The most interesting part of Kermode's commentary begins at 5:10. He goes: "The really impressive thing about Linklater is that while you're watching the movie, you don't sit there marveling at the logistic of bringing this project together. What you do is sit there, marveling at the fact that he's the most humanist of directors." And then, he says accurately: "People talk about cinema being a voyeuristic medium, in which you look AT people, and Linklater looks WITH people." He really got the core of Linklater's cinema with those words.
I watched this movie on my own a few months before my 21st birthday. It's the best film I've ever seen. I don't think there's much else I have to say, really. It just knocked me out.
Such a wonderful film. It's mundane and the issues can seem trivial, but I was transfixed. Boyhood shows life. Warts and all. Also, I worry for people who don't like this film or even hated the characters. Their emotional depth must struggle to fill a petri dish.
The film is a beautifully mundane masterpiece and I doubt we'll see anything like it for a very long time, if not ever. It boggles my mind that anyone could hate it. Its life. Hating Boyhood, speaks volumes to how you see life as a greater concept. "Boring, overrated and a waste of good time". I will forever sing its praises. Its like a reflection of your own understanding of life. Maybe its just one of those films you can only really appreciate and capture the gravitas if you are a film academic. Who knows. One things sure, I can't get enough.
+Bibbi DaSilva The scope of this film is incredible to say the very least. The way Linklater seeminglessly moved the story and it characters from period to period was just a work of art. I think many people aren't satisfied with it's lack of "enthusiasm" and a huge climax but I think that's what made the movie all the more well rounded. It was true to itself. I enjoyed the hell out of it.
Crazy thing is Linklater was supposed to start shooting a 20-year film called _Merrily We Roll Along_ this year. With COVID-19 delaying films, I wonder how it is going to affect things. The man just keeps challenging himself to capture the essence of transition and time within people's life experience in a more and more extended way.
Absolutely loved it. The way it skips through moments is like how memories suddenly hit you when you're doing housework or whatever. I think it's an easy film to hate being such a nice film and such a big hit, but don't let that put you off seeing it.
Really? Because by all the incredibly high ratings and positive reviews and quotes like "One of the great films of the decade" I was under the impression a lot of people shared that opinion. Well I guess I was wrong Mr I've Seen More Movies Than You & Know More About Movies Than You.
If you're not a fan of the film then that's fine. But don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about when I'm only expressing my opinion. If you think it's flawed then fair enough but I personally think it's flawless and have no interest in looking deep under the surface to find it's flaws. Because you can do that with practically every film in existence and all it does is lessen your enjoyment of film.
Loved it. Up there with Under The Skin and even more enjoyable than Her, for me so far. Some excellent challenging films this year from some of my favourite filmmakers. Boyhood was a particularly ecstatic success. I can't wait to see it again.
The fact that someone like Linklater, who goes back and forth between genres and formats (Long live 35mm!) and styles and can blend a Gen X narrative with Eric Rhomer and Godard, can have a film out the same week as Michael Bay, gives me some hope for humanity. Some ;).
I found boyhood to be a remarkable film, particularly because of what you just described, not only does it follows the protagonist young boy, but his whole family as they grow through the years. Great, great movie.
My best way to describe this movie is this, you know how there is a lot of talk about how characters in movies always feel very 2 dimensional? That they are a curtain way and they don't change, and to think that real people are like this is wrong. Well this movie portraits humans as actual humans instead of 2 dimensional characters, the movie is very grounded in reality and down to earth, very relate-able and the dialogue is great with great points and meanings. Great experience but you have to be in the mood for it, its very calm with no real climax. 8/10
For me, while I did enjoy the film on the whole, I always felt that the film was more about the joy of watching someone grow up rather than actually growing up oneself. Since I grew up at round about the same time as Mason, I was expecting to connect with him a lot more than I actually did. Instead, I always felt at arms length from the character, as it seemed more content to view his life as a series of milestones to be ogled like a scrapbook rather than enjoyed as a coherent narrative. While the direction is highly impressive, and the performances on the whole are pretty excellent (I'll be disappointed if Patricia Arquette doesn't win Best Supporting Actress), I never found the film to draw me in as much as I would have liked. The 12 year production time is highly impressive, and Linklater should certainly be commended for this, but for me there was always the unmistakeable sense that the screenplay was being written as the movie was being filmed (admittedly unavoidable given its development, but still present none-the-less). On the whole, I just don't feel that it was either as consistently brilliant as Birdman, or as charming as the Grand Budapest Hotel. I get the feeling that this film would be greater enjoyed if the viewer was a parent, as someone who has witnessed their child grow up first hand, but I don't feel that the film has much to say to people who have just reached the stage in their life that Mason has. Maybe if I watch the film in 20 years or so I'll see it as a masterpiece, but right now I'm not entirely enthralled.
The analogy I've used to describe my viewing experience of watching this film: It was like going over to a neighbour's house to watch their home movies, and after about an hour you realize you don't like them that much, and after nearly three you realize you hate them. I sometimes feel that I'm one of the only people who not only disliked this film, but outright hated it. It's not even that most of it is so mundane -- yes, I get that's the point -- but what I hate most in a film is one that fails to surprise me, and here, as soon as I saw the setup with the mother and her professor I had a feeling where it was going to go -- they'd marry and he'd be an a**hole -- and I really do not like it when I can predict films like that. It was similar when she gave the advice to the landscaper -- I could see him coming back later having taken her advice. Both of those are such overused cliches in film that it honestly bugs me that they're not brought up. So when I see this winning major awards over IMO more worthwhile and original -- and above all more entertaining -- fair like Birdman or The Grand Budapest Hotel, it really bothers me, and in the end it shouldn't because these are just films, but still, I just don't get the hype this film has been getting. I really don't.
