Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Brilliant and touching

If you like to be scared, if you like to laugh, and if you like to learn a thing or two at the movies, this absolutely cannot be missed.

Blistering performances.

An Amazon reviewer commented that this film has an essence of "Stand By Me" about it, and that was all it took to convince me to give it a try - without even reading any more of their review.They weren't wrong. Almost the first shot of the film features a boy who closely resembles River Phoenix in "Stand By Me", including the same haircut and similar white t-shirt. And the mood and flavour of the film continues to be similar throughout, with additional overtones of "The Client", "The Cure", and even elements of Stephen King's "IT" (the original, not the remake). Because, of course, this is just one in a long and distinguished line of coming-of-age dramas, mostly featuring boys aged between 11 and 14, mostly in bucolic rural settings, and mostly unsupervised, that can trace their origins back to Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer. It is a genre that is nearly always richly evocative, and speaks to a nostalgic place, particularly to be found in the male soul, that yearns for the freedom and adventure of ones' youth - either fondly remembered, or wishfully imagined.These specific stories, which are quintessentially American, have their cousins in every other culture around the world - wherever young boys live and play and explore the world around them in search of adventure and independence. As a Brit, my version of "Huckleberry Finn" was "Swallows and Amazons" which reflected my own culture's youthful adventures of a bygone age, and remains powerfully resonant and evocative to me even in middle age. I was lucky enough to actually have a childhood like that, so I can enjoy real memories as well as imagination.But I also grew up with the American mythology too, and when "Stand By Me" first hit the screens, it touched that special place in the centre of my soul that will forever be a 12 year-old boy. I'm particularly susceptible to such stories.Mud is one such story, and it is beautifully realised. The screenplay is honest, raw, and unflinching. It is also pleasingly male-centric, with not a single trace of post-feminist political correctness. Every featured female character is a representation of the various ways that women can hurt and abuse men, and every featured male character has been hurt or abused by a female in one way or another. Now, although this may not seem realistic or fair, it is purely because the film is entirely presented from a male perspective - which is both refreshing and deeply satisfying if, like me, you are a male who has grown up in a world where anyone who owns a penis is automatically fair game.Personally, I've had enough of watching "empowered" women "heroically" kicking men's asses in movies. And I've had enough of watching men always being the abuser. In this film, the women are all abusive in one way or another, but they are also depicted realistically and with more even-handedness than male characters would have been if their roles had been reversed. The dialogue is also intelligently written, and the two central characters - boys in their early teens - are written and depicted honestly and with great respect. There is no dumbing-down here.The cinematography is attractive and straightforward, perfectly capturing the beauty of the great outdoors without falling into any of the usual clichés. There are no smoke-filled woods with sun rays piercing through. There are no arty close-ups of barbed wire with out-of-focus red barns in the background. There are no shots of people silhouetted against the sunset. (At least, if there were, I wasn't distracted by them).Similarly, the music doesn't draw attention to itself, the editing is equally unobtrusive, and the director wisely keeps his actors from chewing-up any scenery. In short, it is good straightforward storytelling, rather than "art". And much as I enjoy "art", with a movie of this nature the story must come first.And finally, with regard to the cast, I can only say that they all did a great job. The supporting cast, most of whom bring a lot of Hollywood "baggage" with them, are sensibly kept in the background, with the exception of McConaughey who turns in a solid (and possibly quite smelly) performance.But the absolute stars of this film are the two boys, both of whom would be equally good in any of the coming-of-age movies that have ever been made. Their acting is natural, confident, nuanced, and filled with - my favourite word - verisimilitude. And the central performance from Tye Sheridan is nothing short of breath-taking. As I was watching, I was thinking "this kid is going to be a huge star". I had never heard of him before. But having since looked him up, I can see that he's already well on the way to my prediction, with an impressive body of work under his belt. I was reminded of both River Phoenix in "Stand By Me" and Brad Renfro in "The Client". And that is a little bit unsettling, based on how both of their young lives were tragically ended. So I hope that Tye Sheridan achieves the success that he so totally deserves, but without falling into the same traps.Overall, "Mud" is a strong addition to a favourite genre of mine. Not the best (hence not 10 stars) but a thoroughly well-made film.

