Discussion for article #226733
I saw Boyhood twice. The first time I came away mostly focused on Mason, Jr. The second time, however, I became much more aware of the development of father and mother, and was particularly moved by Ethan Hawke’s nuanced portrayal of Mason, Sr.
Yes, he became more responsible, more settled down, as well as loving to those around him. But the scene that got to me was in the music club in Austin where his friend Jimmy was warming up for a gig. You realize what Mason, Sr. had to give up to become that responsible adult, and you realize that Mason, Jr. has come to a crossroads himself, leaving behind his girlfriend, moving to another part of Texas, choosing to pursue his photography, at least for now.
Mason, Sr. exudes a complex mix of satisfaction and sadness – an awareness of who he has become and choices made. He’s a better man, for sure, but it comes at a cost.
3 Likes
I’ve just seen it once, but I’ll probably see it again, as it was masterfully done. The movie prompted me to reflect on my own Mason Sr-esque extended adolescence, as well as the my relationship to my 14 year old son, and men’s often prickly and prickish interactions with adolescent boys. I’m gonna try to cut teenage boys some more slack 'cos being one ain’t always easy, and that’s not a bad take-away from a movie.
Now if someone would only come out with a “Girlhood” to help me with my 12 year old daughter. 
2 Likes
That was a good review. For me, the scenes with Ethan Hawke were generally the strongest in the movie–the only times I felt truly engaged with it. I agree that the evolution of Hawke’s character was an important aspect of the film and that this, in general, was well portrayed. Nonetheless I did not buy his relationship with the Christian woman and her cartoonish parents. That character would not have gone in that direction and, if he did, I would view it as a mistake on his part. This seemed to me just an exaggerated attempt on Linklater’s part to capture the notion of settling down, making compromises and so forth. And his having the cliched minivan seemed, well, cliched. Why did he need a minivan anyway? He had one baby, not a whole brood to shuttle around.
And, not to be a wet blanket, but I have to say that I was a bit disappointed by the film as a whole. I am a big Linklater fan, or at least I thought I was. And it’s not that it wasn’t a good movie, but I was led to believe it was going to be a masterpiece and it wasn’t. While I was expecting to have to be carried from the theater overcome with emotion, all in all I just didn’t find it that moving. Perhaps my expectations were too high. But the cliches! The minivan was one. And that ending about “having the moments seize you” and “it just being one moment after another.” Argh! Okay, that’s the kind of thing that adolescents say, along with shouting into the dusk at Big Bend. But those statements and types of actions also have a strong element of self-consciousness to them; they are cringe-worthy when you have to watch them. My wife groaned out loud when those lines were spoken, Was Linklater attempting to capture that dynamic? Maybe, but that doesn’t seem to be any of the reviewers’ reactions. No, it is seen as profound statement. One called it “Zen”! (clearly any mention of being in the moment is the essence of Zen (sarcasm)). I think we were supposed to be moved by the passion of it all and I wasn’t.
I apologize to anyone who loved the movie for having to read this; I know it can be irritating to hear something you liked being criticized. But to me this basic idea that when we are young we’re on fire and idealistic, awash in a series of incredible moments and then growing up means compromising and becoming conventional and getting a mini-van seems hackneyed and superficial.
I probably shouldn’t be reading spoilers since I haven’t seen this movie and am looking forward to it. That being said, this article had some spoilers and Matthew’s comments validate what was going through my head as I was reading it. If this is how Hawke’s character “transforms”, it’s a bit too cliche. You don’t have to buy a lame minivan, become religious, and give up your dreams to be a responsible adult.
In any case, I still want to see the movie and judge for myself. 
Yes, Seth, you should see the movie. Please don’t let me spoil it for you, though if you question that conception of “transformation,” you may end up having some of the same reactions I did. For the record, though, Mason’s father does not actually become religious himself, so at least that was not advanced as part of maturity. (And, incidentally, I am not at all opposed to religion myself, at least in some of its expressions. But the idea that Hawke’s character would end up with someone who was, apparently, a kind of right-wing fundamentalist seemed highly unlikely.)