Gone Baby Gone (15)

Film

migrate.34184.jpg

Time Out rating:

<strong>Rating: </strong>3/5

User ratings:

<strong>Rating: </strong>4/5
Rate this  

Time Out says

Tue Jun 3 2008

With their tribal loyalties and unkillable grudges, the cops, hoods, and hard-eyed women of South Boston have become the stuff of Shakespearean tragedy at the movies in recent years. The neighbourhood is a hotbed of broad-vowelled agonistes in Eastwood’s ‘Mystic River’, Scorsese’s ‘The Departed’ and now ‘Gone Baby Gone’, the flawed but impressive directorial debut by Boston native Ben Affleck.

Like ‘Mystic River’, Affleck’s film is adapted from a novel of the same name by Dennis Lehane, it’s steeped in local colour and texture, and it hinges on a lost child, an anguished parent, and a grievous backstory that sort of explains all. (Due to superficial resemblances to the Madeleine McCann kidnapping case, ‘Gone Baby Gone’ was withdrawn from the London Film Festival last year and pushed back from its original December release date.)

When little Amanda McCready goes missing, hopes are dim. She’s from a neighbourhood where residents aren’t disposed to talk to the cops, and her junkie mother, Helene (Amy Ryan), has incurred the wrath of a drug kingpin. Those are reasons enough for Amanda’s devoted aunt and uncle (Titus Welliver and Amy Madigan) to hire a young boyfriend-girlfriend team of private investigators, Patrick Kenzie (Casey Affleck, Ben’s brother) and Angie Gennaro (Michelle Monaghan in an inert, thankless role), who then spend the requisite amount of time earning the trust of the cynical, squinty detective on the case (Ed Harris, naturally) and the heartbroken police captain (Morgan Freeman), who knows parental sorrow all too well.

The Oscar-nominated Ryan is fantastic, creating a character who’s at once fearsome and pathetic. Casey Affleck’s wry, soft-spoken poise is the movie’s backbone, and as Kenzie’s investigation twists and deepens, the character enters uncharted and hopelessly blurred moral territory, where sacred bloodlines seem to lose their resolution and doing the right thing starts to look all wrong (and vice versa). The rub, though, is that the film’s compelling ambiguities come to a head in a final, puzzle-solving final-reel development that is so mawkishly convoluted and screamingly absurd that it threatens to upend all the fine work that went before it.

32

Comments

Add +

Release details

Rated:

15

UK release:

Fri Jun 6 2008

Duration:

114 mins

Share your thoughts
  1. * mandatory fields

Comments & ratings

Rated as: 4/5 (24 ratings)
  • This is my final comment: it just occured to me that in 'Mystic River', which also takes place in the same or a very similar tough Boston neighbourhood and deals with an equally disturbing subject matter, there is ABSOLUTELY NOT any obsession of the characters about knowing who's a faggot or not. This is the very difference in the art of film making: Clint Eastwood is intelligent enough to focus on the subject matter, and not to pay any attention to the obnoxious gossip of some of the characters, a thing that Mr. Affleck constantly does with great pleasure in his piece of shit of a film, So mr. Aflleck should know one essential thing about film making: it is about focusing on a given subject matter, and not displaying his own obessions on screnn: they are fundamentally uninteresting: alas, he doesn't have that intelligence, and, anyway, he was bad as an actor already, so he should definitely avoid being a director!!!

    yduric Mon Mar 22 2010
    Rated as: 1/5
    Report
  • To Josh: Your response is very coherent, since you exposed all your arguments in defence of the film in a very detailed and accurate manner that makes perfect sense. As for me, i am still holding on to my second comment, but this is a very personal matter. What I want to say is that this confirms my belief that the way we judge films is always a very subjective thing, and that it is not always easy for the user to write a review, (or to modify it) in order to make it appear coherent and easily understandable to other users who may read it. Anyway, I thank you for writing a post that espresses a different view BY DISCUSSSING ELEMENTS OF THE FILM: This is the right way to behave, contrarily to other users who, instead of dicussing the fim, express fast judgemnts or even insults to other users!

