Cathardincu Surprisingly incoherent and boring

SoTrumpBelieve Must See Movie...

Merolliv I really wanted to like this movie. I feel terribly cynical trashing it, and that's why I'm giving it a middling 5. Actually, I'm giving it a 5 because there were some superb performances.

Bergorks If you like to be scared, if you like to laugh, and if you like to learn a thing or two at the movies, this absolutely cannot be missed.

Viewer111 "Flowers for Algernon" is one of my all time favorite short stories. The later novel is good and this movie is excellent. Beautiful music. Superb acting. Moving story.I give this movie an A+

Xophianic I already knew the story behind FLOWERS FOR ALGERNON before I saw the TV movie. I've always thought the story was, although maybe a little sad, a pretty interesting story. And I really like the way it was written when I read it, through the eyes of Charlie and his journal. I had once seen a very old version of FLOWERS FOR ALGERNON movie based on the book. As I recall, the acting was horrible and the movie was badly presented, but it was ok because it was true to the book. This one is the opposite. It's still very good, but it has good acting and was presented well, but is a little less similar to the book.Charlie Gordan (Matthew Modine) is a retarded gentleman who wants more than anything to learn and be a genius. He attends regular classes for special people taught by the beautiful Alice Kinian (Kelli Williams). When Dr. Strauss (Ron Rifkin) is testing an operation that can make mentally retarded people incredibly smart, Alice sets Charlie up for it as a test. Charlie becomes incredibly smart, with an IQ over 200, but is very unhappy when he realizes that this whole time his so-called "friends" were actually mocking him behind his back. Just as he starts to find happiness when he falls in love with Alice, and Alice falls in love with him, he learns that the effects of the operation are only temporary and has to try his hardest to learn how to stop from becoming retarded again.This movie lacks a few things from the original. One is that it is not presented through the viewpoint of Charlie's journal, of course. This couldn't have been done, but it was a lot better from that viewpoint. Algernon, the mouse that was another test for this operation that Charlie makes friends with, is underplayed. It's strange to say a mouse was underplayed, but it's true. Considering that Algernon is in the title, this is strange. The beginning of this movie is also kind of rushed and can be confusing if you didn't already know the story.But the solid acting and great dramatic scenes make up for all the faults. Matthew Modine does great as both the stupid and smart Charlie Gordan. Kelli Williams certainly stole the show. Whether she was crying or laughing, the emotions seemed so real. She did an excellent job.One thing that I found very strange was that many places, even this database, listed this movie as a comedy. It's no comedy. What are we expected to laugh at? The ignorant retarded people? Do you find that funny? I sure didn't. This movie is way more of a drama with an interesting plot. It's certainly not a comedy.I'd recommend reading the original story above seeing this movie. But if it came down to a choice between this one and the older movie based on the same story, I'd choose this one in a heartbeat. If it's ever on TV again, it's certainly worth watching.

hawktwo I was surprised to surf into this movie last week. I remembered the wonderful job Cliff Robertson had achieved in the same role -- movie was called Charly -- and for which he received an Oscar.Matthew Modine managed to quite believably transform himself into the various personas for this movie -- a very demanding role. At times he even physically seemed to be different persons. Based on this movie, I think he is very under-used and under-rated.

jimmyplm I watched this made for television movie last night and found it to be quite an entertaining movie. I read the book in high school, so I was already familiar with the plot. While the book is better (that is inevitable with any film adaptation of a novel), this was a fairly good film. I think that Matthew Modine did a wonderful job playing Charlie Gordon. I have seen an older film adaptation of the novel (I think it was called "Charlie"), and it was nowhere near as good as this version. I recommend this movie to anyone who has read the classic novel.