The Education of Charlie Banks

source: The Education of Charlie Banks

Others here have expressed that this Indie film was good and I agree. I think it could have been better. I also agree, the educational part was not about Charlie Banks, who seems very passive and self centered with many short rather flippant comments. He really doesn't rise very high on the intellectual ladder. However, I also felt as a privileged kid who had all his little ducks in a row, and egocentric as most of these people are, the film seemed to project a kind of real life situational social drama. What exactly Charlie learned? Well, I was mystified how a moocher could live and walk about an Ivy League campus without some security officer kicking him out. I suppose this does happen where friends allow for social reasons something like these triangles to happen. But, gosh uncle Elmer how did he eat and live in a dorm room that was rented for two legitimate male students. I suppose the moral crisis comes late in the story, and in fact, Charlie and his Mich buddy were not physically matched for fighting. I would have thought Charlie would have attempted to undermine Mich earlier in the film, rather than passively sulking and accepting this man's total illegitimacy as a college student. However all these picky concerns did not over all make me dislike the flick. I have known students like Charlie before and wondered if they actually had any moral compass other than their own egocentric interests in sex and pleasing their parents. I rated it above my standard 5 to a 7. The film is worth a look !

I was surprised after just viewing this movie through Netflix to see the glowing reviews of this little known art-house style film. The acting was satisfactory, and the story had potential, but the pace of the film after the first 15 or 20 minutes became rather sluggish, and the characters behaved more like high school students than college kids. I must confess that I attended University from 1958 to the mid 70's, earning a doctorate, so I may be behind the times when it comes to campus behavior. Yes there was drinking and parties, (no drugs until the mid 60's), but I only saw one fight in all that time on campus, and none in the 2 years I lived on campus. I never saw Limp Bizkit, but I saw Fred Durst in an indie called Population 436, which I thoroughly enjoyed, and he acted quite well, so it doesn't shock me that he showed genuine competency in his directorial debut. Jesse Eisenberg may annoy some reviewers because he tends to play similar characters in many of his films, but he was the only male in this film that bore any resemblance to college students I knew. I won't restate the plot, as many others have covered it adequately. I didn't hate the film, but I did fast forward a few times using subtitles. And I am no fan of action movies, it's just that this one dragged and rarely came to life. I give it a 5.4 (so I don't have to round it up to 6).

I guess some folks who were young during the Reagan Era got a little nostalgic flashback when seeing The Education Of Charlie Banks. It's a perfect brat pack movie, even being set during the Eighties. And some of today's younger players looked pretty good in Eighties fashions. Jason Ritter is the one who educates young Charlie Banks who is played by Jesse Eisenberg. If this were made in 1987 their roles would have been played by Rob Lowe and James Spader respectively. In fact the film has some similarity to a film they did co-star in back in the day called Bad Influence. Eisenberg is this nerdy rich kid who has been fascinated by tough kid Ritter since childhood. At one point he called the police on Ritter after at a party Ritter beat up and left two others badly injured, but later recanted and Ritter was set free. Years later while at college Ritter comes to visit, ostensibly to visit Eisenberg's roommate Chris Marquette who also knew Eisenberg back in the day. He insinuates himself into college life, maybe a little too much. Jason Ritter does a fine job in displaying both charisma and tension at the same time. We know what a violent individual he is, we can never know what little thing might set him off. And does he know exactly what Eisenberg almost did to him years ago? Sebastian Stan is also in the cast playing what back in the day would be called a wastrel. Here he's just a rich kid floating through the halls of higher learning, just training to be a wastrel. I've met a few like that before and after and Stan's portrayal rings true. I did kind of like what Ritter did to him. The Education Of Charlie Banks takes you back to 1985 to what some call the good old days.

Fred Durst from some music group called 'Limp Bizkit' directed this & it is his first effort. For a first timer he did a first class job. Peter Eckoff wrote this screenplay about some college students in the 1970's at Brown Univ. in Rhode Island. The screenplay is quite intelligent & not the usual college days & nights stuff we usually see. However I felt that the ending was a letdown & to me it hurt MY overall enjoyment of this very well acted & made drama. There are many comic moments BUT this is primarily a drama. Jesse Eisenburg is Charlie & he is just first rate. Jason Ritter who has usually done lighter roles is just magnificent as a confused non conformist & bully. Chris Marquette is there buddy & has most of the funny lines. This is one trio I would like to see again. Eva Amurri is also first rate as a love interest.the entire cast are all first rate. This is another low budget film that only had a very short USA run in March 2009. & released to DVD 3 months later. This is a darn good film,I just did not care for the ending. See it, you may or may not agree with me on the ending, BUT I feel you all will like it. It also is a wee bit overlong. Ratings: *** (out of 4) 84 points (out of 100) IMDb 7 (out of 100)

