Watch The Mudge Boy For Free

Highly Overrated But Still Good

Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Look around us, you will find many persons from this movie, you will find yourself. When we lose something somebody, we really need a hug a talk,whatever anything. When we are lonely, we also need to pursue something, to release ourselves.It's not about living in the village or big city, it's just different way to show a kind of period in our life. In this movie, the director built a small society for us, and we always follow the kid Dunkan, we become him, from his eyes feel his feeling, look for what we need.No happy thing happened during this movie, there are several happy moments, we can feel them from Dunkan's eyes, but they're killed by the following affairs. It's like in our life there is a period, bad period, we know finally we will walk out, but we have to face it, no other choice, the director showed this period for us, nothing bored, nothing retarded,except swallowing the chicken head, oh, man, it really cannot make me calm down, I know there is something will happen with this chicken, 'cause Dunkan has to give up his relying, but at the last moment, when he do it, I'm still shocked,the actors played so good, so natural. There are so many shitty, commercial movies today, but the Mudge boy, it's impressive, didn't waste my time.

This is a remake of the short film Fishbelly White by Michael Burke (1998). The plot line and characters are all the same, but the story is fleshed out in The Mudge Boy.In Fishbelly White, Duncan's character is more homo-erotic; the under-the-track-scene is more deliberate and graphic and explains much of what is left out of The Mudge Boy. In Fishbelly White, Duncan bites the head off his favorite chicken during the pick-up scene with the drunken youths and the rape scene never occurs.The two films make for an interesting comparison of the two director's visions.

3 men (2 boys and a grownup) with pain they cannot speak about are pitched against each other - denying what is inside them and trying to change the other. They hurt each other in the process and in the hurt and the feeling of the pain, is their personal redemption. The actor who plays the father is superb in the way he is trying to cope with his own loss and at the same time tries to deal and help a son who is "strange" learning in the end that what is really needed is to openly express his own feelings, help his son vocalize his feelings and pain and to hold onto each other ( as distinct from holding onto the dead mother/wife) and not let go. In the end, it did not matter whether either or both the boys were gay or not - you just cared about them

The sensitive hero, Duncan Mudge, beautifully played by Emile Hirsch, is victimized by a society characterized above all by fear and the cruelty this fear generates. In another lovely film with a similar theme, ("Get Real"), Steven, the main character asks, "What is everyone so afraid of?" Indeed that is the question that lurks at the core of this film. The answer is, of course, that everyone is afraid of being who he/she really is, thus earning the ridicule of everyone else who is suffering from a similar fear. Duncan seeks acceptance and affection, which he cannot get from his uncommunicative father, from a neighbor boy, Perry, whose instincts are in conflict, who is only half eaten by fear. Duncan tries to reach the better other half of Perry and crashed into Perry's ambivalence and is exploited in the process. Another reviewer here has said that Duncan is stupid. Can't Duncan see what is happening, why he is treated so cruelly by his peers? Why doesn't he give up his quest to be himself and conform? Isn't that what all of us do? I am put off by the question so often raised of whether this is a "gay film," or whether Duncan and/or Perry are gay. What bothers me about that is the need to categorize, to fix a label on a person, to commodify him. This provides an escape from seeing and relating to someone else as a complex person in his own right, not someone who fits in this box or that box. This need to classify, to objectify and to control is also a product of fear. I think it was H. L. Mencken who defined Puritanism as "that haunting fear what someone, somewhere, might be different." We are still in essence puritans.