criterionforum.org

If Mud were competing at Cannes this year instead of last year, it might be the favorite for the Palme. That's not because I think it's some sort of modern masterpiece, but because of how much I think it would appeal to this year's jury chairman. This boys' adventure on The Mighty Mississip' certainly evokes Twain, but its sensitive young men seeking father figures would be right at home in the best work of Spielberg too.

This film is sure to be hailed as yet another sign of The Second Coming of Matthew McConaughey (and he's great again), but it was young Tye Sheridan who knocked my socks off. He was a pretty amazing presence in Tree of Life, and is given even more to do here as our hero, Ellis. Nichols also discovered a great local kid to cast as Ellis' pal, Neckbone. Ellis and Neck interact with each other like real rural 14-year-olds. They're just as a authentic as the Arkansas locale. Mud evokes a sense of place in much the same way Malick does in To the Wonder (thanks in part to some great cinematography by Adam Stone).

Mud isn't perfect. The action-packed climax doesn't quite jibe tonally with the rest of the film, and I wish the ending was a bit more ambiguous. I could also certainly understand some accusations of misogyny being leveled at the film's use of a trio of heart-stomping women (including a very underused Reese Witherspoon).

Flaws aside, this is the most fun I've had at a cinema so far this year. It's confirmation of Jeff Nichols as a significant talent with more than one film-making gear.

I agree with Jeff. I hesitate to say this because I think it's overused, but darn it if Mud isn't exactly the sort of character-driven auteur film that defined American cinema in the 1970s. It's a coming-of-age film that doesn't pander or talk down to its characters or its audience, balancing the relative innocence of the leads against an honest portrayal of the world they are growing into.

Mud has all the earnestness of the best parts of Spielberg's kids films without the sappiness or the overweening visual/aural romanticism. I've heard the director tentatively sketch this project's tonal ballpark as "Mark Twain by way of Peckinpah." That seems about right to me. If you consider that he's talking about mixing Twain's timeless insight into American boyhood with Peckinpah's deep understanding of American maleness (and violence), while maintaining the sense of humor and humanity that are central to the achievement of their oeuvres. The obvious Twain touchstone is Huck Finn, but with Peckinpah I'm harder pressed to cite one specific work. It's more about the craggy Westerners in the margins of all his films, like the guy and his family on the raft floating down the river in Pat Garrett & Billy the Kid.

The boy who plays the lead, Ellis, is great. Though, Neckbone, his wisecracking deadpan companion with the awesome nickname, gets all the best lines ("Hey hard-on, let's go!" or "That's his 'doing it' song.") It's always good to see Michael Shannon and especially nice to see him in a largely comedic supporting role. Ray McKinnon has his best role since Deadwood. Sam Shepard is also put to the best use he's been in a while, lending the whole film instant street cred with the weight of his authenticity. Only Reese Witherspoon seems a bit out of place to me, though part of that may be the writing of her role. I guess I just expected someone a little less familiar, more ethereal and evasive (as she's built up to be stunning and mysterious before we meet her).

I'm not even sure I have a problem with the violent climax.

Spoiler

It viscerally shocked me the way I imagine it's supposed to feel to some of the characters caught in the middle of it. It's certainly of a piece with the mythic/Biblical violence in all of Nichols' films. (How about when the bounty hunters take a knee, join hands and pray "for the death of the man who killed my son"?) But it's even more important thematically in this one. As it's a literal manifestation of the end of Ellis' childhood innocence and an exteriorization of the emotionally violent dissolution of life in his family home.

If there's a criticism I have of the ending it's that it resolves every last narrative thread a little too neatly. Still, Nichols' direction is so skillful that it mostly works. Just when you're thinking he's gone too far, he wins you back with his handling of some little touch, like, say, the very last shot/moment of the entire film, a "new beginning" beat that so many others would have ruined.

Likewise, I think giving the film's female characters more screentime or making them more well-rounded (whatever that means) doesn't make much sense, as this film isn't just from the point of view of its boys/men, but deeply about the mindset and limitations that flow from such a perspective.

Nichols is three for three as far as I'm concerned. (When was the last time an emerging American Independent filmmaker had a track record like that?) Each successive film of his has, in some way, been more ambitious than the last. And while he's clearly obsessed with telling stories about what it means to be a man in rural America, they are all so different from one another. Mud has a larger cast, more locations and practical effects, but the real challenge here is balancing and integrating the range of tones and emotions in the storytelling. A lesser director (or, as Jeff points out above, perhaps a more acclaimed one) might have erred too much in one direction.

warren oates wrote: Mud has all the earnestness of the best parts of Spielberg's kids films without the sappiness or the overweening visual/aural romanticism. I've heard the director tentatively sketch this project's tonal ballpark as "Mark Twain by way Peckinpah." That seems about right to me. If you consider that he's talking about mixing Twain's timeless insight into American boyhood with Peckinpah's deep understanding of American maleness (and violence), while maintaining the sense of humor and humanity that are central to the achievement of their oeuvres. The obvious Twain touchstone is Huck Finn, but with Peckinpah I'm harder pressed to cite one specific work. It's more about the craggy Westerners in the margins of all his films, like the guy on the raft floating down the river in Pat Garrett & Billy the Kid.