The landscaper bit was the only part in the whole film that made me roll my eyes and cringe. That was way too cliche and trying hard to be sentimental. That being said, I very much enjoyed the movie and disagree with the rest of your statement.
faizan73ht I didn't like the film either, but even though it did showcase an "American" point-of-view on growing up, it's more narrow than that. It was a very West Coast/liberal perspective, and it's not how most of the country would raise a child. The film was poorly written and the dialogue and acting was atrocious, among many other problems.
i kind of thought that. but i also noticed (in the landscaper scene), that his success isn't exactly blown out of proportion. he only says hes at college and is a manager in a restaurant, real hollywood films would have him CEO of mcdonalds or a highly successful lawyer, his position is still within reason. more importantly, the mothers reaction when he tells her of his success isn't blown up either, she pretty much nonchalantly tells him thank you and its never brought up again. and lastly, if you really didn't like it because you found the plot derivative and boring, try watching it again and let the plot be the backdrop to the rest of the film. i think many people have a hard time doing that, a lot of people thought 'the master' was abad film and these same people wonder why it garnered critical acclaim.
"try watching it again and let the plot be the backdrop to the rest of the film" I really don't have the patience to try to watch a nearly 3 hour film I really hated the first time again. For the record, though, I wasn't really blown away by anything I saw or heard on screen, either.
Thought the first half was great, and I appreciate Richard Linklater's passion for the movie, but I wasn't as engaged with the story and characters in the second half. It just felt underwhelming, and Mason's speeches about his thoughts and ideas were really irritating in my opinion
the problem I have with Boyhood is one thing: I don't care about the kid. I never got into his character, I never related to anything he did, his acting as he got older was insufferable. What would've been more interesting is if we followed the parents. The excitement of newborn, experiences as he got older, drifting apart and divorces while still being a parent etc
Director Richard Linklater delivers an iconically unforgettable coming of age story where the cast delivers one of their best roles, as the film’s terrifically written, so incredibly focused & is 2014’s best film. (100%) (5/5 stars) (positive)
I saw this film tonight and it blew me away! I have to go back and see it a 2nd time to be sure but I have to rate this right now as one of the best films I've ever seen! And that's saying something considering how unorthodox it is. This watches less like a film and more like an exercise in total sensory immersion in the sped up life of one family. As always there are some nit picks that can be found, I thought that the central teen characters seems a little clichéd at times but then I had to remind myself, that's how teens actually are lol. An utterly amazing piece of film making!
from all the comments about this film, i could only get that this is a love it or hate it experience. everyone’s entitled to their own opinion. what linklater has shown to me is a slice of modern american life and its problems and joys over a period of 12 years.
I neither love nor hate it. I appreciate the immense effort put into its production, and there certainly is a sincerity and charm to watching a film where the actors grow up with their characters. And even more so the small details such as the old Mac computers and the music of the time were honest touches. I also appreciate the "slice of life" aspect to the film. However, despite all this, I feel that the film forgot to give me a reason to actually care about the characters at all. Unfortunately, contrary to what Kermode says, I do not feel that Coltrane turned out to be a particularly charismatic actor. He seems to move around with a slow-motion disinterest, and not in a way that is particularly owned either. Considering its unique structure and production, the lack of plot in the film would have been perfectly fine if I felt compelled to care about the characters. But unfortunately I had neither a plot nor characters to feel invested in. So yeah, to summarise I would say that I appreciated and respected this film more than I liked it. It felt like a sincere project though, and not a pretentious one like it could have turned into, so I can't say that I hate it either.
the problem with the film is that it was clearly written AFTER the 12-year process was decided on. what that means is that instead of having a really good story and then saying 'you know what could make this even better?', they were actually thinking 'it's ok if everything except the acting is mediocre, because the 12-year thing will save the movie.'
I really like coldplay but god I hate it when theyre used in film. I thought this film was gonna be another one of those soppy Hollywood cheese movies; needless to say I really want to see it now
Wonderful film and wonderful review, but just for the record, Mason DOES speak in the clip that is played (despite Mark saying the boy doesn't speak in the clip). He says the sentence beginning with "Why is it all on us, Dad?"
Would have been a classic, for me, if it had been 30 odd minutes shorter - eventually the film felt like it was running on fumes. A great achievement nonetheless.
Boyhood was amazingly naive, absolutely common featuring an atrocious performance by the central actor. Only thing that everyone says is "wow it took 12 years to make". But hey. It got promoted by critics like this one so it will get an oscar. Great
Boyhood was made for that viewer with an IQ larger than his shoe size. If you judge the worth of a movie by the number of helicopters that blow up, Boyhood is not a movie for you. Critics have given Boyhood an amazing 99 rotten tomatoes because the movie deserves it. The final scene is the most perfect I've ever experienced and I'm 56 years old.
There's "fine" and then there's "fine" though. He clearly meant it in a "This is a really fine piece of work." way instead of "Ugh, it's fine. I'll put up with it."
I think it is a fine thing that it exists but I don't see it as furthering anything. I don't think it is as brilliant as everyone says but I don't hate it. I think people who are inherently annoyed by the suspension of disbelief you need when watching films love boyhood.
