• Home
• About
• Archives
• Contact
• Links

Theoretics: Mystic River 

(Major Spoilers!). See the film before reading, even if you’ve seen it before. Lots of plot details and hypothetical notions discussed .

With the new Clint Eastwood directed film Million Dollar Baby hitting Australian cinemas next week (and up for a Best Picture Oscar nod), I thought I’d give some analysis of his 2003 film Mystic River.

To me, this is without a doubt one of the darkest mainstream films to be made within the Hollywood system in recent years that has gotten so much recognition (the Oscar nominations no doubt helped). And Eastwood as a director is so much better than Eastwood as an actor. He’s definitely improving as a director with every film he makes too (which is why I’m dead keen to see Million Dollar Baby as well as gaining Beth and Lyn’s rubber stamps of approval. Actually over our fantastic beer-fuelled discussion Friday night, we were briefly discussing Mystic River’s topical ending, an ending many people had problems with).

Mystic River, the title, always confused me upon the initial viewing. Was it as easy as saying that Mystic River was in actual fact a river in the area where the boys grew up? Or was it a metaphor for the darkness, the rage, the fear that embodied Jimmy (Sean Penn)? Remember Jimmy says “We bury our sins there, we wash them clear”. Maybe it wasn’t just Jimmy that wipes his sins clean either. Both Dave (Tim Robbins) and Sean (Kevin Bacon) have sins they want to cleanse as well (but more on that later). It troubled me quite a bit too that some people believed Jimmy wasn’t essentially a bad man. Confused, but not evil. A ‘man’s’ man. A man who killed Dave because he thought he murdered his daughter Katie. He’s even likable which makes it even harder to despise him. But let’s not forget that Jimmy killed Just Ray (not to be confused with his son Silent Ray, the young mute boy) years before and dumped him into the river. And where was Jimmy’s remorse for killing Dave? (who was innocent of Katie’s death). He didn’t seem all that upset in the parade scene towards the end of the film, giving that look to Sean as if to say “that’s how it is” (at least in Jimmy’s perspective). If anything it demonstrates that Jimmy isn’t a man who thinks about the consequences he causes. And that grating speech Jimmy’s wife (Laura Linney) gives about how much stronger they are than other people. That speech nearly made me vomit and ruin an otherwise great motion picture but perhaps it’s more a critique on society, the self-righteousness of some people. Jimmy, his wife, the Savages. They all possess evil characteristics, more so than any of the other main characters in the film. And this is made even clearer in the book (well from what I’ve been told).

Dave was a man tortured and sexually abused as a child whom we all assumed murdered Katie in the beginning. Dave is perhaps the most interesting and complex character in the entire film. A difficult role to play but Tim Robbins does exceedingly well. Dave’s messed up beyond the point of no return, a point where he doesn’t even understand his own rationales. Another point of discussion posed to me a while back was why didn’t Dave tell his wife the truth of what happened from the very beginning? Why didn’t he tell her that he killed the paedophile? This is something I had to think about for while and was explained to me in more depth from someone that had read the book. My initial thought was that Dave was fundamentally messed up mentally ever since the abduction. In the book it becomes more apparent that he had no father figure in his life and that his mother was crazy. Did he receive counselling as a child? In the film it doesn’t appear so (or perhaps the counselling didn’t help) and the book even brings to light the fact that Dave had sexual urges towards children himself. This is hinted at momentarily in the film when Jimmy confronts Dave at the Pier, Dave mumbling “I don’t know. Maybe I thought I might be turning into him (the paedophile)”, but the book explains it much better. So perhaps Dave didn\rquote t tell his wife the truth for fear of her leaving him and taking their son away due to his ambivalent sexual urges. But make no mistake that Dave was a victim who was to become the wolf that he kept referring to in his monologues.

Perhaps the least developed character in the film was Sean (Kevin Bacon). Again, in the book, the relationship with his wife is given a more thorough treatment. However I think Eastwood decided it was a subplot that didn’t serve the story he was trying to tell, so it got sidelined. I would have preferred it got cut out altogether or at least taken from another perspective, because it doesn\rquote t really add any importance to the overall story. However with that said, maybe it was illustrating that all the boys grew up with some sort of hindrance in their lives; Sean’s being unable to sustain a healthy relationship, the guilt he feels over it. Hrmmm’85I dunno. Maybe I’m reaching there but it’s a possibility.

And there-in lies the fundamental differences between the book and the film. Eastwood chose to leave many things open-ended, perhaps most notably Sean’s reaction to Jimmy’s confession of Dave’s murder. Remember in the movie during the parade, he points his finger at Jimmy in the shape of a gun and pulls the trigger. Are we to assume Sean will eventually charge Jimmy with the murder or is he content now that he has his wife and child back, and leave it be? In the film we can only hypothesize but the book finds a resolution. I remember one person telling me that Jimmy’s sins will come back to haunt him one day, that being through Dave’s son and a potential relationship with Jimmy’s daughter (also of similar age) in years to follow. If you think about it, that is a truly haunting possibility.