The last five minutes of this movie make this old man cry ever time. Losing a child because of the child's struggles or self-destructive behavior is a pain no parent should endure. Reverend Mclean's wisdom, "but we can still love them. We can love completely without complete understanding," is the greatest of wisdom for all of us. Love thy neighbor as theself.
Look at the movies that were playing at the same time: Glengarry Glen Ross, Of Mice and Men, Last of the Mohicans and A River Runs Through It. There hasn't been a line-up of good movies like that in twenty years.
I know I'm in the minority and thats fine but I hated a river runs through it and glengarry glen ross. Of Mice and Men was fairly decent. Never seen last of the mohawks.
The scenery captured in this elegant film just enhanced Mr. Redford’s reading of Maclean’s poetic words. A moving experience not forgotten all these years later. A film beautiful on many levels.
It is a great movie about the meaning of family and love... The scene near the end where the father is giving a sermon and we know he is thinking of his son who died causes me to lose it every time.... 😭
One of my top 10 films of all-time! The performances are all outstanding. The cinematography is incredible. If you haven't seen this film do your self a favor!
"It is those we live with who elude us. But we can still love them. We can love completely. Without complete understanding." This is my favorite movie. How do you help a loved one that is self-destructive and in need? That's what the movie is about.
Lynn Turman the quote is about loving that certain loved one through and through regardless. Even if you do not understand what they do the things that they do
Nice to see them agree on a film. Yes, this film and story is fantastic, A great novella by Norman Maclean. I wish they would make more movies like this one instead of the repetitive mindless summer action films filled with violence and stupidity.
This has been on my Netflix watch list for some time. Seeing that it was leaving soon I decided to watch it and was really glad I did. It’s a great movie.
Not about the DAMN fly fishing. Yes I read the book, several times. The center is focused on God, nature, excelling, relationships that all typified by a 10-2 motion. The father's faith predates the boys, the father's faith shows through the death, the father's faith strengthens the mother, the father's faith commands the last sermon scene. At the end, Norman is fly fishing, but thinking of thoughts millions of years old, melding his rearing, his faith, his education, his experience, his soon passing. As we all do.
My cousin let me borrow this and I loved it! I was tired when I saw it but I managed to stay awake 99% of the time because I was so riveted! I was able to keep the DVD and I saw it again-it's that great! We both agree that it's one of our favorite movies! Sorry about the "shouting" but this movie is worth hyping about! Roger gave it 3.5/4 stars, I give it a perfect 4!
I am always amazed at how even a video about something as wonderful as this film can bring the most ill-tempered, cynical, foul-mouthed cretins out of the wood work to sling mud at everyone else.
New to your channel. We just started a channel as well. Mainly travel,outdoors,tractor's. Have a great day enjoyed your video! I just did a tribute to the river runs through it. Thanks for sharing this video on the movie. Its truly an American classic!
The whole movie was all heartfelt, especially when he caught the huge fish, making his day and BAM he was beaten to death. End of movie. Got me fucked up.
Maybe he felt the film medium couldn't do it justice. Redford proved that it could. Both the book and movie are real classics. However, another truly great novel of fly-fishing, The River Why, a knockout book, was made into a mediocre film. Maybe even a poor film at that. The book has way too much internal dialogue to translate well to film.
You cannot separate the spiritual dimention from the fishing or really any other part in this wonderful film. All their lives are woven with belief. But sadly Paul was drawn away and chose not to live in the way. . A choice all men have.
He was probably deemed too young. It was filmed in the summer of 1991. Phoenix turned 21 in late August. On the other hand, Craig Sheffer was 31 and Pitt was 27. I'm guessing Phoenix was vying for 'Paul,' who is in his early thirties by the end.
You don't have to be a hardcore Christian to understand anything. You do have to have a brain however. Did you not know it's based on a autobiography?I didn't find the fact that the father was a preacher to even be a big part of the story really. Or it to be overly religious in anyway. You have to be very oversensitive and really intolerant to feel that way. I found the movie to be a man telling a story about his family. Not hard to understand really at all and certainly not preachy in anyway.
Just got through watching this movie. First time i couldn't make it. It's worth watching. But the Emily Lloyd character is really just a token love interest. Nothing in the film shows or tells us anything about her. What is it that makes her so charming? We never know.
That's a pretty ridiculous opinion. Based on very little at best and certainly over sensitive. Deceitful? How? I would love to hear why you choose that strong of a word to describe a character. Self indulged?.... Maybe at times but your comment is considerably more self indulged not to mention your apparent need to make sure your sophomoric editorials are heard and the even bigger delusion that they are somehow important, right or need to be shared. Absolute stupidity
I didnt enjoy this movie much, with the exception of the setting, there wasnt much story there and absolutely no character arc for anybody…I dont get this movie.