Mason was nowhere near as interesting as the mother...f*&k she had issues and depth, some great scenes, great concept...but he never grabbed me as a character, even more so as he got older!
Boyhood does extremely well with themes and narrative, the least you'd expect when you have 12 years to review the plot line. The adult characters and relationships portrayed in the film are absolutely sublime however when it comes to the children/teenagers it is completely substandard. Maison's monotone, dreary dialogue towards the end of my film made me want to rip my eyeballs out with a fork because at least that would have some entertainment value. I guess you just can't tell how a child actor will turn out after such an absurd production time.
Okay I may be in the vast minority in this one but I feel Boyhood is tremendously overrated. It's not, by any means, a bad film, just not nearly as good as most critics claim it is. The problem I have with this film is its glaring lack of substance. There is not a single character in this film that goes through some kind of character arc. The minor changes they undergo are left obscure and there are no hints as to what brought about those changes. None of the characters are likable. The entire film almost is a passive observation of this family's uneventful progression through the years. Although that worked very well in the first half of the movie the second half seemed superfluous. It brings back some of the most overused cliches (honestly if I had a nickel for every time a movie showed the divorced dad as cool and buff and the divorced mother as the complete opposite). The kid actors are great but as they age they seem less and less convincing. The dialogue as well suffers from cranky and mawkish moments. And on top of all that it lacks lacks a narrative structure. If you look at the Tree of Life, which is just as unstructured, Malick took advantage of that and turned it into a meditation on human behavior. Boyhood didn't even attempt to achieve anything of the sort. Tree of Life was poetry; Boyhood is just product. All the reviews I've read so far seem to be obsessed with the concept of the film rather than the final result. To me, Boyhood is yet another film that didn't come close to justifying its overblown hype. I would've given it a max of 7/10.
An excellent analysis, in which you manage to draw attention to the almost entire lack of justification for the hype surrounding this film--something which I had tried, but hitherto failed, to articulate. I agree that the second half of the film loses all the charm and authenticity which the first had just by dint of reflecting the natural innocence, spontaneity, and possibilities of life from the point of view of childhood. The remainder of the film perhaps reveals less about Linklater's mishandled direction than the sheer depressing homogeneity into which life inexorably descends: cliché is substituted for any kind of psychological or narrative intrigue; one stops suspending disbelief about the reality of these characters; and the meditation on addiction and mental illness (responsible for the most powerful scene of the film) becomes reduced to blanket assumptions about the flaws of middle-aged men, tantamount to a misandrist agenda, such that any words that emerge from their mouths are delegitimised by association with violent actions. The specious profundity of young people’s reflections on life is also an irritant. Ethan Hawke and Patricia Arquette are convincing at intervals, but even their characters are bastardised and caused to ‘sell out’, as it were. Where Mason, the centrepiece, is concerned, I thought the portrayal was guilty of grossly misrepresenting and over-simplifying the complexities intrinsic to growing up in a protean, ever-shifting society; individual perspective is eschewed for a terribly twee, universalist one. Indeed, what is perhaps most objectionable about ‘Boyhood’ is the disservice it does to the fascinating chaos that dominates the mental world of youth, preferring to exist as a totem and paean of maudlin sentimentality. The five-star reviews give due credit to the impressive realisation of the time-lapse project, but to conflate such a judgement with the merit of the product is a dereliction of the critic's duty.
Glaring lack of substance? No character arc? Uneventful obscure changes? Unlikable characters? Sounds like this movie tried to portray life a little _too_ accurately.
lukebccb I know. I changed my opinion drastically about the film. So don't mind what I wrote above. I still have issues with the film but I do feel it's a very good movie. It's just no Citizen Kane.
lukebccb I understand your point and your reasons for defending the film, but I am not convinced that 'Boyhood' can be merged seamlessly with this 'impressionist' category that you cite somewhat out of the ether; this 'real-life' argument does not hold water for me, since a poor film cannot be excused on the grounds that it is 'realistic'. Further, not only is it highly disputable as to what constitutes such a film (usually it just seems to 'work' on its own terms, despite clear problems to which critics are sensitive), but I am not aware that Linklater is a director to have indulged that possibility with deliberate authorial intent elsewhere. Moreover, I think 'Boyhood' has discernible pretensions to a more conventional narrative arc/structure, in which respect it fails quite remarkably (partly because of the buccaneering nature of the project), and must therefore be considered flawed. Contrary to the OP, I think 'Boyhood' has deteriorated from the distance afforded by time and unconscious reflection. Its message about youth and ageing, if it can lay claim to one whose only purpose is to elicit the cinematic staples of nostalgia and sentimentality, is hackneyed and at times quite false; the acting of the principal character became more wooden and irksome precisely as more maturity and insight were required of him; and the only scenes which I can remember being conducive to the progression of the 'drama' (e.g. the domestic abuse) and the shaping of the personages were those implicitly condemned by the film, leading to unaccountable narrative holes. I wouldn't complain to this extent if I weren't so keen to underline the hypocrisy of the critics who inexplicably fell in love with, and worshipped so sycophantically, this thoroughly mediocre picture.
It's like a soap in which nothing happens. Or alternatively, like being sober at a really bad party, listening to other people's small talk, not caring about them and suspecting you'll never see them again. Boringly shot, unimaginatively written, too long, unconvincing and doesn't hang together. It's a gimmick.
+Joaq Wizard Phoenix Uninteresting to you, but certainly not to most people. That's objectively untrue. The movie has a 98% on Rotten Tomatoes (100% Top Critics), and an 8.0/10 on IMDB. It obviously had a significant impact on most people.