There are two ways you can look at this film. The first is simply as a drama film like any other, a well-set piece for the epoch it unfolds in; certainly the clothing and set accessories are all in their right place for the 70's/80's. The acting is quite impressive all around: Jesse Eisenberg and Jason Ritter are the stars of the show, commanding very well-built characters; one a more introspective, unspoken kid and the other a more domineering, swagger-carrying bad-ass. Chris Marquette and Sebastian Stan are also worthy of note, as is Eva Amurri as the typical thrill-seeking bored rich girl - the type that tends to want what she can't have, in this case a guy who is perhaps not to be trifled with, possibly of the kind she is ill-equipped to deal with, or at least to deal with as she does - again the typical heart-breaking machinery at work. The other way you can look at this film is as a Fred Durst production. Considering he was the director, you're ready to give it more credit than it would be worth straight out of the bat. It is quite impressive on his part that he was able to put this together (if such was the case), even if marks of a certain lack of experience are visible throughout. First we have the screenplay - some of what the characters are saying is repetitive and at times nonsensical. The dialogue could have been more elaborate - that would certainly have upped the quality and believability quotient - not that the film strays too far from reality - in fact it tends to steer back on track and find it's way safely to the end, yet scenes such as the one when Jason Ritter is in the bar by himself with only a few "workers" around him and the things the barman spouts there. These exhibitions of class demarcation and the like are ultimately unreal. There is also an ongoing attack at "rich people" in general, when the case being considered is that of the spoiled offspring of some rich people - not all "rich people" are worthy of scorn. Second there is the unnecessary use of swear words. At a certain point in the film these just become tiring. Not that films should forcefully not contain these, the simple fact is a film reads differently than, say, a rap album with explicit content. However you look at it, notwithstanding, the film still pulls through successfully. Considering the kind of garbage being thrown our way these days, The Education Of Charlie Banks stands. The title is fitting; indeed, even if we may think otherwise, Charlie is the one who ends up learning from things. He in a way corrects his ways and makes the right choice. He shows humanity, he tries to be cooperative as opposed to being oppressive. Here the film triumphs, in that it reveals a positive message. Kudos to otherwise career-dead Durst for carrying this one through; let's hope he learns from his mistakes and rises to make better things? One can't help but think this could have been so immensely better with a different director, yet it is still surprising that it was carried under his wing. 6.5(7)/10

This film could have been better if the acting was better. Jason Ritter is riding on the coattails of his late dad. Certainly he is no John Ritter.The vastly underrated, John Ritter had range and went from slapstick to straight man comedy to drama in 'Sling Blade' and did it well. His range was terrific. Jason Ritter playing the bad boy bully , stalking his nemesis in college was ineffective. Than again, none of the actors shined in this film. This was just a bad effort all around. There was no acting chemistry or believability. Certainly getting lost in this plot was impossible. The shame of it all, is that the movie , with better acting could have worked. The plot ,itself, was interesting. Articulation there was none. Direction .. Nothing. This film could have been a contender , instead, collectively , it fell flat on its face.

Saw this on Netflix streaming movies. Now that Jessie Eisenberg has become well known after his starring role in "The Social Network" it is interesting to see him in an earlier movie. I'm not sure he has much range as an actor, but he was ideal for this role. Jesse Eisenberg is Charlie, and we see glimpses of his character in grade school. He is a timid sort, and we see a kid his age who hangs around with older kids, smokes, and appears to be a "hot head." In high school, the bully kid, Mick, gets angry, beats a larger guy to near death in his anger. To do the right thing Charlie, a witness to the attack, reports Mick, and the police arrest him. Charlie's friend Danny doesn't approve, because he is also friends with Mick. It gets a bit complicated. However a few years pass, Charlie is in college at a pastoral campus in upstate NY, Mick and his trouble are long forgotten. That is, until Charlie comes back to his dorm room, shared with Danny, and finds Mick there. Shocked, Charlie wonders if Mick has come to get revenge. It is unclear why Mick is there, and how long he will stay, and soon he is "auditing" courses. I never much cared for Jason Ritter as an actor, but here as bad boy Mick he is very good. Maybe that is the key, he is made for bad boy roles. Eva Amurri is Mary, the college girl that Charlie likes, but that Mick steals away. And Chris Marquette (of Joan of Arcadia) is Danny. SPOILERS: Mick seems to be toying with Charlie, at once seeming to be ready to beat him to a pulp or then playing around with him. Mick is a dangerous person and Charlie treats him that way. It turns out Mick is on the run from the law, after getting into a fight and beating someone to death. He has a close similar incident on campus when insulted by someone. Finally Mick disappears, we don't know his fate, but we do see that he is troubled, he understands his fault but doesn't know how to deal with it.

For about the first half hour or so this movie is OK and appears to be going someplace. After, it just dwindles into a lot of college dialogue. It's all a little stale and lacking in any of the tension that existed in the first part of the film. It's trying desperately to make a statement on juvenile delinquents, crime, guilt and that type of thing and never succeeds. Also why do the guys keeping hugging each other every time they meet? I kept waiting for something of significance to occur but aside from some pretty girls and a short hot-tub scene it's a fast forward movie. It's a poor version of 'The Talented Mr. Ripley'.

This is an excellent film with a great cast. Jason Ritter gives an outstanding performance. I thought the title should be "The Education of Mick". It's really Mick that we see undergoing a transformation when he visits the college from a thug to a misunderstood kid trying to find a better life for himself. I really didn't find Eisenberg's character Charlie Banks interesting or sympathetic at all. I didn't identify with his character who was mostly cold & distant and very little was revealed about him personally. Part of this is the fault of the writer, but also Eisenberg was just wrong for the part. He was mainly just an observer & didn't get into any conflicts until the last scene. Mick on the other hand reveals his complex nature and shows he's not just a bully with a difficult upbringing but someone who has compassion and is a loyal friend. Without a doubt Ritter is the star of this film, not Eisenberg.