MovieChat Forums > Charlie St. Cloud (2010) Discussion > Would have been better without heavy rel...

Would have been better without heavy religious tones.

posted 14 years ago by CanadianCanine
12 replies | jump to latest

I understand that it was based on a book, but I think this movie would have worked much better if it was left up to interpretation rather than "This is God's plan" being shoved in our faces. It also would not have been as corny as it the whole film came across perhaps.

I was interested in this film because Charlie hallucinating his dead brother and shunning the world out due to his inability to let go of what happened. I thought the character of Charlie may have been heavily disturbed in the mind. I was fine with the religious hints, but it all went down too cleanly. For one example : When Charlie chose to pursue to find Tess instead of returning to Sam, they shouldn't have had Sam be like ".... Oh, ok. I love you, Charlie. *Smiles and disappears after a cheesy montage*. They should have had Sam guilting Charlie to return, throwing a tantrum and telling Charlie that he hated him for leaving. That would have had such an impact, making Charlie's choice to let go of Sam's memory all the more powerful. It all went down so opposite of that, I was left wondering "Gee.. if it was that easy Charlie, you should have done it in the first place."

I just thought this movie was too simple. Sometimes an audience enjoys being challenged. They should have left it up to decide whether Charlie was being led by his own insanity, religious influences, or perhaps supernatural. It was just too way too Disney.

Not a horrible movie though. 6.5/10

[–] jakerutigliano 14 years ago

You can find the screenplay for this movie right here:http://www.mediafire.com/?3n4kvkgk4dqcnpw. It appears to be Craig Pearce's final draft before it was polished by Burr Steers.

I kinda like it because it's more closer to the book and made Charlie and Sam's relationship more powerful and it has everything the final movie lacks, including the "older Sam" ending starring Chris Massoglia. If this movie gets a remake, it better be 100% entirely closer to the book.

[–] CanadianCanine 14 years ago

Thanks for posting that link. When I get time I'm definitely going to read that through.

[–] jakerutigliano 14 years ago

Do you think Chris Massoglia's scene could've made the story a little bit better so the audience could see his "better life of becoming a man", the goal he was holding back from?

[–] wishingwell57 14 years ago

Heavy religious tones???!!!! Touchy, touchy.....

The movie was spiritual but not religious. You should have been complaining that it was about hanging onto a dead relative and having sex a dead person, if you felt you had to make this type of comment to begin with. Those subjects are not religious in the sense you are trying to stir up.

You react like this to every little thing????

If you are going to complain, at least get the complaint subject correct.

[–] CanadianCanine 13 years ago

It's just my perspective on the film, buddy... You're aware you are on a discussion board, right?

[–] JoeGPM 13 years ago

I strongly disagree that this movie had heavy religious tones.

[–] fluffchop 10 years ago

He wasn't trying to stir up anything. You are! And failing miserably in your attempt.

---
Scientologists love Narnia, there's plenty of closet space.

[–] johnf_sf 9 years ago

Some people are overly sensitive to religious tones.funny though, because Buddhism or Hinduism doesn't affect them, but if it's that other religion...they get their panties in a bunch.

[–] dbwilyumz 13 years ago

"it all went down too cleanly. For one example : When Charlie chose to pursue to find Tess instead of returning to Sam, they shouldn't have had Sam be like ".... Oh, ok. I love you, Charlie. *Smiles and disappears after a cheesy montage*. They should have had Sam guilting Charlie to return, throwing a tantrum and telling Charlie that he hated him for leaving. That would have had such an impact, making Charlie's choice to let go of Sam's memory all the more powerful. It all went down so opposite of that, I was left wondering "Gee.. if it was that easy Charlie, you should have done it in the first place."

An excellent point. I also thought that one weakness in the story was the lack of real emotional blackmail by the dead little brother. It would have explained why Charlie couldn't break loose for so many years. Same for the thin role of Charlie's mother. They should have added 90 seconds with a scene in which Mom tells Charlie that she's moving away and she wants him to move on too. Charlie's refusal would have heightened the fact that he is trapped.

[–] macgirl66 13 years ago

I just saw this movie. I have not read the book. I'm going to disagree on two points.

First, that this movie has heavy religious overtones. I think they only mention God once, when RL's character tell's him that God brought him back to give him a second chance. Charlie doesn't do much thinking about God or religion. He takes what RL said and does some thinking about whether he should rejoin life and maybe break his daily commitment to Sam, whether he has the right to rejoin life, to be a part of it and to make connections to real live people.

Secondly, regarding Sam's reaction to Charlie's final choice. When Charlie does decide that it is more important to try to save Tess, who he realizes is still alive then it is to keep his daily appointment with Sam, this is really not a huge shocker. We have seen signs that Charlie has been getting ready to let go and that Sam is getting ready to allow Charlie to let him go. I mean, it has been 5 years, nearly half the time Sam was alive. We see Sam excited for Charlie to have a date with Tess, helping to decide what to make for dinner. Having a good time looking through the magazine that shows her and her boat. Charlie and Sam have the conversation about his conversation with the dead marine, Sam is asking, "Did he say anything?", like he is curious and perhaps worried about what else is "out there" when you are dead. Sam obviously has mixed feelings about letting Charlie go, as when he is actually faced with Tess, he is angered. However when you look at the entire sequence of conversations they have, it makes all kinds of sense to me that it is just not a natural state for the dead to be stuck on Earth. That it is the strong link of Sam and Charlie and perhaps Sam's fear of moving on that has kept him there, so at the end I didn't find it odd at all that Sam would find happiness to pass on and would wish his brother love and happiness and that he would finally be ready to go.

Lastly, when a "spirit" does decide to move on and not to cling to an unnatural state, it makes sense (to me at least), that this would be a positive decision, because I don't believe it is normal for spirits to be trapped on Earth. This is not a religious belief, I don't know what happens to the soul when we die, but I don't believe it is supposed to be trapped here on any specific physical plane due to "unfinished business". Therefore I think it makes all kinds of sense that Sam's moving on would bring him peace. Why would he wish the brother who he loves so much pain and anger?

As for the religious angle, they could have made this a true religious film, and Charlie could have said, "I feel so happy now that I know that Sam is in heaven now with your father, Tess". This movie might be able to be called spiritual. It is not even close to religious.

To each their own...opinion

[–] neil-476 12 years ago

I must have been snoozing. All 3 times I watched it. Haven't spotted any religious overtones, heavy or otherwise, as of yet.

[–] jacksvoice 10 years ago

completely disagree. as im sure most would. freedom of religion. we can put drugs,gays, violence, nudity on tv but oh nooo please no religion.... wow get right man... unless you have other comments against everything i listed. we hear writers opinions everyday on tv, but once they express some religious views this Canadian has some complaints...