All of Mark's praise on the film are true. The authenticity and humanity displayed is masterful. But Mark, I wish you addressed some flaws with this film because there are quite a few - i won't mention them since few people have seen this movie. Why focus the first few minutes of this review on the premise? Spend 1 minute talking about it and get stuck into the writing, the characters, the narrative etc.
"you hear the song with different ears" - funny, I've always thought exactly that about Linklater's Dazed & Confused. when Alice Cooper - School's Out plays it somehow sounds great even though I've never liked that song (and still don't).
This is another one of those films that people are gonna look back on in 5 years, and it's not gonna be the gleaming sugarcoated masterpiece that it's being hailed as right now.
i have mixed feelings about boy hood. two hours in I was thinking: ok wheres this going? but by the end i just felt content with he film and as if it were a natural finish to a great story almost expecting some cleche twist at the end.
I watch this film this week and as much as I love Richard films, this could have been done without wasting 12 years in my opinion. The kids were great actors from young to teen. I think the reason why this film us gettin this much attention is the length it took to make and showing the age, time process of everyone. The plot is basic, nothing interesting happens as much as slacker. But I do agree with mark in the sense you really connect with the everyone and in the sense it feels real more then anything you'll watch this yr.
"That's hecause they're quite good Mark." You're tilting at windmills, Simon. Just give up. The quiff on Mark's head prevents music with more than three chords from penetrating his head. It's simply the way of things. Perhaps he'll one day accept that Elvis is dead, but until then, take comfort in th fact that you have better taste in music ;).
Hello everyone! I'm Mark kermode, today we're going to review Boyhood, right lets get too it! Boyhood is a film about growing up, up in the higher atmosphere oxygen levels degrease with altitude and air temperatures drop drastically. The film stars Ethan Hawke's are a predatory species of bird, there are many varieties of Hawks, Patricia Arquette is a leading expert on hawke's, she says, the males often leave the nest leaving mother to raise the children on her own, in this case particular case though, mother Hawke moved around a lot, she was disturbed by the rumbling sound of the coal train passing every day's pass so quickly, before you know it the children are all grown up. The film is amazing in its ability to comprehend what the hell i'm talking about, I give this film an EH, I think most would agree eh!?......I thought so!
OMG it's not the fall of the Berlin Wall for Christ sakes! Tell us if you like the movie or not and why, please don't ramble on at a thousand words s minute, you must have 4 tongues! I got dizzy after a few min.
This film was like watching a typical American drama/comedy TV series. Predictable and uninspired. I think I zoned out through most of it. I certainly don't remember any of it now.
"Boyhood" wasn't very good. It was only a spectacle of what it is like to shoot a movie over 12 years and to watch the actors actually age. There was nothing else there, and there was no substance. The plot was extremely thin and the spectacle of watching the kids age was null and void because the kid didn't even look the same from one time period to the next. He looked like a different actor, aside from being totally unlikable and completely unexpressive. The film swung and missed if you ask me. Linklater's films are vaguely interesting concepts, but I feel they are disastrous and not even worth making in the actual execution. You're going down the wrong track if Ethan Hawke is your muse. Sorry, bro.
Disappointing. What's all the fuss about? The film is boring, inconsequential and way overlong. It's supposed to be a drama right? It's not a documentary so why does it feel like one? For goodness sake Linklater, at least write some drama or comedy or tragedy or something. The film just feels like real life. And how exciting is that! There are no 'moments' in this film at all. Mason is just not very interesting. What he does is not very interesting. Nothing happens to him. So it was filmed over 12 years (and felt nearly as long watching it). Whoop De Doo! Where's the catharsis? I liked the soundtrack though.
The most interesting part of Kermode's commentary begins at 5:10. He goes: "The really impressive thing about Linklater is that while you're watching the movie, you don't sit there marveling at the logistic of bringing this project together. What you do is sit there, marveling at the fact that he's the most humanist of directors."
And then, he says accurately: "People talk about cinema being a voyeuristic medium, in which you look AT people, and Linklater looks WITH people." He really got the core of Linklater's cinema with those words.
I watched this movie on my own a few months before my 21st birthday. It's the best film I've ever seen. I don't think there's much else I have to say, really. It just knocked me out.
This film is an example of why I fell in love with cinema. Thank you Richard Linklater
@@feralmode Thanks for sharing. You've enlightened us all (you haven't).
Such a wonderful film. It's mundane and the issues can seem trivial, but I was transfixed. Boyhood shows life. Warts and all.
Also, I worry for people who don't like this film or even hated the characters. Their emotional depth must struggle to fill a petri dish.
I can't believe I'm saying this, but I was absolutely blown away by Hawke's performance. The man was incredible.
The film is a beautifully mundane masterpiece and I doubt we'll see anything like it for a very long time, if not ever. It boggles my mind that anyone could hate it. Its life. Hating Boyhood, speaks volumes to how you see life as a greater concept. "Boring, overrated and a waste of good time". I will forever sing its praises. Its like a reflection of your own understanding of life. Maybe its just one of those films you can only really appreciate and capture the gravitas if you are a film academic. Who knows. One things sure, I can't get enough.
+Bibbi DaSilva The scope of this film is incredible to say the very least. The way Linklater seeminglessly moved the story and it characters from period to period was just a work of art. I think many people aren't satisfied with it's lack of "enthusiasm" and a huge climax but I think that's what made the movie all the more well rounded. It was true to itself. I enjoyed the hell out of it.
