Connianatu How wonderful it is to see this fine actress carry a film and carry it so beautifully.

Myron Clemons A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

Erica Derrick By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Nicole I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

Thomas Engels I don't know if you ever saw Threesome, a humorous story about an atypical triangle relationship. It's certainly not a masterpiece, but it does what it does with panache. It's fun to watch the confusion and somehow it's believable that two boys and a girl all have a thing for each other.The Mysteries of Pittsburgh also touches on the dilemma of bisexuality and sharing the same lover. However, here the setup is so bland that it seems to (involuntarily, of course) echo the clichés of people who have issues with homosexuality, namely, gays are confused/immoral and have too much libido for their own good.The film lacks clarity. Especially the beginning is a messy collage that fails to properly introduce the main character. The confusion becomes greater when more side characters show up. Nobody seems to know what he or she is doing in this story. The actors caught on to this, because their performances are colourless. Considering the 18 karat cast, the director is to blame.I add Mysteries to the long list of movies that failed because the people who made it thought that going off the beaten track would be enough to make a good movie.

Twins65 I must 1st admit I've not read the book, which apparently is way better than this film adaptation according to the general consensus here at IMDb. I was warned to stay far away from this movie.But I FINALLY saw it anyway, almost 7 full years after Sienna Miller made entertainment headlines trashing Pittsburgh in an interview while filming there on location. The film wasn't easy to track down, as I found a DVD through an interlibrary loan. I'm glad I watched it, but can't really recommend it.As indie movies go, I thought it had decent production values, including respected actors (Nolte, Sarsgaard, Suvari & Miller). I was unfamiliar with the work of Jon Foster (but his brother Ben can really bring it at times), and thought he was just OK as the lead. Perhaps a more dynamic young actor would have brought more to the production, but he's not the reason I'm giving this a below-average rating.The story was decent enough, but it just never really felt like I was watching a movie set in '83. Outside of Sienna's beat up VW Beetle and Sarsgaard's convertible, there was nothing to peg this as "early 80's"! I realize Pittsburgh has had roughly the same look for years, but couldn't they at least have thrown in some more "visuals" or music from that era to bring home it was 1983? The producers could have used more early 80's indie rock during the movie if they couldn't afford the rights for major label material from that era. And that punk club scene looked more like something you'd see in a retro themed inner-city dive in Chicago these days than a packed bar in Pitt. 30 years ago. I'm giving this 1 extra star (4 instead of 3) for having the punk band play a cover of The Replacements' God Damn Job off their '82 EP "Stink". I never, ever thought I'd hear that cut in movie! This movie is worth a look only if it pops up on IFC or Sundance at some point, but I've never seen it playing there.

artisticengineer This movie came so close to being a very good movie but fouled up at the end-leaving one to mourn what would have been a very good adaptation of a very good book.It is the summer of 1983. A college graduate (Art) is trying to enjoy his last summer before he leaves Pittsburgh (his home) to become a financial broker. We find that his dad (fantastic portrayal by Nick Nolte) is an organized crime chief, of the local mob, and is proud of his son graduating and does NOT want his son to go into organized crime. The son takes a job for the summer at a local bookstore and is immediately seduced by his only slightly older female supervisor; an affair ensues. During this same period of time Art meets a stunningly attractive young blond (portrayed by Sienna Miller) who likes him; even though she already has a boyfriend (dude named Cleveland). The next day Cleveland, a tough biker type, comes to the bookstore and gives Art a deal "he cannot refuse"- which is a ride on the bike to a local abandoned factory site. At the factory site is a smokestack that still belches out clouds; even though the factory has been shut down for thirty years! Why? It is a mystery, a mystery of Pittsburgh. Why is does Cleveland turn to be actually friendly towards a potential rival? Well, that is another mystery of Pittsburgh.The movie portrays the last summer of youthful abandon and care; set in surprisingly beautiful settings of a city that is reinventing itself from the traditional "smokestack technology" to a more "greener" environment. Yet, the problem with the movie is its unrealistic portrayal of male and female friendships. It was a very good movie; showing Sienna Miller, for example, doing some very good driving of golf balls at a party. Yet, this subplot never plays out- never explains why she is shown doing something so atypical. Loose ends, poor connections, double meanings that invoke something that is hard to believe even with the typical "suspension of disbelief" found at movies. All of these plot error and loopholes foul up the movie beyond redemption.

jotix100 Michael Chabon's 1988 novel " The Mysteries of Pittsburgh" was a novel about coming of age for a young man. The book is a fine account of a summer in the life of Art Bechstein, the son of a mobster who falls for Jane, a young woman, who is in love with another man. There is no doubt in our minds Rawson Marshall Thurber had the best intentions when he decided to adapt, then direct, this beloved work of many for the screen.The problem seems to be in the way Art comes out in the movie, where he also serves as the narrator as well. The way Mr. Thurber conceived his main character does not resonate with the viewer. It is never quite clear what did Jane and Cleveland see in this bland person to befriend and be part of a group; they are unevenly matched, to say the least.Cleveland is the most complex character in the novel. He is a bisexual man that is in the equation for the thrills he can get out of his situation with Jane. Art finds out soon enough what Cleveland is all about, but in the end he too is seduced by a guy that is a manipulator of the worse kind. It is also hard to believe, the way Cleveland is presented in the film he is the criminal he is supposed to be. Art, on the other hand, appears to be a closet homosexual, in spite of the sexual relationship he was having with Phlox, something that seems contrived and phony.Any film in which Peter Sarsgaard appears is worth a look. He is the most lively character in the picture. Mena Suvari shows up as a brunette with such a different look. It is hard to recognize her at first. Ms. Suvari is at her best in the film. Jon Foster is too bland to get anyone's attention. Nick Nolte plays Art's father. Sienna Miller, in spite of her looks, is an enigma in the movie.One thing that plays well is Theodore Shapiro's fine musical score. It gives the picture some class. Michael Barrett captures the spirit of the city, and its surrounding area in great images.