This movie is a lot darker than these two let on. And Redford does not do a good job of splicing the almost "Our Town" type of theme of the movie to how the movie ends. The character Paul, the reporter, is deeply flawed (in the film, not the script) and comes to not so much tragic but ignominious, even trashy end. You can almost here Tom Waits singing in the background, "Small change got rained on with his own 0.38....". It is almost laughable.
I can't recommend this picture a truly great waste of talent. Just didn't quite do it for me. And a great film that got mixed reviews Legend of the Fall.
Something irked me about this review. I think it is watching these two liberals praise this film for all the right reasons and yet consciously omit the fact that Christianity, more specifically protestant Christianity, is the guiding theme to both the film and novel. They mention that the father is a minister, but that is it. How do you talk about A River Runs Through It and not mention the religion of the family? The Ivy League Catholic and Jew found a way.
+DaleRobby rear No, sorry. Both you (and the reviewers) get it wrong. They praise the movie for all the WRONG reasons, and this movie (and McLean's short story) are about flyfishing. You CANNOT substitute any activity (as these urban NON-outdoorsmen try to do) for flyfishing. Flyfishing is the ballet of fishing where rhythm, beauty, time, & beat all are coordinated to the rhythms of the river. This movie is not about religion in the church, it is about religion OUTSIDE the church, and that is flyfishing. That's why the worse sin imaginable is bait-fishing, which is what one of the buffoons in the movie actually tries to do! Scottish Presbyterianism plays a very small role in the movie, but even smaller in the book (short story), and is a foil for flyfishing....which is where the prime "sinner" in the family (named Paul) tries to find redemption.
+DaleRobby rear Not really, not in the formal institutional sense. Let me give you one example: in the movie, the narrator (Norman/Redford) attributes to his dad the famous quote "Methodists were Baptists who could read." That is NOT in the short story. In email exchanges with Joel Snyder (who at the time was a prof at the U of Chic) he told me that that quote found its way into the movie when a bunch of them sat around the table (including his father-in-law Norman) and talked about his father. It was agreed that, although they could not recall him saying it, it was something "he could have said." The sort of religion in the story is the same as that in William O. Douglas' Of Men and Mountains, a freer, outdoors is my cathedral type of religion. I hope that answers your question. You are too quick to see everything in the same, tired old "liberals are out to get me" routine. The story (and the film) are about the idea that non-traditional religion can take many forms, esp. in the west. In this case, it is flyfishing.
Michael McKenzie I don't know how in the hell a quote NOT found in the novella (not short story), is an example of how religion is not one of its themes. Especially one that is Methodist taking a cheap shot at Baptist. That is nuts. It has nothing to do with our argument and wasn't even in the book. You are a leftist who sees organized religion as bad, but you enjoy the movie, so you have separated to the two in your mind. It is what your type do. I love the novella, and don't think anyone is out to get me. Don't comment back unless you have some evidence that Protestantism is not a theme in A River Runs Through It. I don't expect to hear back from you.
+DaleRobby rear You're in WAY over your head and, frankly, you don't know what you're talking about. The quote was attributed to a PRESBYTERIAN, and making the very accurate point that many Baptists--esp. back then--did not put much of a premium on education, and that Methodists weren't much better. So it was not "Methodist taking a cheap shot at Baptist" (lol). I can tell from your post that education is not high on your list of priorities, so I won't waste much time with you. But your bias and prejudice (as well as your inability to write a coherent sentence) tell me that you look for "leftists" everywhere. My colleagues would laugh uproariously to hear me being called that! You just don't know how to read a book properly, that's all. Your problem is that you SHIFTED your argument when I refuted your initial try when you said that "Protestantism is the guiding theme of the book and movie." That, as my narrative illustrates, is false. It is not. BUT THEN, you change your tune to claim only that "Protestantism is a theme" in the movie. Well yeah, it is "a" theme, but it is a minor one when compared to fly-fishing. So I have no problem with calling religion a minor trope in the movie/story. But that's it. This is a coming of age story about a time long gone, about alienation, and about family. All of those are "themes." But they are all collected, compared, and analyzed in regards to fishing, in particular fly-fishing. THAT is the dominant theme in both the story and the movie, the one consistent thread that holds both together.
I did say it was only my opinion. I dislike films with special effects and superheroes I very much like films about relationships and real people, just not his !
Lynn Turman I think it's interesting that your name is "Lynn Turman" because there is actually a black actor named "Glynn Turman". Have you ever heard of him? He was in the movie Gremlins and he was in Out Of Bounds which starred Anthony Michael Hall. His name is just like yours except it starts with a "G". You should Google Glynn Turman and read about him if you don't already know who he is. ~Dutch
+michael berry Then, read the novella from which the movie was taken, which is about relationships and real people, btw, and maybe you will gain newfound appreciation. :-)