Crazy thing is Linklater was supposed to start shooting a 20-year film called _Merrily We Roll Along_ this year. With COVID-19 delaying films, I wonder how it is going to affect things. The man just keeps challenging himself to capture the essence of transition and time within people's life experience in a more and more extended way.
Absolutely loved it. The way it skips through moments is like how memories suddenly hit you when you're doing housework or whatever. I think it's an easy film to hate being such a nice film and such a big hit, but don't let that put you off seeing it.
This will not be shown at either one of the two local cinemas.. Bad times.
I really can't wait for this film, in fact it's my most anticipated film of the year. I'm seeing it on Sunday.
I've just seen it. It's one of the greatest movies of all time.
Really? Because by all the incredibly high ratings and positive reviews and quotes like "One of the great films of the decade" I was under the impression a lot of people shared that opinion. Well I guess I was wrong Mr I've Seen More Movies Than You & Know More About Movies Than You.
If you're not a fan of the film then that's fine. But don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about when I'm only expressing my opinion. If you think it's flawed then fair enough but I personally think it's flawless and have no interest in looking deep under the surface to find it's flaws. Because you can do that with practically every film in existence and all it does is lessen your enjoyment of film.
Ok tell me then, why in your eyes is this film so flawed?
Ok then, so where is the review?
Loved it. Up there with Under The Skin and even more enjoyable than Her, for me so far. Some excellent challenging films this year from some of my favourite filmmakers. Boyhood was a particularly ecstatic success. I can't wait to see it again.
Saw it earlier today and its really left an impression on me. Really impressive film.
Saw it earlier today. It was absolutely fantastic, without a doubt the best film this year
I agree it is my favorite flim this year
+GizmoCh not a chance
only just watched it and i love this, ethan hawke is one of the most lovable characters ive ever seen
The fact that someone like Linklater, who goes back and forth between genres and formats (Long live 35mm!) and styles and can blend a Gen X narrative with Eric Rhomer and Godard, can have a film out the same week as Michael Bay, gives me some hope for humanity. Some ;).
I found boyhood to be a remarkable film, particularly because of what you just described, not only does it follows the protagonist young boy, but his whole family as they grow through the years. Great, great movie.
Best film I've seen in 2014. I've actually HAD TO rewatch it a few times, that's how I loved it.
My best way to describe this movie is this, you know how there is a lot of talk about how characters in movies always feel very 2 dimensional? That they are a curtain way and they don't change, and to think that real people are like this is wrong. Well this movie portraits humans as actual humans instead of 2 dimensional characters, the movie is very grounded in reality and down to earth, very relate-able and the dialogue is great with great points and meanings. Great experience but you have to be in the mood for it, its very calm with no real climax. 8/10
For me, while I did enjoy the film on the whole, I always felt that the film was more about the joy of watching someone grow up rather than actually growing up oneself. Since I grew up at round about the same time as Mason, I was expecting to connect with him a lot more than I actually did. Instead, I always felt at arms length from the character, as it seemed more content to view his life as a series of milestones to be ogled like a scrapbook rather than enjoyed as a coherent narrative.
While the direction is highly impressive, and the performances on the whole are pretty excellent (I'll be disappointed if Patricia Arquette doesn't win Best Supporting Actress), I never found the film to draw me in as much as I would have liked. The 12 year production time is highly impressive, and Linklater should certainly be commended for this, but for me there was always the unmistakeable sense that the screenplay was being written as the movie was being filmed (admittedly unavoidable given its development, but still present none-the-less).
On the whole, I just don't feel that it was either as consistently brilliant as Birdman, or as charming as the Grand Budapest Hotel. I get the feeling that this film would be greater enjoyed if the viewer was a parent, as someone who has witnessed their child grow up first hand, but I don't feel that the film has much to say to people who have just reached the stage in their life that Mason has. Maybe if I watch the film in 20 years or so I'll see it as a masterpiece, but right now I'm not entirely enthralled.
The analogy I've used to describe my viewing experience of watching this film:
It was like going over to a neighbour's house to watch their home movies, and after about an hour you realize you don't like them that much, and after nearly three you realize you hate them.
I sometimes feel that I'm one of the only people who not only disliked this film, but outright hated it. It's not even that most of it is so mundane -- yes, I get that's the point -- but what I hate most in a film is one that fails to surprise me, and here, as soon as I saw the setup with the mother and her professor I had a feeling where it was going to go -- they'd marry and he'd be an a**hole -- and I really do not like it when I can predict films like that. It was similar when she gave the advice to the landscaper -- I could see him coming back later having taken her advice. Both of those are such overused cliches in film that it honestly bugs me that they're not brought up.
So when I see this winning major awards over IMO more worthwhile and original -- and above all more entertaining -- fair like Birdman or The Grand Budapest Hotel, it really bothers me, and in the end it shouldn't because these are just films, but still, I just don't get the hype this film has been getting. I really don't.
The landscaper bit was the only part in the whole film that made me roll my eyes and cringe.
That was way too cliche and trying hard to be sentimental.
