflicted about killing his friend in error which didn't seem to really fit his character either.

OldSchoolBabe · 10-30-2003, 11:05 AM

Knowing Jimmy killed them and proving it are two different things. Sean would never get Jimmy to confess on record, so it would only be hearsay. I believe Sean pointing the finger at Jimmy at the end was his way of saying - I can't get you now, but I'm watching you and you'll screw up sooner or later.

Anyway - I thought the movie was great, acting superb and since I didn't really notice the soundtrack, I'd say it didn't have a part in how I viewed the film.

Zaius · 10-30-2003, 06:20 PM

**SPOILERS**

You don't need to have a murderer confess to find him guilty in a court of law. All Sean has to do is check out who Jimmy hangs around with. He can start with the two thugs he's always with, and eventually work his way to the bar and bartender. It's also right next to the Mystic, a perfect place to dump bodies. Heck, Sean and his partner are certainly capable of following up on those leads. He certainly could have arrested him right on the street when he found that Jimmy all but confessed to him, and Dave was missing. Arrests based on strong circumstantial evidence are very common, especially when an off-record confession occurs. It's in court that you have to come up with a reasonable amount of factual evidence.

Why didn't he arrest Jimmy? Why isn't he immediately following up on any possible leads, instead of attending the parade? I think Sean is just happy he got his wife back.

No, if Sean wants to get Jimmy, he can get him. I don't buy that he can't. He knows Jimmy killed two people, and he can certainly investigate it.

Paulie · 10-30-2003, 07:17 PM

**SPOILERS**

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldSchoolBabe

I believe Sean pointing the finger at Jimmy at the end was his way of saying - I can't get you now, but I'm watching you and you'll screw up sooner or later.

Yeah, that's kind of how I rationalized it, as well. Jimmy's shrug was sort of saying, "Do what you want. You won't get me." At least I hoped that's what was going on because otherwise I'm in complete agreement with Zaius. It would be awful for him to just let it go. It would, however, be in character for Sean to cut Jimmy some slack. He seemed to go easy on his friends throughout the investigation.

I don't think Brendan's brother acted mute, BTW. I think he was mute. It was his friend that was doing all the talking. Even in the face of being beaten by Brendan, his brother never said anything. If he was faking being mute, you'd think he would. That part of the crime played out in parallel to Jimmy's confusion about who killed his daughter. Brendan had accused and was beating the wrong guy.

Zaius · 10-30-2003, 07:38 PM

***YET MORE SPOILERS***

I remember the 911 tape having two different voices. One saying "he wants to know her name" and the one yelling something to the effect "hang up/let's go". That's what I remember, but I might have remembered incorrectly

I think that's what led me to think he might not be mute. Well, that coupled with the fact his brother seemed convinced his brother could talk.

At first I interpreted the Sean/Jimmy gestures at the parade like you did, Paulie. However for some reason, whether it was because of Sean's resigned, almost blank look he gave to Celeste, Dave's wife, or the fact that his pointing finger seemed to be delivered in a joking matter - I got the general feeling that Sean didn't want to pursue this anymore. Eastwood seemed to set a similar tone when he allowed Jimmy to come outside and watch the parade and be in the sun, which he had seemed to shy away from previously. It was as if his life was starting over, and all those "bad events" were in the past. That tone seemed to also be set by Jimmy's wife's monologue about how Jimmy wasn't a bad man, but just strong and with a big heart :rolleyes , and how he would be the king of this town, generally looking to the future.

Again, all this does not detract from the fact that this was a great movie.

Paulie · 10-30-2003, 07:50 PM

*SPOILERS BLAH BLAH BLAH*

Oh, yeah. Maybe there were two voices on the 911 call. Can't remember now.

As for Sean's resigned look, you may be right. Like I said, I thought he gave his friends some serious slack in the investigation. And maybe he's just as broken inside as them. It doesn't excuse his behavior, but it may explain it.

karlyr · 11-12-2003, 02:24 PM

Ok, here is the part that I didn't get.. what the heck did the situation with Sean's wife have to do with the whole movie? You have no idea why she left and then she comes back... but what was the point of it?!!!!

10-23-2003, 03:17 PM	#11
Paulie Sexy evil genius Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Not the regular cabana boy Age: 38 Posts: 11,787	I actually didn't figure out what was going on till late. But that's how I watch movies. I'm like a kid in a toy store sometimes. __________________ When you're ten years old and a car drives by and splashes a puddle of water all over you, it's hard to decide if you should go to school like that or try to go home and change and probably be late. So while he was trying to decide, I drove by and splashed him again. - Jack Handey Read Paulie's Precaps for Survivor:Vanuatu: 1-2-3-4-5

