TrueHello
Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.
Ketrivie
It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.
SeeQuant
Blending excellent reporting and strong storytelling, this is a disturbing film truly stranger than fiction
Raymond Sierra
The film may be flawed, but its message is not.
Hitchcoc
Cheryl Gordon is a mentally handicapped man, played wonderfully by Cliff Robertson, who is tormented by society. The novella it is based on is a study in how the brain begins to change and his acuity with it. The language changes from stilted phrases to long, complex sentences. Here, things happens fast. Charly has brain surgery and begins to grow in intellect. It is a quantum leap in that he rises to high levels overnight. This is OK because we accept it in the movie, but his lack of experiences aren't really dealt with. Imagine a man not even knowing what the stock market is and then investing in it. He would still have to have the experience of some economic knowledge development. This is a story of great tragedy because the experiences of love and longing stay but he is left to his own designs.
Dalbert Pringle
You know, I still haven't quite made up my mind which character I thought Cliff Robertson played the worst - The mentally defective, Charly Gordon? - or - The brilliant genius, Charly Gordon? If I was actually forced to make a decision about either one of Robertson's truly unconvincing portrayals, I guess I would have to go with his impersonation of the mentally defective, Charly Gordon. I mean, Robertson was so "aw-shucks!" bad that it was downright laughable at times.And, with that in mind, I honestly cannot believe that Robertson actually won an Oscar for his performance, portraying the 2 Charly Gordons. And, besides that, at 45, I thought he was way too old for his character.This 1968 picture (no matter how well-meaning its story was meant to be) not only left me quite dissatisfied with its half-baked theories regarding mental retardation, but, below is a list of 3 of my major beefs against it.(1) I think this film deliberately exploited retardation simply for the sake of a really cornball romantic angle.(2) I thought that it was pretty damn-low that therapist, Alice Kinnian, actually had sex with her patient (Charly Gordon), regardless of his progressing intellectual level.(3) When Charly finally transformed into "Mr. Genius", his character was so unable to see beyond his own sneering cynicism towards his fellow man that it left him incapable of offering any sound solutions to many of man's social/global blunders.Anyway - In conclusion - This was one film that I was hoping would be more than just some entertainment "fluff". But, that's all that it was. 'Cause it was certainly a far cry from being a worthwhile exercise into intellectualism, as it might have been.
JDFeltz
I saw this movie at the drive-in when I was 12. I recall finding it to be a touching tragedy. I used to volunteer with "the special ed class", and found the students there to be gentle and grateful and affectionate, and could never understand how the other kids could make fun of them the way they did. But that only explains how and why this touched me personally, even at the age of 12.Reviews some 30 years after this film was made are very critical, calling it 'schlock', and criticizing the simplification of a complex issue. However, over the last 30-40 years, society has become more enlightened about both mental retardation, but also about what science can and cannot do. It was easier to suspend belief and go with the concept.At the time, this movie conveyed something new about how a mentally retarded person might view their situation....that alone made this film unique; lots of people never even considered the feelings of the mentally retarded, so this film surely opened some eyes.And way ahead of it's time (I'm sure this was never considered in making the film), because it conveys the feelings and reactions of someone who is losing their intellectual capacity....such as those suffering from dementia or Alzheimer's. At that time, little thought was given by the average person about the feelings of either the mentally retarded, or people with Alzheimer's or dementia.I'm sure the book was better than the movie; that almost always goes without saying. However, movies reach audiences that books sometimes don't, and this movie reached a new audience.I'm afraid too many reviewers are unable to see an older movie and not hold it to the same standards, socially, scientifically and a cinematography standpoint. Cinema has evolved, as has society and science, and it's quite interesting to watch "Charly" with that in mind.
thinker1691
Perhaps it's wishful thinking, but there are many people who wish they could learn as much as anyone else. It's sad and downright tragic when you realize you're incapable of advancing common knowledge or higher education. Some are gifted, some are slow and some are just plain retarded and will never comprehend what is being taught. But what if there was a way? What if science could remedy what nature restricted in the human brain? That is the premise for the movie " Charly. " It tells the story of an adult retarded man named Charley Gordon (Cliff Robertson, 1968 Academy Award winner) who is mentally incapable of surmounting even simple challenges like spelling the word 'School.' Inside him is a deep desire to learn, but is mentally unable. That all changes when two brilliant scientists conceive of a medical procedure which can transform, first a mouse, then a human being into not only a educated individual, but a mental genius. Based on the novel "Flowers for Algernon" Cliff Robertson gives a brilliant and visually haunting performance of the retarded man who is suddenly transformed into a genius. Not only does he 'see' better than most, he's able to visualize what escapes even the most sophisticated in society. What he also sadly realizes is that 'increased intelligence equals loss of friends.' Beginning with the ability to learn and learn quickly, his advanced knowledge also unfortunately reveals his own future, a future he confronts the two doctors with. This is a must picture for anyone who'd like to see the man beat the mouse and yet have sympathy for both. A superb cast featuring Claire Bloom, Lilia Skala, Leon Janney and Dick Van Patten as Bert makes for a believable Classic movie. ****