If I were playing this game, I guess the Peckinpah title I would be most reminded of would be Junior Bonner. But this is a much better film. I particularly liked the authentic dialog (young people calling their elders "sir" or "ma'am", for example) and the locations. I also liked the fact that the story was as much about the adults as about the kids. The parents are real characters, not caricatures. Even the bad guys are real human beings for a change--when Joe Don Baker did his final scene I wanted to stand and salute. Authenticity is everywhere in this picture. A remarkable achievement.

Disappointed there isn't more discussion on this film. I remember the back and forth on Nichols' last film Take Shelter regarding the ending. I think Mud exceeds that film in just about every way. As has been pointed out, McConaughey is of course great but it's definitely Tye Sheridan's movie. Probably the best child performance since Portman in Leon.

I've seen some critics refer to it as a fairy tale. Which I don't think is good writing as a movie critic, because calling it a fairy tale implies that it will have a happy ending, so right there you've already spoiled the movie. I also think calling something a fairy tale implies a level of supernatural or heightened disbelief, whereas this was grounded in complete reality -- ala David Gordon Green pre-Danny McBride.

I like the idea of the Twain meets Peckinpah tone (though I suppose even the Peckinpah mention is also perhaps a spoiler of sorts). If I was going to compare it to something I would immediately go to Stand By Me. Not so much because of the similarities of teenage boys in the woods but because of the respect that was given to the child actors. I don't want to say they were allowed to act like adults, they just acted authentically. I don't really like the Spielberg comparison because there's always something artificial about the way children act in Spielberg's movies.

Great movie. I hope there's more discussion on it. I'd love to hear more.

Just saw it and I'm less enamoured of it than you guys. It starts off very well and evocatively, but its rather warmed-over thriller genre leanings derailed it for me quite a bit in the second half, specifically the Witherspoon and revenge-seeking family subplots (though it's always a pleasure to see Joe Don Baker onscreen), and the climactic shootout was somewhat hackneyed.

Spoiler

Thanks heavens there was a retired sharpshooter living across the river!

That said, I certainly can't fault any of the performances, and as warren oates said above, Ray McKinnon has his best role in a long time which is great to see. Had just hoped for more from the director of Take Shelter, which I admired a great deal.

JamesF wrote:

Spoiler

Thanks heavens there was a retired sharpshooter living across the river!

Come on, now. This detail and this character are both so carefully set up so much earlier that this is hardly plot manipulation or some kind of deus ex Shepard.

I think you're right to point out Witherspoon as a problem area, though I'd cite different reasons. For me the part is simply miscast. I'd much prefer someone a little more anonymous and mysterious. As an actress, she's just too well-known a quantity to surprise us in the way her character should. Also perhaps not ethereally, untouchably beautiful enough in the way she's idealized by Mud beforehand.

As for the family revenge stuff, Nichols is pretty much obsessed with this theme vis-a-vis the South. And for me it produces one of the film's most surprising and indelible moments, where all the bounty hunters take a knee and pray. Have you seen Shotgun Stories?

He's not even much of a deux ex either considering how little his involvement ultimately helps.

Spoiler

I think that that largely would have happened with or without his help because of who Mud was in the moment and that his presence there like in much of the movie is one for thematic ends rather than anything particular to the story.

The movie does come across like if you asked Shepard to make a The Sandlot type film. Hope that it eventually becomes a minor cult favorite for kids. Also I have to say this is my favorite Nichols yet pretty exclusively because it evokes my south growing up so much verus the other sorts of south present in his previous two.

warren oates wrote:Also perhaps not ethereally, untouchably beautiful enough in the way she's idealized by Mud beforehand.

I don't really see this as a problem - I don't think it's necessary to see her as "ethereally, untouchably beautiful" myself, just to see her as someone Mud himself would think that about. And why wouldn't I believe that? Just how many women more beautiful than Reese Witherspoon are we to think that Mud comes across on a daily basis?

In fact, if you have trouble believing that, I would suggest that the casting problem might actually be with McConaughey. He does a fine job, to be sure, but I'm just not sure that I can quite believe him as a sad-sack puppy dog loser type. I've known more than a few guys who are in one-sided relationships like Mud's and nonetheless can't help themselves from pining after the girl, and I can't think of any of those guys who were all-world alpha-dog types like McConaughey. He just doesn't seem to possess the kind of submissiveness needed to expose one's self to the kind of repeated heartache that Mud does.

I feel like Nichols maybe realized this on some level, which is why we get Mud's fake crooked teeth, as if it was necessary to deglamorize McConaughey to make him more believable in the role. But still it doesn't quite work for me.

Still, I liked the movie for the most part. It's a step down for me from Nichols's first two films, but there's a lot of good stuff here, and I'd probably like it more if I didn't have those two films to compare it to. And as has been said here, it was good to see Joe Don Baker again - I honestly thought he had died a while back.

I think the stuff with Mud shouldn't be taken on a literal level like that and it seems to be more a comment on childhood anxiety and the like. Admittedly that poses interesting questions for when the reflection finally intrudes on the real world, but I don't think anything from the Mud storyline should be treated as something other than a metaphor. That's a real sketchy way to say maybe McConaughey looking so good would be a problem if he was the father or some similar character, but Mud almost seems like an act of wish fulfillment for the boy so would replicate his sensitivities and what he thinks a hero should be like. With the introduction of Witherspoon as a flesh and blood person that begins a Blue Velvet style rot which finally brings to a close that chapter of childhood.