That being said, I very much enjoyed the movie and disagree with the rest of your statement.
faizan73ht I didn't like the film either, but even though it did showcase an "American" point-of-view on growing up, it's more narrow than that. It was a very West Coast/liberal perspective, and it's not how most of the country would raise a child. The film was poorly written and the dialogue and acting was atrocious, among many other problems.
i kind of thought that. but i also noticed (in the landscaper scene), that his success isn't exactly blown out of proportion. he only says hes at college and is a manager in a restaurant, real hollywood films would have him CEO of mcdonalds or a highly successful lawyer, his position is still within reason. more importantly, the mothers reaction when he tells her of his success isn't blown up either, she pretty much nonchalantly tells him thank you and its never brought up again. and lastly, if you really didn't like it because you found the plot derivative and boring, try watching it again and let the plot be the backdrop to the rest of the film. i think many people have a hard time doing that, a lot of people thought 'the master' was abad film and these same people wonder why it garnered critical acclaim.
"try watching it again and let the plot be the backdrop to the rest of the film"
I really don't have the patience to try to watch a nearly 3 hour film I really hated the first time again.
For the record, though, I wasn't really blown away by anything I saw or heard on screen, either.
Red Letter Media gave it a pretty scathing review
Thought the first half was great, and I appreciate Richard Linklater's passion for the movie, but I wasn't as engaged with the story and characters in the second half. It just felt underwhelming, and Mason's speeches about his thoughts and ideas were really irritating in my opinion
the problem I have with Boyhood is one thing: I don't care about the kid. I never got into his character, I never related to anything he did, his acting as he got older was insufferable. What would've been more interesting is if we followed the parents. The excitement of newborn, experiences as he got older, drifting apart and divorces while still being a parent etc
Director Richard Linklater delivers an iconically unforgettable coming of age story where the cast delivers one of their best roles, as the film’s terrifically written, so incredibly focused & is 2014’s best film. (100%) (5/5 stars) (positive)
that pause
What an amazing review. Highly recommend it.
This film’s a masterpiece
Richard Linklater does not make bad movies… They are all amazing
I saw this film tonight and it blew me away! I have to go back and see it a 2nd time to be sure but I have to rate this right now as one of the best films I've ever seen! And that's saying something considering how unorthodox it is. This watches less like a film and more like an exercise in total sensory immersion in the sped up life of one family. As always there are some nit picks that can be found, I thought that the central teen characters seems a little clichéd at times but then I had to remind myself, that's how teens actually are lol. An utterly amazing piece of film making!
I'm just back from seeing Boyhood. I don't think I'll ever be the same.
Can't wait for this movie, too bad i have to wait a month for release and its hard to even get to the theater.
It's phenomenal. Like, unbelievably good. I was stunned, mind blown, I'm out of adjectives.
cant wait to see this movie,i have been waiting for 12 years
An absolutely amazing film.
Charismatic Ellar Coltraine? What film did you watch, Kermode!?
from all the comments about this film, i could only get that this is a love it or hate it experience. everyone’s entitled to their own opinion. what linklater has shown to me is a slice of modern american life and its problems and joys over a period of 12 years.
I neither love nor hate it. I appreciate the immense effort put into its production, and there certainly is a sincerity and charm to watching a film where the actors grow up with their characters. And even more so the small details such as the old Mac computers and the music of the time were honest touches. I also appreciate the "slice of life" aspect to the film. However, despite all this, I feel that the film forgot to give me a reason to actually care about the characters at all. Unfortunately, contrary to what Kermode says, I do not feel that Coltrane turned out to be a particularly charismatic actor. He seems to move around with a slow-motion disinterest, and not in a way that is particularly owned either. Considering its unique structure and production, the lack of plot in the film would have been perfectly fine if I felt compelled to care about the characters. But unfortunately I had neither a plot nor characters to feel invested in.
So yeah, to summarise I would say that I appreciated and respected this film more than I liked it. It felt like a sincere project though, and not a pretentious one like it could have turned into, so I can't say that I hate it either.
the problem with the film is that it was clearly written AFTER the 12-year process was decided on. what that means is that instead of having a really good story and then saying 'you know what could make this even better?', they were actually thinking 'it's ok if everything except the acting is mediocre, because the 12-year thing will save the movie.'
One of the top 5 films this year
I don't always agree with Kermode but he got it 100% regarding Linklater
I really like coldplay but god I hate it when theyre used in film.
I thought this film was gonna be another one of those soppy Hollywood cheese movies; needless to say I really want to see it now
Wonderful film and wonderful review, but just for the record, Mason DOES speak in the clip that is played (despite Mark saying the boy doesn't speak in the clip). He says the sentence beginning with "Why is it all on us, Dad?"
12 years a slave didn't take 12 years to make.
And what?
Would have been a classic, for me, if it had been 30 odd minutes shorter - eventually the film felt like it was running on fumes. A great achievement nonetheless.
Boyhood was amazingly naive, absolutely common featuring an atrocious performance by the central actor. Only thing that everyone says is "wow it took 12 years to make". But hey. It got promoted by critics like this one so it will get an oscar. Great
Boyhood was made for that viewer with an IQ larger than his shoe size. If you judge the worth of a movie by the number of helicopters that blow up, Boyhood is not a movie for you. Critics have given Boyhood an amazing 99 rotten tomatoes because the movie deserves it. The final scene is the most perfect I've ever experienced and I'm 56 years old.
"Really fine" is as good as you're gonna get from Mark
I would't say so, he called The Master a "masterpiece" on his review.
There's "fine" and then there's "fine" though. He clearly meant it in a "This is a really fine piece of work." way instead of "Ugh, it's fine. I'll put up with it."
I think it is a fine thing that it exists but I don't see it as furthering anything. I don't think it is as brilliant as everyone says but I don't hate it. I think people who are inherently annoyed by the suspension of disbelief you need when watching films love boyhood.