    yduric Thu Jan 21 2010
    Report
  • To Yudric: Have you ever been to the U.S.? Or, I guess I should say Boston? In order to create a movie with believable and real characters, dialogue has to be real. To make a movie centered in Boston, about Boston characters, without using the word "faggot" in dialogue, is like making a movie about the effects of alcoholism where all the alcoholics drink apple juice. One of the points for the movie is to turn Boston into a character of its own (note how vital the neighborhood's attitude and identity is to the story). Without having realistic dialogue, how could the characters and the city possibly seem real or engaging? You say that you hate the use (or over-use, rather) of the word "faggot" in the film and "American's" view on gays, but does that mean that this movie is flawed? Absolutely not. That means that the characters portrayed in the movie are flawed, at least, to you. Because of their views and their language, you don't like the characters. Wouldn't that give the movie more value? After all, the film isn't a garbage documentary about how faggots are bad. And think of your first-response to the film: it was fantastic, emotional, and intelligent. Now that the crassness and realness of the characters has sunk in, to expose the characters as "bloody Americans", shouldn't that give the film more value? And as you said, the film is about the kidnapping of a little girl... and a Boston neighborhood's reaction to said kidnapping. The dialogue has EVERYTHING to do with the subject matter. If a film was made about, say, a murder and how it affected an English neigborhood, and it used dialogue that may be offensive, would the movie be bad? Probably not. However, if it were censored and all the actors had American accents, then yeah, it would be bad. Gone, Baby, Gone deserves Kudos for NOT censoring the way a REAL Boston-er would speak.

    Josh Wed Jan 20 2010
    Report
  • aMAZING MOVIE WITH A GREAT TWIST!

    Thomas Noctor Sun Jan 17 2010
    Rated as: 5/5
    Report
  • I loved it, granted there were times (only moments) when I couldn't understand what some characters said, but the ending was thought-provoking, It actually made me question what I would do in this situation which I think few films actually manage.

    claire Sat Jun 27 2009
    Rated as: 5/5
    Report
  • just watch the beginning and the end, the rest is uninteresting tubbish. disapointing

    denise reid Sat Apr 4 2009
    Rated as: 1/5
    Report
  • I was so disappointed at the end. This movie had such great potential, spoiled by an utterly ridiculous 'twist,' and a moral dilemma silly enough to literally make me laugh out loud. The movie's main issue is that it assumes neglected children are helplessly caught in their parents clutches. Uh - SOCIAL SERVICES, people.

    Sicily Sun Nov 2 2008
    Rated as: 2/5
    Report
  • Second viewing, second comment: I'm totally disowning the my first comment. I had actually completely forgotten that this piece of shit is overwhelmed by filthy homophobic dialog with the word 'faggot' occuring in about one out of two sentences uttered: this pretentious crap is supposed to deal with the abduction of a little girl, and not with the fact of knowing who is a 'faggot' in this movie. Im am definitely fed up with that 'fagotry' with which those bloody americans seem so obsessed. This obnoxious behaviour in their recent 'movie-making' makes me lose all interest in about one half of all their 'films'. So next time, couldn't they just give us a fucking break and deal with the supposed subject matter of the movie seriously for once instead of going off-focus in such an obnoxious manner? So I have a suggestion for Mr Afflleck: instead of naming his movie 'Gone Baby Gone' he should rename it 'Gone Faggie Gone'!!!

    yduric Sun Oct 26 2008
    Rated as: 1/5
    Report
  • This is an incredible film, fresh and real. Characters are rich and alive, the story is compelling, surprising, not at all predictable. I didn't want it to end. Hard for me to understand the low ratings here... with all the crap Hollywood turns out this movie is a clear stand-out. Critics love this movie and it's obvious why. A near-masterpiece.

    Bill Mon Oct 13 2008
    Rated as: 5/5
    Report
  • As usual, the Time Out Review is misleading , and potential viewers of the film should ignore the comments about the ending, which is one of most powerful I have seen in modern cinema. Giving this film only three stars is unfair, but this is often the case with Time Out reviewers who don't like the American film industry achieving aesthetic excellence and try to pretend that it is happening. What the film achieves is the delineation of a complex moral dilemma which raises challenging questions as to what constitutes a caring society, and how that society is to be policed. A brave, cutting-edge film which is a must-see.

    John Cooper Thu Sep 4 2008
    Rated as: 5/5
    Report
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  • Hotwise
  • Cool brands
  • Star