I am a little conflicted about Manchester by the Sea and maybe i need to give it another viewing. I love a slow burner, full of conversation and endings that go nowhere and as a father myself i can fully empathize with the main characters. I mean what could be worse than what Lee and Randi go through.. Was the lack of on screen grieving the premise for us viewers to feel numb like our on screen characters ? Were we supposed to root for them and hope life starts to treat them more kindly - i for one didn't. I just felt numb and maybe that was the point.
I felt the pain during the house fire scene, the combination of Barber's, Adagio for Strings during such a traumatic event really pulled at me also when Lee and Randi meet in the street, well the flood gates almost opened but thankfully Lee ran away from the conversation and this grown man was saved from embarrassing himself in the cinema, the other side of me wanted to be a blubbering wreck , i wanted to see Lee's breakdown and maybe his breakthrough but would that be a bit too melodramatic and soap opera like....but still something was lacking and i can't quite put my finger on it.
I mean Casey Affleck has been doing this kind of acting for years - i am not being critical, he was fantastic - i am just saying this is the way he acts in most films - he is inaudible and moody so the casting was perfect . Oscar worthy i don't know . I'll let you know once i have watched the other nominees.

[9.0/10] There are some losses that you can’t come back from, that change you so fundamentally that even the most vital pulls and connections cannot bring you out of it. That is the core idea at the center of Manchester by the Sea. It is a film about grief, how we deal with it, and how its tendrils wrap themselves around the rest of our lives, to where some can wriggle free and some cannot.

The emblem of that is Lee Chandler (Casey Affleck) a Boston handyman who is the film’s protagonist. When Lee’s brother Joe (Kyle Chandler) dies, he is called back to Manchester to settle his affairs, including what’s to be done about Lee’s nephew Patty. These events call on Lee to face the site and memories of his own traumas, as he’s trying to do right by his brother and help his nephew with his own grief.

What’s striking is the way that even before the exact contours of the loss that made Lee into the person he is today are revealed, it’s clear that he is a broken man, someone who is not fully present in the world. Some of this comes from the flashbacks pepper into the film, which show a much more jovial and engaged individual, cutting a contrast with the dead-eyed janitor who lurches through life in the present day. But a great deal of it comes from an outstanding performance from Affleck, who evinces a detached hauntedness from the first minute of the film.

When it is revealed, at the halfway mark, that Lee’s three young children died in a fire, a fire that he accidentally caused, its crystalizes the reasons for Lee’s demeanor and his difficulties in returning to Manchester and acceding to Joe’s wishes that he become Patty’s guardians. But to the film’s credit, it never underlines these points too heavily, to where they’re barely uttered or even acknowledged out loud, but permeate the background of every scene and every moment.

It’s never says that Lee so resists the notion of living in Manchester because it’s the place where his children died. It just shows him looking out onto the city and intersperses that with scenes of the grisly aftermath. It never says he’s reluctant to be a father because he blames himself for what happened to his kids, it just shows him struggling to give any meaningful direction to Patty. It never says that he’s overly cautious when it comes to safety, particularly the safety of children, it just shows him overreacting to a misunderstanding when Patty tries to get out of the car while he’s driving. It never says that Lee won’t grant himself the chance for human connection again because he doesn’t believe he deserves it and because he’s scared of where it might lead, it just shows him having ample opportunities to connect with people and invariably turning them down.

Much of this is conveyed in Affleck’s bravura performance. He portrays Lee as completely hollowed out by the horrors he’s been a part of, so convincingly deadened by them that he’s no longer fully alive, just this inert, barely there thing that continues to exist without any reason to. The little details of the performance win the day. There is his sublimated anger, at himself and at the world, that prompt him to get into bar fights to feel something. There are the moments where a real human being breaks through so that Lee can comfort his nephew. There are hints, in a heart-rending scene with his ex-wife (Michelle Williams, who makes a big impact in limited screen time) at the recriminations, self-inflicted and otherwise, that leave such overwhelming guilt lingering within him.

But the best thing to recommend the film is its ending. In so many movies in this same vein, the natural move would be for Lee to have his troubles with being back in Manchester and faced with the ghosts of his past, but that the importance of Patty’s upbringing and his brother’s wishes would be enough for him to overcome them. Instead, in a quietly emotional moment, Lee confesses to Patty that he “just can’t beat it.” The memories of his children’s deaths, of his inadvertent hand in them, are too much for him to bear, even for this, one of the few people, if not the only person, that Lee still loves.

