Just AWFUL

What is YOUR idea of a Film? because i'd love to agree that we disagree on what we think of this film, but sorry who gives you the right to say which is a good/bad film? why don't you just put a score on the imdb meter and let other people see it and think for themselves?
the freedom of opinion keep it to you and your friends don't post on imdb saying crap about a movie because maybe those movies you liked in your day were critisized by other.
And yeah, the movie's got fault but still it's great enough to be far beyond your petty comment.

Wow, you're such an INTELLIGENT person, you must have a mastery of the written WORD, as shown by your constant CAPITALIZATION of seemingly every OTHER word, and use of cool shorthand, such as gf, lol, and the ingenious of using *beep* to get your point across, not to mention the witty retorts such as "mr. suicidal pants" and "I mean, the dialogue was so NOT clever...it was terrible!". You sir, are the clever one, and I honestly don't know why this hack is writing movies and you have yet to win an Oscar, not to mention a Pulitzer! Well done, sir, well done.

*Spoilers*

I think you missed the end montage. It wasn't a flashback, but rather a glimpse to an epilogue. Robert Downey Jr. returned to being a history teacher. Earlier in the film, it was referenced that Susan and he both preferred it when he was a history teacher.

This movie was meant to be a feel-good movie, not a leap into societal realism. Of course, a person isn't going to be universally popular overnight. We know that.

I must disagree, and say that a guy dispensing medicine would be IMMENSELY popular amongst A LOT of people. As sad as it is, that's pretty true.

I know quite a bit about film, and I think it was an honest effort, and was excellent for what it was. I feel you're insulting the intelligence of anyone with an opinion contrary to your own with your final comment.

damn cheese...you on your period or what?

SPOILER ALERT.

I completely disagree with the entirety of your post. To begin with, Charlie Bartlett is obviously not cool. Did you even see the beginning of the movie? He is moved to a public school and has no idea how to relate to his peers. He comes across as far too eager, far too preppy, far too disconnected to be anywhere close to cool. On the first day of school, Charlie shows up in a blazer, khakis, and a tie, and offers his hand to anyone he meets for a warm handshake and a smiling introduction. This is, obviously, simply not how it's done amongst teenagers. Thus, he only becomes cool once he realizes the potential his prescriptions could have if given to students who actually need them. And, if you were to actually pay attention to the film, you would realize that they were not portraying pills in a "positive, cool" light. When distributed incorrectly, they resulted in a student's suicide attempt. You have to realize that that part of the plot was written to teach Charlie a lesson about how medications can of course be helpful and life-saving but that, when used in an improper fashion, can be very, very dangerous.

The advice Charlie gave was not terrible. It was down-to-earth advice that the students at his school could actually use. When adults attempt to give advice to teens when they barely remember what it was like to be a teen themselves, it usually ends up being terrible. The writers knew this. Thus, they had Charlie help his peers in a way they would find, oddly enough, helpful.

The actor playing Charlie was so very, very far from terrible. He created a character that had difficulty relating to people and showing emotion in general. It's not that Anton was unable to portray emotions; his character, Charlie, could not portray emotions. Anton was able to display this difficulty and yet still get across to the audience how Charlie was feeling underneath his shields and defense mechanisms. Brilliant, really. The real test of acting is not whether you can cry on command but whether you can display deep inner turmoil without shedding a tear. Which Anton did, splendidly.

And by the way, Charlie was indeed nervous about going to a public school, and upset about leaving his old one, as displayed by the conversation in the limo where he said he was just starting to relate to the other students at the academy he was just expelled from. But of course, he couldn't openly show his fears to his mother, because he had to protect her and take care of her (all said in the conversation with Susan right before they had sex). And he NEEDS popularity because it is so hard for him to get it! I don't understand how you missed that crucial plot element. HE IS NOT COOL. For God's sake, he came home from his first day of school drenched in toilet water with a black eye and the slow kid as his only friend. It is established early on that he is very intelligent, and we know he has money. The only thing out of his grasp is being well-liked. That is the last aspect of life he has to learn to conquer.