Mason was nowhere near as interesting as the mother...f*&k she had issues and depth, some great scenes, great concept...but he never grabbed me as a character, even more so as he got older!
Boyhood does extremely well with themes and narrative, the least you'd expect when you have 12 years to review the plot line. The adult characters and relationships portrayed in the film are absolutely sublime however when it comes to the children/teenagers it is completely substandard. Maison's monotone, dreary dialogue towards the end of my film made me want to rip my eyeballs out with a fork because at least that would have some entertainment value. I guess you just can't tell how a child actor will turn out after such an absurd production time.
Okay I may be in the vast minority in this one but I feel Boyhood is tremendously overrated. It's not, by any means, a bad film, just not nearly as good as most critics claim it is. The problem I have with this film is its glaring lack of substance. There is not a single character in this film that goes through some kind of character arc. The minor changes they undergo are left obscure and there are no hints as to what brought about those changes. None of the characters are likable. The entire film almost is a passive observation of this family's uneventful progression through the years. Although that worked very well in the first half of the movie the second half seemed superfluous. It brings back some of the most overused cliches (honestly if I had a nickel for every time a movie showed the divorced dad as cool and buff and the divorced mother as the complete opposite). The kid actors are great but as they age they seem less and less convincing. The dialogue as well suffers from cranky and mawkish moments. And on top of all that it lacks lacks a narrative structure. If you look at the Tree of Life, which is just as unstructured, Malick took advantage of that and turned it into a meditation on human behavior. Boyhood didn't even attempt to achieve anything of the sort. Tree of Life was poetry; Boyhood is just product. All the reviews I've read so far seem to be obsessed with the concept of the film rather than the final result. To me, Boyhood is yet another film that didn't come close to justifying its overblown hype. I would've given it a max of 7/10.
An excellent analysis, in which you manage to draw attention to the almost entire lack of justification for the hype surrounding this film--something which I had tried, but hitherto failed, to articulate. I agree that the second half of the film loses all the charm and authenticity which the first had just by dint of reflecting the natural innocence, spontaneity, and possibilities of life from the point of view of childhood.
The remainder of the film perhaps reveals less about Linklater's mishandled direction than the sheer depressing homogeneity into which life inexorably descends: cliché is substituted for any kind of psychological or narrative intrigue; one stops suspending disbelief about the reality of these characters; and the meditation on addiction and mental illness (responsible for the most powerful scene of the film) becomes reduced to blanket assumptions about the flaws of middle-aged men, tantamount to a misandrist agenda, such that any words that emerge from their mouths are delegitimised by association with violent actions.
The specious profundity of young people’s reflections on life is also an irritant. Ethan Hawke and Patricia Arquette are convincing at intervals, but even their characters are bastardised and caused to ‘sell out’, as it were. Where Mason, the centrepiece, is concerned, I thought the portrayal was guilty of grossly misrepresenting and over-simplifying the complexities intrinsic to growing up in a protean, ever-shifting society; individual perspective is eschewed for a terribly twee, universalist one. Indeed, what is perhaps most objectionable about ‘Boyhood’ is the disservice it does to the fascinating chaos that dominates the mental world of youth, preferring to exist as a totem and paean of maudlin sentimentality. The five-star reviews give due credit to the impressive realisation of the time-lapse project, but to conflate such a judgement with the merit of the product is a dereliction of the critic's duty.
***** Very well put.
Glaring lack of substance? No character arc? Uneventful obscure changes? Unlikable characters?
Sounds like this movie tried to portray life a little _too_ accurately.
lukebccb I know. I changed my opinion drastically about the film. So don't mind what I wrote above. I still have issues with the film but I do feel it's a very good movie. It's just no Citizen Kane.
lukebccb I understand your point and your reasons for defending the film, but I am not convinced that 'Boyhood' can be merged seamlessly with this 'impressionist' category that you cite somewhat out of the ether; this 'real-life' argument does not hold water for me, since a poor film cannot be excused on the grounds that it is 'realistic'. Further, not only is it highly disputable as to what constitutes such a film (usually it just seems to 'work' on its own terms, despite clear problems to which critics are sensitive), but I am not aware that Linklater is a director to have indulged that possibility with deliberate authorial intent elsewhere. Moreover, I think 'Boyhood' has discernible pretensions to a more conventional narrative arc/structure, in which respect it fails quite remarkably (partly because of the buccaneering nature of the project), and must therefore be considered flawed. Contrary to the OP, I think 'Boyhood' has deteriorated from the distance afforded by time and unconscious reflection. Its message about youth and ageing, if it can lay claim to one whose only purpose is to elicit the cinematic staples of nostalgia and sentimentality, is hackneyed and at times quite false; the acting of the principal character became more wooden and irksome precisely as more maturity and insight were required of him; and the only scenes which I can remember being conducive to the progression of the 'drama' (e.g. the domestic abuse) and the shaping of the personages were those implicitly condemned by the film, leading to unaccountable narrative holes. I wouldn't complain to this extent if I weren't so keen to underline the hypocrisy of the critics who inexplicably fell in love with, and worshipped so sycophantically, this thoroughly mediocre picture.
It's like a soap in which nothing happens. Or alternatively, like being sober at a really bad party, listening to other people's small talk, not caring about them and suspecting you'll never see them again. Boringly shot, unimaginatively written, too long, unconvincing and doesn't hang together. It's a gimmick.