There is boldness in that choice. It’s too much to call Manchester by the Sea subversive, but the heart of storytelling, particularly in quiet character dramas like this one, is change. It’s the old story circle again – a character is called to adventure, has an experience, and comes back changed. Manchester uses that structure, but subverts it. It shows Lee on the cusp of recovering, on the cusp of making a breakthrough, coming ever so close to having that change and epiphany and recommitment to a new life, and then faltering in the face of inescapable reminders of what he was running from in the first place.

It is, in that way, one of the truest testaments to grief imaginable. There are some things in life that cannot be outrun or overcome. It is not a heartening notion, but it is true to live, and Manchester by the Sea examines it with conviction, empathy, and grace.

It would be easy for Lee to be the bad guy, for Patty to be a brat or the piteous kid who lost his father, for the community of Manchester to come together to raise them both up. Instead, there is complexity in the film’s DNA, to where Lee is equal parts unreachable and understandable, Patty experiences genuine pain and difficulty but also reads as a genuine teenager with all the rough edges that come with, and the people of Manchester help the Chandlers as best they can, but help them with well-warranted reservations as well. And it posits that recovery, even when necessary to take care of others you love, may simply not be possible.

And yet, for all that the film has been decried or championed for its depressing qualities, it ends on a note of measured and earned hope. Lee is not ready to be a father again, to be back in the place where his children died again, even for Patty. But he is ready to open his life again, just a little bit. His new apartment will have an extra room so that his nephew can come visit and stay. We see him out on that boat, on the water once more, symbolizing the times when he could be happy and his old self, and it’s a sign that he is not better, but that for the first time in a long time, there’s room in his life for something better.

Lee may never recover from this, may never become the person he was or even a person who a stranger could stand to have a conversation with for a half an hour. But he is, it seems, ready to become more, to open himself up to the last person in this world that he cares about. Manchester by the Sea ends on a note of hope. That hope is measured, balanced out by the cloud of grief that Lee will likely never fully escape, but it is a sign that even amid the harshest of losses, the ones that take away everything, there are people who give us something to hang onto, something to live for, something that makes us just a little bit more who we were before.

I watched this movie based on its high score, I found the movie to be too long and maybe should have been edited down to 90 minutes or less. I usually go for exteneded versions of movies as I like to really get into the characters and don't normally like it to be over to quickly.
This was one of those occasions where instead of entertainment it was a chore to watch, I didn't find the actors performances anything special or the context of the story.

Overall very boring and if I am going to score this it would be a 1 out of 10. I did stick with it to the end and gave it its best shot, but not for me.

American dramatist Kenneth Lonergan’s third feature, after his career has been punishingly stalled by the ill-fated MARGARET (2011), made in 2005 as a much-anticipated follow-up to his sterling debut YOU CAN COUNT ON ME (2000), then embroiled in the lawsuit purgatory with the film’s producers and only would be permitted for a limited release 6 years after, MANCHESTER BY THE SEA impacts as a resounding comeback and it is as good as you can get while toiling away with thumping grief and inconsolable guilt.

Lee Chandler (Affleck), a building janitor in Boston, he is the dour and withdrawn everyman type who distances himself from rest of the world and occasionally courts unwarranted bar brawl to unleash the smothering anger, so routinely the film will slowly mine into his profoundly buried tale-of-woe which would explain how he has fetched up to the current walking-dead state, and in this case, it is a helluva calamity, the most heart-rending accident could ever happen to a parent, and he has no one but himself to answer for. Receiving the news that his brother Joe (Chandler) died in a sudden heart attack, brings Lee back to his hometown, the titular Manchester-by-the-Sea where flashback adroitly interleaves into the narrative to refresh Lee’s memory (edited with pellucid correlations with what he experiences now) where the concealed secret incubates, and would eventually unfolds in the murky, snow night accompanied by Tomaso Albinoni and Remo Giazotto’s ADAGIO IN G MINOR, a sublime sequence transmits a synesthetic frisson which can knock dead its armchair viewers.