You're right, they didn't show any students disliking him because he was a dealer, but that doesn't mean they weren't there. Perhaps the film didn't include them, because it wasn't really vital to the story line. Granted, it is not our place to assume anything– scripts must include it or allude to it or else it does not exist in the story. However, if you're willing to create the rest of Charlie's world in your head, you might come up with the possibility that dissenting students were there but in the minority and thus not pictured. And by the way, in the scene in the limo where Charlie is waiting outside of the prison, Anton did not portray a lot of emotion. He portrayed a lot of pent-up emotion that Charlie was unable to display. Learn the difference. Of course there are tons of wooden actors out there making a living by showing us the same faces over and over again, but Anton is not one of them. He knows how to create a character, create depth, and convey an entire lifetime's worth of history in a line.

And this has probably already been pointed out to you, but they were not flashbacks. They were flashforwards. They were a way to close the story, create a resolution, let you see a glimpse into the characters' futures. I really doubt you were paying attention to this film at all, since you missed several key points, thereby tainting your review. I cannot take it seriously.

- - - - - - - - - -
Bruce Willis is dead.

i completely agree that this was a terrible movie, and im a teenager myself.

anton yelchin is completely bland in ANY movie hes in, so the character is at no fault here. however, the character, as well as the rest of the movie, is badly written. while i have absolutely no problem with sad or depressing movies, the sad undertones of the movie seemed out of place. at the same time, i didnt think this movie was funny at all, so those who came to the theater expecting a funny teen comedy all left disappointed. what was left was just a bland story, with one of the worst, most sappy endings i have ever witnessed appearing on screen.

in addition to those flaws, the main plots of this movie didnt make sense to me either. first he sells drugs to his classmates, something that he not only would have been caught for much earlier, but also something that not EVERY teenager would want. if i heard a student was selling drugs in the mens bathroom to the entire school, i not only wouldnt be interested but i might report it (and if i didnt, surely someone else would). then the second half of the film is based around how the students are angry that security cameras are being installed in their lounge. how spoiled do these students have to be to have the nerve to complain about that? no school i know even gives students that much of a privilege, so that fact that they were angered over the fact that the school would want some sort of supervision placed upon them only made me root against them instead of for them. and the lengths they went to to prevent this happening was ridiculous.

and im also not sure how i was supposed to relate to or root for the main character. charlie shows no real emotions, and seems inhuman, which is automatically abnormal and difficult to relate to. then he almost forces a kid to commit suicide. then he punches his girlfriends dad and his principal, simply because he wanted to look inside a suspicious brown paper bag he is giving his daughter. i mean, he was caught selling drugs, so why is it wrong for her dad to ask to see whats in the bag. that seems reasonable enough to me, but no, BAM! charlie punches him instead. and im supposed to want a happy ending for this kid???

this movie was actually quite boring overall, and whenever i go to see a comedy that turns out to be bad, i prefer it is at least dumb instead of boring, so i at least have something to laugh at.

"Second of all, when did pills become a positive and cool thing? What kind of stupid message is that?"

I really think when looking at this film you need to look at the big picture. They were not depicted selling pills as a 'positive and cool thing.' The film was quite satirical in it's depiction of an adult world using psychiatric drugs to keep the kids in their own type of prozac nation. The pills that Charlie “prescribed” were not shown to be used as a means of getting high for the kids, instead to help them escape from their problems…but in the same light, isn’t that what getting high is all about? I feel like the film showed the use of psychiatric drugs very much in the same way they depicted any other drug that kids may be taking, but these drugs are not only accepted by adults but pushed onto the kids by those adults. This was shown very clearly in the scene where Charlie trips out on the Ritalin prescribed to him by his own psychiatrist.

"It's life. It's real and sometimes it fvckin' hurts.. but it's kind of all we have"
-Garden State

This is to Blacklungzz and ifightcheese:

I just saw this film yesterday and was horribly disappointed.

After coming to this board, I kept wondering what was wrong with me. I thought that I had somehow missed the point of the entire movie, and that perhaps my mind was slipping.

But after reading the comments of both posters, I find I am in complete agreement.

I don't mind being in the minority opinion of disliking this film, but it's nice to find at least a couple of posters to validate my own perceptions.

Well whatever, this is one of the BEST MOVIES OF THE YEARR so far.
And it has more than 7 stars here, so, that means it's not terrible at all.
mayority just voted. Period.

[deleted]

You already did a monologue,and,why did you sit thru it,who forced you? Moron

I enjoy reading lengthy unrelenting posts where people note all the intricate parts of a movie that they hated. Then I laugh because I could not care less.

I loved this movie, it was amazing! It also kind of gave popularity a new definition. Instead of Charlie just hanging out with a certain group of kids that were considered cool kids, he was nice to everyone, even the speacial needs kid.