10-28-2003, 02:00 PM	#12
Zaius Allez les Bleus! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 1,362	I really liked this movie because it made me so damn mad at the characters. I recommend everyone to go see it because it adresses a lot of interesting issues and gets you thinking about them, and that's what movies are about right? (Well sometimes they're about neat stuff blowing up and flashing lights...) I agree Mosaik that the score was somewhat misplaced at times, but I tried to let it work, and it eventually did for me. I do have some spoiler material that I was wondering if anyone else interpreted the way I did. *REST IS SPOILERS* Was anyone else dissapointed with Sean (Kevin Bacon's character) simply not caring a bit about bringing Jimmy in after finding out he killed Dave? Jimmy tried to explain what he did by saying "last time I saw Dave he was lead away in that car". Maybe that's how you rationalize things Jimmy, but Dave was still a person, however troubled, and he isn't someone you use as a vengeance punching bag. Jimmy is a bad, violent person though, so I can understand that. But the way Sean simply accepted it and instead of bringing him to jail, simply made a cute little "gun gesture" at Jimmy in the parade is dissapointing. It seems Sean was so selfish that when his life got better by finally apologizing and having his wife back, Dave's killing seemed unimportant. By the way I am fully aware that Dave too did something horrible by killing that man. What surprised me the most was the people's reactions about this when I left the theatre. The way Eastwood handled this, he never explicitly said to us "shouldn't Jimmy go to jail?". He let the movie end from there, only adding Jimmy's wife's monologue, and showing Celeste's inner-troubles. It seems the people I went to see the movie with were either fooled by Eastwood's handling of the end, or they don't have the same moral outrage I have for this sort of thing, because they didn't feel the ending was outrageous. Oh and another thing, why did the boyfriend's brother act mute? I was led to believe that he could indeed talk from the 911 tape, but I can't understand what would motivate a young boy to lie about being mute his entire life, even preceeding any of these horrible events. A bad mom and dad? I understand how horrible that can be, but can that be enough of motivator to act mute so well that your own brother doesn't know, day-in day-out? __________________ "The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of an expanding bureaucracy." -- Unknown Last edited by Zaius; 10-28-2003 at 02:05 PM.

10-30-2003, 11:05 AM	#14
OldSchoolBabe Love that Smile, RU! Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Island Paradise in RUland Posts: 1,042	Knowing Jimmy killed them and proving it are two different things. Sean would never get Jimmy to confess on record, so it would only be hearsay. I believe Sean pointing the finger at Jimmy at the end was his way of saying - I can't get you now, but I'm watching you and you'll screw up sooner or later. Anyway - I thought the movie was great, acting superb and since I didn't really notice the soundtrack, I'd say it didn't have a part in how I viewed the film. __________________ "The Return" in stores Oct. 17th! Ruben Studdard's DBL PLATINUM CD "Soulful" & his GOLD Gospel CD "I Need An Angel" available in stores now! gRUBEhugs all around!

10-30-2003, 06:20 PM	#15
Zaius Allez les Bleus! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 1,362	SPOILERS You don't need to have a murderer confess to find him guilty in a court of law. All Sean has to do is check out who Jimmy hangs around with. He can start with the two thugs he's always with, and eventually work his way to the bar and bartender. It's also right next to the Mystic, a perfect place to dump bodies. Heck, Sean and his partner are certainly capable of following up on those leads. He certainly could have arrested him right on the street when he found that Jimmy all but confessed to him, and Dave was missing. Arrests based on strong circumstantial evidence are very common, especially when an off-record confession occurs. It's in court that you have to come up with a reasonable amount of factual evidence. Why didn't he arrest Jimmy? Why isn't he immediately following up on any possible leads, instead of attending the parade? I think Sean is just happy he got his wife back. No, if Sean wants to get Jimmy, he can get him. I don't buy that he can't. He knows Jimmy killed two people, and he can certainly investigate it. __________________ "The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of an expanding bureaucracy." -- Unknown

10-30-2003, 07:38 PM	#17
Zaius Allez les Bleus! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 1,362	*YET MORE SPOILERS* I remember the 911 tape having two different voices. One saying "he wants to know her name" and the one yelling something to the effect "hang up/let's go". That's what I remember, but I might have remembered incorrectly I think that's what led me to think he might not be mute. Well, that coupled with the fact his brother seemed convinced his brother could talk. At first I interpreted the Sean/Jimmy gestures at the parade like you did, Paulie. However for some reason, whether it was because of Sean's resigned, almost blank look he gave to Celeste, Dave's wife, or the fact that his pointing finger seemed to be delivered in a joking matter - I got the general feeling that Sean didn't want to pursue this anymore. Eastwood seemed to set a similar tone when he allowed Jimmy to come outside and watch the parade and be in the sun, which he had seemed to shy away from previously. It was as if his life was starting over, and all those "bad events" were in the past. That tone seemed to also be set by Jimmy's wife's monologue about how Jimmy wasn't a bad man, but just strong and with a big heart :rolleyes , and how he would be the king of this town, generally looking to the future. Again, all this does not detract from the fact that this was a great movie. __________________ "The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of an expanding bureaucracy." -- Unknown Last edited by Zaius; 10-30-2003 at 07:43 PM.

10-28-2003, 11:45 PM	#13
MollyRose FORT Fogey Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: New Mexico Age: 46 Posts: 831	I agree with you Zaius. I thought the movie was well acted, directed and shot, but it was depressing and had a questionable moral message. I thought Sean was the one of the boys who had made it to adulthood fairly sane and mature, but then he just lets Jimmy go knowing he's murdered two people! Plus, Jimmy didn't seem all that conflicted about killing his friend in error which didn't seem to really fit his character either.

10-30-2003, 07:50 PM	#18
Paulie Sexy evil genius Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Not the regular cabana boy Age: 38 Posts: 11,787	SPOILERS BLAH BLAH BLAH Oh, yeah. Maybe there were two voices on the 911 call. Can't remember now. As for Sean's resigned look, you may be right. Like I said, I thought he gave his friends some serious slack in the investigation. And maybe he's just as broken inside as them. It doesn't excuse his behavior, but it may explain it. __________________ When you're ten years old and a car drives by and splashes a puddle of water all over you, it's hard to decide if you should go to school like that or try to go home and change and probably be late. So while he was trying to decide, I drove by and splashed him again. - Jack Handey Read Paulie's Precaps for Survivor:Vanuatu: 1-2-3-4-5

11-12-2003, 02:24 PM	#19
karlyr FORT Newbie Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 4	Ok, here is the part that I didn't get.. what the heck did the situation with Sean's wife have to do with the whole movie? You have no idea why she left and then she comes back... but what was the point of it?!!!!