A heart made of $hit and splinters!!!!
HAHA, what a fantastic description of that psycho child! YES! Leave it to Stephen Colbert to set those parents straight!
shareDespite the fact that Colbert had a miniscule part, they gave him the best line in the movie.
share[deleted]
I'll have to watch the movie again, but is there anything in the film which argues that the child was not adopted? I agree with you that it would be surprising for two lean and fit parents to have a child who is that overweight at that age, although maybe overeating is another symptom of his emotional problems.
shareWell, I did watch it again, and Charlie's not adopted. The mom says she "doesn't know" why he has a weight problem, since she and David are both so thin. Her friend, the actress who got the part that would have been perfect for her, says "sometimes these things just happen." So the movie anticipated your criticism, and answered it.
I think the movie as a whole suggests that Charlie has an eating problem, and that it's another symptom of his emotional distress. He pours about a cup of sugar into his cereal in the beginning of the movie, and in his last scene he's slathering a hot dog with mayo, and ignoring his parents' suggestion of mustard.
[deleted]
Oh my God QB I know!!! I could not stop laughing when Stephen said that. I took care of two little demon seeds for a while, and I think that description was made for them.
share[deleted]
I think the principal, after engaging in all the politically-correct, 'caring' banter and not getting through, finally spoke the truth. Whatever the parent's fault may or may not have been in creating the situation, Colbert's character's candor broke through their denial and perhaps prompted them to get their son the help they clearly could not provide.
Sure beats leaving him on the path we saw him on, to become a future arsonist, rapist or murderer...
[deleted]
But he was getting "help" already, because remember in the dinner scene where the mom says she thinks he needs a little more and that she was glad the husband might be getting that deal. Ya' know to pay those bills that little hellion was racking up.
ican model nude for u.But this time you need a canvas there's no such thing as a finger paint model
This film is about healing - epecially after 9/11. It isn't just the child. The parents are nutjobs too. The parents and child are never going to heal until they admit what is really wrong. Like the cliche says - the first step to solving a problem is admitting you have one. They are dancing around the real issue and focusing on all the wrong things. The principal is doing everything he can to say, without saying, "You've produced a monster through your inept parenting." When they aren't getting the hints, he has to wake them up (the boy nearly kills another boy for no reason). Like it or not, what the principal did jumpstarted the healing process (the look on the mom's face suggests she knows he is right in spite of the ugliness). If he doesn't tell them that, they likely sink deeper and deeper into denial and the severity of the boy's problems. I don't believe they just "got rid of the kid." That would be wrong and the scene with the empty room was the only bad part of the script to me because they didn't clarify the outcome of the child. It makes the parents look more selfish than they already are. But two things: First, if they go through with what the principal suggests, the child went to a camp, a home, a school...something temporary, but long enough for the parents to get it together. Nothing wrong with that. Second, the final shot of the room's windows suggested to me that the environment was also part of the kid's problem. Two iconic buildings just collapsed in NYC and the boy is constantly encapsulated by staircases, balconies, brick walls and windows. Getting away is the best thing for the boy. This is a poignant film. You have to get deep and put yourself in EVERYONE's shoes to fully appreciate the film.
shareThey noted that he was going to child psychologist THREE times a week! They said that in the restaurant.
shareI am sorry to say that principals do not prescribe medications to students (maybe I have confused your use of "they." And it obviously was not his "amateur diagnosis," it was his frank professional opinion which as other comments have stated, woke the parents up to the reality that further professional assistance was needed for their child. Then they did take him to a psychologist/psychiatrist who professionally diagnosed the child and then recommends some in-patient treatment facility. Yes the child is 'gone' when we see the empty room but he was not abandoned.
shareI agree absolutely. On the thread people seem to focus on 'getting rid' of the kid. I don't think that the parents took him out and had him shot. Maybe he just was institutionalised for a time. He certainly was only getting worse in his present situation.
shareYou are 100 percent correct...i just got threw watching the film...Colbert's character was trying wake these people up....knock,knock dummies you're building a monster with your half-assed parenting........I saw Stephen on a episode of Law and Order it's surreal to see him in other stuff after his show has taking off......
shareI think Colbert was just like the parents. I think they just got rid of the kid, which is the best thing for the kid. Sure there may be nothing wrong with the kid getting some real help while the parents sort of decompress and get their $hit together. But still they are portrayed as selfish jerks all happy having sex not really concerend about their kid at all.
Sure Colbert might have been trying to wake them up as some have said but wake them up to getting rid of the kid so they can enjoy life. Selfish all around.
I hope one day y'all will be talking about my stories on this website.
They sent the kid away never to return, he must have been adopted and the adoption not final. Notice that they cleared his room out completely, if the kid was going to return they would never have done that
shareThey sent the kid away never to return, he must have been adopted and the adoption not final. Notice that they cleared his room out completely, if the kid was going to return they would never have done that
Don't be absurd. They sent him off to some boarding school for troubled kids, no doubt -- they didn't put him up for adoption! Just as the school principal said to do.
The empty room was for dramatic effect -- tell me, chief, if all his stuff was still in his room, would a shot of his room have told you that he was gone?
Some people need to be reminded that what they are watching is a movie. share
thank you! I just said the same thing in another thread. It is because some people apparently have to be beaten over the head with symbolism to realize they are watching a MOVIE.
shareI figured the kid was overweight because the parents didn't set or adhere to *any* sort of boundaries for him. As a result he didn't respect them a single bit and I wonder if he felt they cared for him, at all. When the mom *disciplined* him after the rukus on the playground, the kid repeated words like regurgitations, not things he really understood or felt. To me, he was rage personified. I kept comparing him to Sandie...a younger version. So due to no fault of his own (he's a kid, after all), I felt sorry for him...but 2 words MILITARY SCHOOL! ;o)
shareHere is the bottom line for all of you who want to blame the parents, the teacher/principal or the "city" enviorment the kid lived in, wether all the afore mentioned had anything to do with the development of this child is a mute point, the point of no return had been passed & it was only going to get worse........way worse the older he got, he was a ticking TIME BOMB WAITING TO EXPLODE, God knows how many victims this "child" was ging to rack up, IMHO once you get to the point with exploring how to kill, skin & dismember animals you are too far gone.
End of disscusion.
Do you think the couple would try to have another child? That would be one way they could attempt to heal the wounds created by their first child.
Or, would the taking care of the one suffice, because obviously, and even with in-patient treatment, this one story still might not have a happy ending.
I agree with BigMess99. I don’t blame the parents at all; I believe they did the best they knew how. They held hope for the kid right up to the moment the principal’s words shocked the mother into reality (the father was still not yet “aware”); both were still thinking “at heart, he’s a good kid” and even “a great kid” – or, at least, they were trying to convince THEMSELVES of this. They sent him to a shrink three days a week, enrolled him in special schools and programs, and tried talking to him and engaging him… all to no avail. This kid was already unreachable and too far gone to “fix” and make right – he had no empathy for other living things, and he never would. He was killing animals, and humans would’ve surely followed. The parents kept trying, but it was time to give up on this kid and essentially “delete” him from existence, because yes, he was THAT bad. The principal’s characterization of him, if anything, was understated. The decision to make him “go away” can be seen as a pre-emptive prison sentence, a punishment exacted BEFORE he commits murder… which he surely would’ve done if he was allowed to stay in society. The parents made the right decision, they were happy with it, and I was happy for them.
I saw this movie only once, years ago, but I'll never forget that kid and what the parents had to do for society's sake: give up on thier child and make him "go away."