RELEASED IN 2012-2013 and written & directed by Jeff Nichols, "Mud" is a southern gothic crime drama taking place in Arkansas along the Mississippi River where two boys discover a fugitive named Mud (Matthew McConaughey) hiding out on an island and decide to help him evade the authorities & vigilantes that are on his trail in hope of reuniting him with his true love, Juniper (Reese Witherspoon). This is a film about authentic Southern people and the code by which they live. Urbanized types usually refer to them as "rednecks." While some of them may be "white trash," most of them are not. They're independent of the government, hardworking and respectful citizens, not to mention rooted in Christian morality, although not necessarily Christians. The film respects the intelligence of the viewer, leaving it to him/her to read between the lines. It's similar to "Joe," which was released a year later, but not as abrasively pessimistic and is overall better. In tone, it's akin to "Undertow" (2004) and "Snow Angels" (2007). If you appreciate those flicks, you'll like "Mud." There are a lot of gems to mine: Ellis (Tye Sheridan) mirrors Mud as an adolescent. Will he make the same mistakes that brought Mud to his current state? The movie's basically a rumination on the potential in both masculinity and femininity for good or bad, but the focus is more on the toxicity of some women, which is refreshing, as Hollywood tends to paint men as evil incarnate or thoroughly inept while women are usually sterling examples of eminent nobility (Why Sure!). The film also reveals the idealization of love and how "love is blind." Just because you truly love someone in a romantic sense doesn't mean s/he is good for you and that you should develop & maintain a relationship. I was never a fan of Witherspoon, but didn't dislike her either. In any case, she's quite good as the seemingly innocent-yet-toxic love interest. Bonnie Sturdivant is excellent as her teenage counterpart, May Pearl; they should've done more with her. THE MOVIE RUNS 2 hour 10 minutes and was shot in Arkansas (Crocketts Bluff, Eudora, Dumas and Stuttgart). ADDITIONAL CAST: Sam Shepard, Michael Shannon, Paul Sparks and Joe Don Baker. GRADE: B/B+

I've been binge watching all of Reese Wither spoons movies and only watch the ones where she is one of the lead stars, so going through all of her movies i came across mud where she is one of the lead actress I was really excited also for the fact that Matthew McConaughey was in it also and he usually does great movies. So I decided to give this a watch 30 min in I go and say where is Reese the suppose girl friend of Mud and finally when she makes her appearance i was all excited but nothing happens you see her for like less then 2 min and then she only shows up 4 other times for under 2 minutes 2 throughout the film i mean come on but that's not the only reason i was kinda cheesed thee other reasons is no character development stupid story and didn't you mother teach you not to talk to strangers how slow dull and boring this movie is I had to speed it yup to be able to make it through the entire film It was that slow and nothing really special happens at the climax i just didn't care whether he lives or dies I'm just so glad this film is over and I can watch a better one

There's little doubt MUD is well made. We can start with the cast. Whether it's McConaughey doing such an excellent job with oddity title character Mud that it revived his flagging career to the, as of this writing, up and coming star Tye Sheridan, to etc. etc. Well, point is everyone here gives a wonderful performance.And thanks to Nichol's writing and careful direction, and each actor's performance, we care about all these characters, or at least relate to them. And the low key, believable, and morally grey scenario these characters are put in feels interesting and keeps your attention. Which is not to say there's not a cinematic flare to the story, but simply that it's lower key than today's glut of explosion filled blockbusters. More Jaws and less Avengers is the order of the day, with no fantastical elements to speak of.And therein we get to the crux of the problem. Which is not the scenario itself, of two boys meeting the strangely charismatic, but wanted man Mud and having to decide whether to help him or not. But that this scenario, entirely unlike Jaws, plays itself out to an entirely unsatisfying, and even a bit off tone, conclusion.And I mention Jaws specifically because, like this movie, it's a fairly low key movie with a bit of cinematic flare but otherwise without any particularly fantastical elements. But to demonstrate what this movie lacks I'll go ahead and spoil Jaws, wherein we build up this challenge, this mountain that is this shark. Oh sure it's one shark, but for the characters involved it is their personal mountain, and the ending battle between them and it feels like the ultimate culmination of the movie. They came to the mountain, they saw the mountain, the mountain was conquered, and we feel a sense of satisfaction and completion once it is.By comparison, Mud almost forgets that there is a mountain. It hardly concentrates at all on Mud's situation and what it means for the kids. Instead the movie satisfies itself with building the characters in their own right and having each little side story get a huge amount of limelight. Which sounds fine until you come to the end, and the proverbial mountain comes for our characters, and you forgot it was there. And so the mountain showing up feels odd, it doesn't feel built up much. It feels, in short, like a guest you realized you invited a week ago, but have forgot to prepare for and in fact haven't even thought about all week, and so when they show up the entire visit feels rather awkward and uncomfortable.And with that awkward, and uncomfortable guest showing up, the movie ends. Flat, straight out ends. The mountain, the shark, killed. The conflict is resolved, and the characters go their separate ways. Oh we like the characters, or at least relate to them, plenty. But we don't feel any particular satisfaction in the end of the story. Because though the main thread of the story is at an end we were never that invested in it to begin with.Which is why, while I enjoyed the film 95% of the time while I was watching it, I also completely forgot it existed until its director came up in movie news with his next, Midnight Special.