It's like real life; by the end you just want to die.
+Jason Nunn But that makes the movie uninteresting and boring and not engaging to basically almost most people who watch movies.
+Joaq Wizard Phoenix Uninteresting to you, but certainly not to most people. That's objectively untrue. The movie has a 98% on Rotten Tomatoes (100% Top Critics), and an 8.0/10 on IMDB. It obviously had a significant impact on most people.
exactly why it is amazing. at first i thought 'the same cast for 12 years thing' must be the gimmick of the movie but it just feels so natural
At first I thought Kermode repeated himself, but then I thought he repeated himself.
Looking forward to seeing the film. I agree with Mark's assessment of Coldplay too, they are awful.
All of Mark's praise on the film are true. The authenticity and humanity displayed is masterful. But Mark, I wish you addressed some flaws with this film because there are quite a few - i won't mention them since few people have seen this movie. Why focus the first few minutes of this review on the premise? Spend 1 minute talking about it and get stuck into the writing, the characters, the narrative etc.
"you hear the song with different ears" - funny, I've always thought exactly that about Linklater's Dazed & Confused. when Alice Cooper - School's Out plays it somehow sounds great even though I've never liked that song (and still don't).
Good movie, not a great one. Leaves a bit to be desired outside of Arquette and Hawke.
You don’t watch boyhood. You live boyhood.
I can't wait for this film!!! 100% on Rotten Tomatoes!!!
This is another one of those films that people are gonna look back on in 5 years, and it's not gonna be the gleaming sugarcoated masterpiece that it's being hailed as right now.
Checking in 6 years later, still love this film
Coldplay's pretty good Mark. Even if you're not a fan, they are by no means "cringe worthy."
they bad
Whatever.
Paradise instrumental is good and mabye midnight everything else is rubbish
thomassu1697 why?
***** fucking why.
i have mixed feelings about boy hood. two hours in I was thinking: ok wheres this going? but by the end i just felt content with he film and as if it were a natural finish to a great story almost expecting some cleche twist at the end.
Coldplay, the "harbingers of cringe" i like Mark Kermode even more now.
I watch this film this week and as much as I love Richard films, this could have been done without wasting 12 years in my opinion. The kids were great actors from young to teen. I think the reason why this film us gettin this much attention is the length it took to make and showing the age, time process of everyone. The plot is basic, nothing interesting happens as much as slacker. But I do agree with mark in the sense you really connect with the everyone and in the sense it feels real more then anything you'll watch this yr.
I would like to see this movie. I like Richard Linklater.
It had dreadful dialogue. The main character's monologue at the end made me vomit up my pelvis.
"That's hecause they're quite good Mark."
You're tilting at windmills, Simon. Just give up. The quiff on Mark's head prevents music with more than three chords from penetrating his head. It's simply the way of things. Perhaps he'll one day accept that Elvis is dead, but until then, take comfort in th fact that you have better taste in music ;).
@Kevin L Lol, I know. I just tired of Mark’s U2 bashing, what can I say ;-)?
This movie thinks it deserves everything thrown at it because it took 12 years to make. Before Sunrise is still his best movie, sooooooooo... yeah.
Hello everyone! I'm Mark kermode, today we're going to review Boyhood, right lets get too it! Boyhood is a film about growing up, up in the higher atmosphere oxygen levels degrease with altitude and air temperatures drop drastically. The film stars Ethan Hawke's are a predatory species of bird, there are many varieties of Hawks, Patricia Arquette is a leading expert on hawke's, she says, the males often leave the nest leaving mother to raise the children on her own, in this case particular case though, mother Hawke moved around a lot, she was disturbed by the rumbling sound of the coal train passing every day's pass so quickly, before you know it the children are all grown up. The film is amazing in its ability to comprehend what the hell i'm talking about, I give this film an EH, I think most would agree eh!?......I thought so!
OMG it's not the fall of the Berlin Wall for Christ sakes! Tell us if you like the movie or not and why, please don't ramble on at a thousand words s minute, you must have 4 tongues! I got dizzy after a few min.
"Coldplay to me are like the harbinger of cringe" 😂
This film was like watching a typical American drama/comedy TV series. Predictable and uninspired. I think I zoned out through most of it. I certainly don't remember any of it now.
I tried to watch this film but found it unutterably boring. Interesting concept, but no thanks.
Childish
"Boyhood" wasn't very good. It was only a spectacle of what it is like to shoot a movie over 12 years and to watch the actors actually age. There was nothing else there, and there was no substance. The plot was extremely thin and the spectacle of watching the kids age was null and void because the kid didn't even look the same from one time period to the next. He looked like a different actor, aside from being totally unlikable and completely unexpressive. The film swung and missed if you ask me. Linklater's films are vaguely interesting concepts, but I feel they are disastrous and not even worth making in the actual execution. You're going down the wrong track if Ethan Hawke is your muse. Sorry, bro.
Good film but too long.
emperors new clothes - it’s a poor film
Disappointing. What's all the fuss about? The film is boring, inconsequential and way overlong. It's supposed to be a drama right? It's not a documentary so why does it feel like one?
For goodness sake Linklater, at least write some drama or comedy or tragedy or something. The film just feels like real life. And how exciting is that!
There are no 'moments' in this film at all. Mason is just not very interesting. What he does is not very interesting. Nothing happens to him. So it was filmed over 12 years (and felt nearly as long watching it). Whoop De Doo! Where's the catharsis?
I liked the soundtrack though.