The Mysteries of Pittsburgh (2009)
Critic Consensus: A listless interpretation of Michael Chabon's first novel, Mysteries of Pittsburgh features none of the source material's charm, but has coming-of-age film cliches in abundance.
The Mysteries of Pittsburgh Photos
Watch it now
People Who Like this movie also like
News & Interviews for The Mysteries of Pittsburgh
Critic Reviews for The Mysteries of Pittsburgh
Shoddy and never credible, The Mysteries of Pittsburgh is an ungainly coming-of-age drama based on a (hopefully much better) novel by Pulitzer Prize-winning author Michael Chabon.
The Mysteries of Pittsburgh seems to be missing an essential element of drama, of risk, underneath its glossy, golden sheen.
I can't imagine the novel's characters were this flat, formulaic and puzzling in their behavior.
The real mystery about The Mysteries of Pittsburgh is how writer-director Rawson Marshall Thurber could turn Michael Chabon's delightful debut novel into such a bore.
Audience Reviews for The Mysteries of Pittsburgh
In "The Mysteries of Pittsburgh," at first glance, Art(Jon Foster) might seem to be committing career suicide by having sex with his supervisor Phlox(Mena Suvari) all over their workplace. But then this is just a summer job for Art at the Book Barn while he considers his next move, so where's the harm? His father(Nick Nolte), a gangster of ill-repute who he has dinner with once a month in a swanky restaurant, has his next five moves planned which include passing his stock trading exam and working in Baltimore. That's where his career comes in. Where Jane(Sienna Miller) comes in is at a party, after which they go eat pie. After that, Jane's boyfriend Cleveland(Peter Sarsgaard) takes Art for a ride. "The Mysteries of Pittsburgh" is a disappointingly inert adaptation of Michael Chabon's novel(I don't remember that much about it except its ending and that I liked it). In its depiction of a transitional year of 1983, it is about a person caught between the respectability he dreads and the eccentric friends he loves. On the one hand, the movie keeps the central relationships intact, but also manages to lose a lot of the book's offbeat energy in its move to the screen which is best exemplified by the casting of non-entity Jon Foster in the lead. That's not to mention too much reliance on daddy issues and droning narration which does eventually disappear. The supporting cast is very, very good but even they cannot save a movie where there is no center.
It's A Home At the End of the World all over again - i.e., one of my most favorite books (which coincidentally also centres on, but is not limited to, a complicated love triangle) is simplified so much that not only are almost all sub-plots removed, but the main plot is so diluted that nothing much of any consequence seems to happen. Even though, in actuality, a lot does happen. Simply put, this is a mediocre adaptation of a superior novel. What elevates this slightly above A Home are some excellent performances. Peter Sarsgaard handles his ambisexual (my term) character with skill, and Jon Foster comes close to matching this, although his monotone delivery can be hard to follow. It's little wonder this failed to set the box-office on fire but it still remains a big disappointment, particularly since Michael Chabon's works lend themselves very well to adaptation (Wonder Boys is evidence of that).
I always have high expectations for movies involving or set in Pittsburgh because that's my hometown, but this one was highly disappointing. The storyline was weak, and it just seemed like there was no point to watching it. A waste of time...
The Mysteries of Pittsburgh Quotes
There are no approved quotes yet for this movie.