Hey, everyone. ”Moriarty” here. I’m planning to see this one and ROCKET SCIENCE in the weeks ahead, and I hope I enjoy both of them. Our semi-regular spy Bungion Boy has seen both, and it sounds like he’s definitely got a fave of the two. Check this out:
Hey Harry, Mori, etc. Bungion Boy here in New York. I have just returned from a screening of “Charlie Bartlett.” I went in with virtually no expectations, not knowing much about the film other than the cast and basic premise, and still managed to find myself disappointed. The following includes some spoilers, unless you’ve ever seen a movie like this before. “Charlie Bartlett,” is one of those quirky, R rated comedies about teenagers and high school. It’s in the spirit of “Rushmore,” “Election,” and “Thumbsucker. Funny. I think I wrote that exact same sentence in my review for “Rocket Science” several months ago. But where that film really succeeded with me, while not being the most original film I’d ever seen, this one kind of falls flat. Look, I don’t need to see a completely original story every time I go to the movies. Good plots and themes get recycled all the time and if they’re recycled effectively than I’ll enjoy it. In fact the films I previously mentioned were also kind of rehashes or other movies or each other, but that didn’t stop them from being good movies. “Charlie Bartlett” isn’t a good movie though. Anton Yelchin stars as the title character, continuing his streak of “wiser than their years” characters. At the start of the film, Charlie has been kicked out, and this isn’t the first time, of a prestigious private school for making fake ID’s for the other students. His easy going, doped up mom, played by the very funny Hope Davis, isn’t mad at all, but rather impressed with how authentic they look. Since no other private schools will take him, Charlie decides to try public school out and arrives on the first day wearing his old private school uniform. So far, so oddly familiar. You can tell that the new school is a public school because it’s filthy and covered in graffiti. There are public schools here in New York that are cleaner and more organized than this one, which I had trouble believing since it seemed to take place in the very wealthy Westchester County. It’s also the smallest public school I’ve ever seen, consisting of what looks like about 400 students. For the record, the private school I attended had about 600. But I’m getting off topic. On Charlie’s first day he is beat up by Murphy, the typical school bully, and shunned by the rest of school. His therapist prescribes Ritalin for him, which offers effects only ever seen in movies. You know, like being compelled to study constantly, watching the pendulum of a clock for hours, and eventually going completely crazy and running down the street wearing underwear and screaming. The montage wasn’t very successful. Charlie decides to go off the drug, but since he got so “high” from it he decides to sell his 90 pills to all the students at the school dance. Once again the numbers don’t always add up. Since he can’t do this alone(?) he enlists the help of Murphy and the two become business partners/unlikely odd couple/friends. After the success of the dance turned orgy, a troubled, depressed student asks Charlie if he can get him other prescription drugs for his panic attacks. With that Charlie has a new business, which entails claiming various symptoms of his fellow students as his own, getting prescriptions for himself, and selling them to the kids in the school. Maybe I’ve become uncool and am no longer hip to the young generation out there, but this just seemed really wrong and irresponsible, even for a movie plot. In fact, despite my efforts not to, I seemed to usually side with the figures of authority in this film, such as in one of the main subplots involving kids protesting that surveillance cameras have been placed in the student lounge and lunch areas, that are still on school property. After observing the delinquents and vandals that a lot of the student body was made of, I thought that seemed like a pretty logical idea. Especially when later the school breaks out into a full scale riot, ala “Do the Right Thing,” complete with garbage cans being thrown through windows. But I’m getting off topic. Charlie opens an “office” in a bathroom stall, where he listens to students problems and prescribes them drugs accordingly. Meanwhile he is discovering special feelings for Susan Gardner, played by Kat Dennings from “The 40 Year Old Virgin.” She happens to be the daughter of the principal, played by the generally awesome Robert Downey Jr, who has problems of his own. I mean the principal. Then again I suppose… but I’m getting off topic. The principal is struggling with alcoholism and depression, while trying to protect his daughter, and also being Charlie’s nemesis while still kind of understanding and admiring his methods. Whew. He has a lot going for him. Well not really. I’ve been so impressed with Downey in the last few years. He’s been giving great performances in some really interesting films like “Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang,” “Zodiac,” “Game 6,” “A Scanner Darkly,” just to name a few. I could go on. He’s pretty good in this but for all that is going on with his character, the movie barely scratches the surface. There could have been a whole film about his character and it probably would have been a more interesting story than the one told here. Oh. And just for the record, is it like a rule that when a character is in a depressed and potentially dangerous mood that they leave their front door ajar, so when someone arrives there they go right in just to see what’s wrong? You see this in movies all the time! I don’t know about you but I always make sure my door closes tight whenever I get home. But once again, I’m getting off topic. (Last Time) There are a lot of really potentially interesting things going on in this movie that really made me want to like it more. For one thing, the relationship Charlie has with his mother is pretty funny, but it’s not at all believable or relatable without some context. We’re thrown right in at the start of the movie, where I would have rather seen some flashbacks showing how this family turned out the way they did. That happens a lot in this movie. There are several moments in the film that made me smile to myself and reflect what a movie would be like that was based on just one of this movie’s scenes or ideas. There are a lot of ethical questions and dramatic situations in this film that are never really addressed and just skimmed over. At the end of the film I felt let down that I was cheated out of seeing an actual mature and interesting take on some of these issues that aren’t normally featured in a film about young people. I do give them points for effort though. And certainly praise should be given to Yelchin who is really quite good in this film, carrying a story for his first time. He’s not afraid to be silly and goofy, but also has a compelling gravitas about him that makes me look forward to seeing him in future films. Robert Downey Jr. is also a lot of fun to watch. He’s a great actor and this is a good performance in a film that doesn’t give him enough to do. First time director Jon Poll, (he’s been an editor for many films including most of Jay Roach’s movies) has a good eye and makes the action on screen look a lot more compelling than it is. This movie isn’t terrible, but I do think it’s a failure for what it’s trying to be. At the end of this film I thought about other recent comedies about youths I had seen and realized that even the hilariously raunchy “Superbad” had more insight and drama involving teen angst and fear. I debated whether that was ironic or strange or a while, but then just decided that all it meant was that one of those movies worked and the other one didn’t. When both films come out this August I implore you to see “Superbad,” and wait to watch this on IFC next year. That’s all for me. Night night. -Bungion Boy