In Joe’s will, he names Lee to be the guardian of his son, the 16-year-old high-school jock Patrick (Hedges), which takes Lee aback, a resultant, seemingly life-affirming uncle-nephew bonding process takes its spin sensibly on veracity and wrestles with both Patrick’s suppressed grievance toward his father’s demise (Lee’s heart condition has been long diagnosed, so that it is more like a time-bomb ticking situation), and Lee’s attempt to re-settle in the town on the face of aghast memories and unrelieved penitence, in a pivotal scene, when Lee’s ex-wife Randi (Williams) pleads him for forgiveness and reconciliation after she has been finally capable of moving on to form a new family and embrace a new life, but feels obliged to proffer some extrication for him too, but things are different for the culpable party, not everyone can make peace with the past, however rational it might sound, some pain can be alleviated through time but other stays, thus one must brave himself to live with it for the rest of his life, that is the affirming life-philosophy Lonergan tries to pass on to his audience through studiously delving into the realistic double-bind based on an über-dramatic back-bone, which appears to be an abiding mythos in all his three directorial works to date.

Casey Affleck finds his footing in inhabiting Lee with a simmering intensity underneath his alternatively inscrutable/apathetic/distraught veneer, a performance is so aptly up his alley (a combo of hang-dog frustration and whimpering elocution) and to call it the performance of the year wouldn’t be such a stretch. Michelle Williams, shoe-horned in a peripheral role, but manifests herself as a sniveling and imploring scene-stealer just in one scene, she dangles us with immense curiosity about how her character has gone through the catastrophe, but essentially this film is Lee’s story. Lucas Hedges gets a windfall for being cast in a plum role and nominated for an Oscar, which could be a double-edged sword for the future of his budding career, but as credible and affecting as his portrayal is, the credit should mostly given for Lonergan’s well-rounded script of a rather bratty teenager; also Kyle Chandler is virtually next-in-line for a renaissance on the big screen after starring a string of high-caliber Oscar-baits, from ARGO, ZERO DARK THIRTY (both in 2012), to THE WOLF OF WALL STREET (2013), CAROL (2015) and now this, all in small roles but his presence looms larger each time.

The cinematography is bracingly crisp and un-showy, a modest production design and an unobtrusive score borrows many classical pieces, MANCHESTER BY THE CITY is a contemplative continuation in the aftermath of a latter-day Greek tragedy, which elevates Lonergan’s status as one of the most outstanding cinematic story-teller currently from USA soil, and one can bet, co-producer Matt Damon must secretly rue the day that he couldn’t commit himself to Casey's role which would have earned him a coveted Oscar statuette as an actor, and in hindsight, his preference to star in Zhang Yimou’s Chinese monster fantasy THE GREAT WALL (2016) now looks like a dumb decision.

**The life doesn't reflect how we want.**

First of all it was not based on any book, but you can see that book kind of effect in the storytelling. One of the best original screenplay, I won't be surprised if it wins the Oscars for that. I actually struggled in the opening to catch the storyline. Because the past and present overlapped while sharing the presentation alternatively. But it was about the present with flashbacks popping out regularly to join the tale by comparing/revealing the earlier events. So after few occasions, I got used to it and enjoyed my rest of the watch.

I always love good drama films. But not all the drama films I have seen are the masterpiece. So despite it was received so well from all the quarters, I kept my expectations low. The initial parts were okay, but its only during the final stage I begin to like it more. Especially the Casey's performance. I have seen him in many great films, in the big roles, but I think this one is his best, particularly from the positive perspective of the character he had played. Looks like the decade belongs to Affleck brothers. They have given great performances recently and acted in the great films that will be remembered for a long time.

This is the story of the Lee, a man who works as a janitor. One day he receives a call that his brother had passed away as he was suffering from the illness for a some time. Since his brother got divorced, all the responsibility comes under his belt, including his teenage son. Now those two struggles to join the force, but somehow manages all. Meanwhile, till the conclusion, the Lee's life before that point were disclosed to us, like how he struggled in his own life before coming to end in the current situation.

I could be wrong, but Casey Affleck's going to win the Oscars for his performance. Andrew Garfield is the other guy standing between his chance. I'll be happy whoever wins between them. I like Michelle Williams, but her Oscars nominee is meaningless. What, she appeared for 10-15 minutes in the entire narration which can be tagged as a guest appearance than a full fledged role. This is a fine drama, one of the year's best, deserved all the Oscars nod it got. Surely worth a watch and I recommend it.

_8/10_