Boyhood

A film that defines growing up in the same way like, for instance, Eyes Wide Shut defines human sexuality. All the looks, the spoken and unspoken emotions, the relationships, the break-ups, the moves, the tears – this is the daily routine of most people in the world, and it's good that Linklater handled Boyhood the way he did. That is, 12 years in 150 minutes and with the same actors, this gives the whole a completely different charge that leaves a mark far beyond cinema. (2021-06-11)

To write and shoot a three-hour film about the elusive meaning of life is something that only a creator who has already created numerous perfect conversations about it can afford. And Richard Linklater proves that in his portrayal, it is not just adulthood, relationships, and definitive maturity that are incredible, but also a hundred and one feelings of the earliest self-awareness. Sometimes on a more intense string, sometimes on a less intense one, but always from a story that we have experienced, our neighbor on the bench or a friend who flew through our lives seemingly irreversibly influencing it and was never seen again. And it is precisely here, with positive and negative paternal figures, with an omnipresent mother who never says "I love you" yet still shows her feelings countless times, that a boy can grow into something more. Maybe even a man. Maybe just an ordinary dilettante. And maybe someone who wants to reach for a little bit of their own happiness while flying through life. (2014-07-19)

A movie that is unique and exceptional only because of the way it was shot. Everything shown in its more than 160-minute runtime is stale (and not only because we experienced it ourselves in adolescence), likewise with some parts of the story, which, without a strong message, clumsily passes by the viewer without leaving a single even slightly significant emotional trace. My hat is off to Linklater for taking on something like this in the first place, but Boyhood lacks so many essentials, starting with more interesting character development and ending with at least one surprising "life" twist, that I'm tempted to talk about a waste of potential and creative time. My thoughts seemed to be summed up at the end by a weeping Patricia Arquette with the words: I was expecting something more... 70% (2014-10-11)

A truly family movie. Mandatory for all kids, so they can see what unavoidably awaits them and that nobody has it easy with adults, the same way as no adults have it easy with kids. But also mandatory for all adults as a reminder that they were no different and that kids don’t have it easy with adults, in the same way that they don’t have it easy with them. Simply a twenty-year long study of one family “as time goes by"; no big dramas, nothing forced. Quite the opposite: central to it is work with the atmosphere of down-to-earth everydayness without any stress on drama, without coming across too unremarkable, boring or routine at any point during the almost three hours that the movie runs. It’s about the joys and trials of a regular boy; nothing more, nothing less. But the truth is that the closing, high school phase is perhaps too ordinary, the same as due to the scope of the focus some themes/storylines remain loose ends and, yes, Mason didn’t have to be some a douche as an adolescent, but... But even so, I sincerely hope that, like he did with “Before This and Before That" Linklater will return to Mason’s fates strictly every twelve years. (2014-07-14)

This is a film I've always subconsciously wanted to see. Creative patience and the ability to capture in life exactly those fleeting moments that shape us further have produced quite possibly the most calculating film in history, but at the same time I can't imagine it could have been made one bit better. If I were a film theorist, I'd analyze it endlessly. At this point, I want to see it at least three more times. (2014-07-27)