The Mysteries of Pittsburgh

Name: The Mysteries of Pittsburgh
Genre: Adventure, Drama, Comedy
Released: April 10, 2009
Duration: 95 min
Rating: 38
Cast: Jon Foster, Peter Sarsgaard, Sienna Miller

2009

METASCORE

Generally unfavorable reviews based on 15 Critic Reviews

See All

USER SCORE

Mixed or average reviews based on 11 Ratings

See All

5.3

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

5.3	Your Score
5.3	User Score Mixed or average reviews based on 11 Ratings

Would you like to write a review?

There is a 75 character minimum for reviews. If your review contains spoilers, please check the Spoiler box. Please do not use ALL CAPS. There is no linking or other HTML allowed. Your review may be edited for content. 0/5000

Check box if your review contains spoilers

Play Sound

Please enter your birth date to watch this video:

You are not allowed to view this material at this time.

The Mysteries Of Pittsburgh

Now Playing: The Mysteries Of Pittsburgh

Movie Details & Credits

Peace Arch Entertainment Group | Release Date: April 10, 2009 | R

Starring: Jon Foster, Peter Sarsgaard, Sienna Miller

Summary: During the summer after his college graduation, Art Bechstein tries to break free from his stern father and his web of gangland connections when he meets Jane Bellweather , at tortured beauty, and her boyfriend, Cleveland Arning, a small-time street hood with seductive delusions of grandeur. The cast is rounded out by Art’s boss andDuring the summer after his college graduation, Art Bechstein tries to break free from his stern father and his web of gangland connections when he meets Jane Bellweather , at tortured beauty, and her boyfriend, Cleveland Arning, a small-time street hood with seductive delusions of grandeur. The cast is rounded out by Art’s boss and part-time girlfriend Phlox. (Groundswell Production)… Expand

Director: Rawson Marshall Thurber

Genre(s): Adventure, Drama, Comedy

Rating: R

Runtime: 95 min

See All Details and Credits

Watch Now

Buy on

Stream On

Metascore

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Critic Reviews

Duane Byrge

In the film's most flamboyant role, Peter Sarsgaard's devil-ish charisma and cold bluster is frightening. Read full review

Dennis Harvey

The full warmth and idiosyncrasy of Chabon's original is missed in an adaptation that feels more impersonally observed. But Lawson's pic, (with the director making a left turn from prior feature "Dodgeball," which he says was a money gig undertaken to hasten this dream project) is entertaining and involving enough on its own terms. Read full review

Jamie Tipps

Disappointed fans of Michael Chabon will have to watch "Wonder Boys" for solace, for The Mysteries of Pittsburgh boasts only one core mystery: how one can take such promising material and render it completely unmemorable? Read full review

Keith Phipps

Only Sarsgaard shows a pulse, creating a self-destructive, omnisexual rogue who, for all his faults, would probably be great company. The same can't be said for the film around him. Read full review

Joe Neumaier

Marries an unengaging love triangle to a flat visual style, nearly squashing the one good thing in it -- a scruffy, slouching performance from Peter Sarsgaard. Read full review

Michael Phillips

A coming-of-ager that nearly slaughters you by minute 30 with the relentlessness of its protagonist's voiceovers. Read full review

Nick Pinkerton

Mena Suvari, as Art's vindictive ex-fuckbuddy, gives sole signs of life--Miller is so void of presence that one can forget she's in the movie from scene to scene. Read full review

SEE ALL 15 REVIEWS

Write a Review

User Reviews

SeanF

Aug 9, 2009

Not sure why this was panned by the critics. Not as good as Wonder Boys, but better than the majority of Hollywood fare. I hadn't seen Peter Sarsgaard or Sienna Miller in a comedic role before, both I think have further potential in that arena. The main character (Jon Foster), I did Not sure why this was panned by the critics. Not as good as Wonder Boys, but better than the majority of Hollywood fare. I hadn't seen Peter Sarsgaard or Sienna Miller in a comedic role before, both I think have further potential in that arena. The main character (Jon Foster), I did not know, and have not seen before, but he did a more than adequate job in this film as well. This has not been a great season for DVD's IMO, so this is a good rental among the limited selections for the summer of 2009.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

deserthaze

Dec 23, 2010

For the purpose of condensing the novel, I can understand why some of the choices are made. However, removing Arthur and consolidating him with Cleveland was questionable. Having read the book, it made me fairly uncomfortable, but somehow the ending came to practically the same conclusionFor the purpose of condensing the novel, I can understand why some of the choices are made. However, removing Arthur and consolidating him with Cleveland was questionable. Having read the book, it made me fairly uncomfortable, but somehow the ending came to practically the same conclusion minus perhaps a bit of emotion.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

JayH.

Aug 2, 2009

Nicely acted, but the movie is just fair. It's well enough done, it has a polished and professional look to it. The story just didn't always hold my interest. Nice cinematography.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

DwayneB

Apr 10, 2009

Missed the tone of the novel completely, distorting characters relationships, motivations and even sexual orientations. Did Thurber even read the novel? Or just the dust jacket? A hatchet job.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

LeviK

Jan 18, 2010

Director Thurber and lead Foster really had to work overtime to mess this one up so badly. I can't believe Chabon consented to this script. The second most important character in the novel (Arthur Lecompte) was cut entirely, which through the remaining storyline and characters off Director Thurber and lead Foster really had to work overtime to mess this one up so badly. I can't believe Chabon consented to this script. The second most important character in the novel (Arthur Lecompte) was cut entirely, which through the remaining storyline and characters off completely. What remains is a well shot and poorly acted cliche, with the exception of Sarsgaard's work. Blah. The real tragedy is not that I wasted my time and money on this, but that I'll never be able to see one of my favorite novels adapted into the fine film it was destined to be. Thurber should stick to what he does best-- Dodgeball II, anyone?… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

SEE ALL 5 REVIEWS