lorcan-61881 In Summer 2017,unexpectedly,I watched one of the best films ever,Garden State,I also discovered that The Perks Of Being A Walflower was one too! The film follows a failed small TV actor,who usually bottles up his feelings,for instance,never having cried for years,goes back to his hometown for his mother's funeral to discover a bunch of great people who never even knew existed. The film is directed by Zach Braff who also stars as the main role. Garden State is a brilliant film,I've loved it since the day I watched it and I try to watch it,once every year,so,next year,possibly in Summer,I'll watch it. The film had absolutely no flaws and I loved the guest performances by Peter Sarsgard and Natalie Porter,I thought they were brilliant as well as Ian Holm and the small appearance by Jim Parsons. The film had brilliant acting,as just said,and a great story that was brilliantly put into a movie,I heard it was based on Braff's true life experiences. The film has a excellent soundtrack featuring a song that would end up being in my best songs ever list which was Let Go - Frou,Frou. Garden State is a brilliant movie,I really advise you to see

jimbo-53-186511 Andrew Largeman (Zach Braff) returns to his hometown in order to attend his mother's funeral. Because he is an actor, many of Andrew's friends see him as a 'big shot' and upon his return home Andrew is treated as a bit of a celebrity. However, Andrew is a troubled man with a troubling past who strikes up a friendship (and eventually) a relationship with Sam (Natalie Portman) a young woman with troubles of her own.It's clear from this film that Braff is setting up a narrative that brings together two seemingly different people who aren't actually all that different. It isn't an entirely original concept, but it's one that can really pull at the heartstrings if it's executed correctly. Unfortunately, Garden State gets some things right and some things wrong...One issue I had with this film is that I never really felt that Braff offered much development to any of his characters; his friends just seemed to be a rather clichéd bunch of frat-boy doofuses which actually made the first 20 minutes or so of the picture to be a particularly painful experience. Sam is an interesting character and I really hoped that more would have been made out of her being a compulsive liar - perhaps a bit of character depth or complexity to explain away her reasons for choosing to lie. Instead of this, you end up with Sam mentioning now and again that she's a compulsive liar and then her mentioning that she doesn't know why she lies, but that's all you get. There's little insight or depth to the picture which at times makes it hard to care what's happening. I could argue the same point with Andrew; a big deal is made about his past and his reasons for disappearing, but again all these details are skimmed over rather than being analysed deeper and I couldn't help but feel that the narrative was a tad simplistic at times. There is some animosity between Largeman and his father which could have been interesting, but is barely given any focus at all resulting in their exchanges having very little bearing on the picture.The one thing running in this film's favour are that both Andrew and Sam are likable and despite the narrative and character weaknesses I did actually find their blossoming relationship believable and kind of endearing. Natalie Portman is another selling point for this film giving a wonderfully quirky and edgy performance - it's a pity really that she didn't have more of a character to work with. Braff is OK, but is no match for Portman and I think he knows it. Sarsgaard is energetic, but his character is annoying and never really feels important to the story. Holm is in this film, but isn't really given anything to do.Garden State has its moments and both Braff and Portman are likable enough and share good chemistry and yes I did find their romance believable and engaging. However, when all is said and done, I just never felt that this film was firing on all four cylinders consistently enough and I found many of the characters to be underdeveloped, underwritten and therefore, both they, and the story, were never as interesting as they could have been. As I said in my summary, it is mildly engaging, but not much more than that.

allenmthompson I recently watched this again and noticed a lot that I had not noticed when I was watching it repeatedly in my early 20's. I found it moving at the time but can't say that I find it the same at age 34. Now it just seems forced, but then it was quite moving (I guess it captured a moment). Then again, I decided to cast a more analytical eye toward Garden State this time as I have been planning for a sermon on the Christian holiday of Pentecost (yes, I'm a pastor). I remembered the fireplace dance scene being a pivotal scene in the film, but I was struck by the frequency with which Sam is visually associated with reds and oranges while Largeman is associated with blues and greens. While we could easily say that Sam is more fiery while Largeman is morose, we can also say that there is clearly an internal spark and not simply an external glow that inspires Sam. Given the circumstances of her life, she should also be spiraling into the same kind of disaffectedness as Large, but she is not. Perhaps it is because Sam is a Gen-Xer while Large is a Millennial (seriously), but perhaps it is a willingness to accept circumstances rather than escape them artificially (through drugs, prescribed or otherwise). After all, that seems to be a main theme of the movie: living with yourself. Still, I can't help but shake the cinematography surrounding Sam and the passage of Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit inspired the people to understand one another with tongues of fire. Given that Pentecost is the spiritual empowerment of people after Jesus's death, it's fitting.

Thomas Drufke When I think of coming of age movies of the last decade, there are several movies that come to mind, and quite possibly Garden State will be in that list. The film does a good job at capturing the time in your life when you are in between school and the real life and still trying to figure out your priorities in life. I really like how Zach Braff directed and wrote this movie. Even though it feels like a lot of other self discovery films, he brought something new to the table.Having Natalie Portman as the lead female is also never a bad choice. Portman is one of the few actresses that bring a tremendous amount of realism to her characters. And she may very well have the best crying face in Hollywood. Her quirky Sam character perfectly complimented Braff's Andrew. Their chemistry is apparent right from the first scene together all the way to the last airport scene. Although I think the ending was one of the few major weak points the movie had. I was also a bit confused on the whole day-dreaming sequence up until the final scene when it started to come together.Peter Sarsgaard was also a good fit with the cast. I'm glad that he didn't turn into just another druggie, and actually had depth to his character. The father felt rather flat to me, and even in the bedroom scene, I didn't feel much compassion for the man. But the real gems are the scenes just between Sam and Andrew. I think for that reason alone is why this film is constantly on top movies of the 2000's lists. What I really enjoyed about this movie, is that it's basically genre-less. It's not a true romance, comedy, drama or adventure. It's simply a pretty good movie about life.+Chemistry between Braff & Portman +No genre +Relatable life situations-Ending falls flat -One note dad character 7.7/10