Garden State. And Zach in general.

Submitted by BatmanMK1989 t3_10p2qli in movies

I just watched Garden State for the first time in a LONG time and wow. So well done. The portrayal of a guy medicated and "dead" inside for so long Not many movies make me care about the characters like this one does. And I SO wanted to know how their lives turned out. Hard to believe this was Zachs first movie(right?). How did he attract the level of talent? Ian, Natalie, etc. I don't think he ever topped this as a behind the camera guy.

Look, he will always be JD to me. I mean that in a good way. I can watch Scrubs once a year. But I generally love the man, or at least what we see of him as fans. I was sad for him when Florence moved on. I have no desire to see that flick either.

What are your thoughts on Garden State and/or Zach Braff?

3

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

datraceman t1_j6ilvq1 wrote

I think the hate for the film today is people that weren't in college/young adults in the era that film came out don't get it.

Looking at the film through a 2023 mindset makes it look like a terrible movie because the worldview of the younger generation has changed.

Everyone and I mean EVERYONE I went to college with at Florida State I knew loved that movie.

Why?

It was the first movie that spoke to us. That weird transitional generation of people who were born in the analog world and then when we got to middle school dial up internet and email and AOL instant messenger came into our lives.

Our whole world changed in 2 years.

We were also the first generation of kids that were en masse put on drugs for hyperactivity, etc. We were the last generation of latch key kids.

Our parents were absent a lot of the time and we had to figure out how to cope with a world that changed so fast.

It sounds dumb to people born after say 1990 but to those of us born in the mid-80s...the world got fucking weird.

We went from watching Saturday Morning Cartoons to having a Cartoon Network 24/7.

We went from Records and Tapes to CDs to Napster in 10 years.

We went from 8-BIT Nintendo to PS2 in 10 years.

We went from calling your friends on the phone or the night before saying I'll meet you at the telephone pole at 9am in the summertime to sitting on AIM and being the first generation of teenagers with internet drama.

Mentally we were all fucked up because life changed so quickly from the analog world to the everyone is connected world.

Our parents couldn't even begin to cope with the world changing either so when we acted out it was easier to put us on a drug than figure out how to deal with it.

The movie is about this guy trying to not live feeling numb anymore. Just as he makes the decision to get off ALL the drugs he was on, his mom dies. There's that scene in the movie where he talks about the necklace and his mom hugging him and talking about trying to cope. If he was all doped up he would have passively observed it, instead he was actually feeling his feelings.

In Natalie Portman, he feels something about her and he's drawn to her and he spends the whole movie trying to figure out what it is. What it is, is he's attracted to her and falling for her and since he isn't all doped up anymore, he's coming off the chemicals and learning to just feel his feelings again and sort them out.

If you watch his character arc from his numb reaction to that shirt that matched the wallpaper where he just looks numb and dead inside to getting angry and protective over Sam near the end of the movie he's learned to feel his emotions and he's saying things and acting on them.

Him running back to Sam saying I don't know how this is going to work but I want to be with you is his final transformation into a real human moving on with his life. Had he abandoned her in the airport and not gone back to her, he'd be living a numb life just like he would have if he was still on the drugs. By going back to her, he was choosing to live more dangerously and be open to getting hurt and not numbing his emotions.

It's also why the conversation with his dad was so important in the movie. Had he chosen to stay on the drugs, he and his dad would have just been shadows but because he wasn't feeling "numb" anymore, he had the tough conversation with his dad and engaged him for the first time as as adult.

Trying to look at this movie with a 2023 won't make any damn sense.

For those of us who lived through that timeframe..it speaks to us differently.

I haven't watched the movie in a long time but its still on my DVD shelf. As a now late 30-something with a wife and kid it's a reminder to me to not make the same mistakes my parents did and engage my kids way better than my parents did. it doesn't mean my parents didn't love me, it just means they didn't do a good job helping me process my emotions and who I am. I want my kid to be able to cope with life and be productive and not go through a lot of the pain my generation did. She'll go through other types of pain than I did.

32

BatmanMK1989 OP t1_j6ixo4z wrote

Man, what a great response. Thank you for this. I experienced all those things as well.

6

3720-To-One t1_j6ivqnx wrote

I dunno… I was in college in the mid/late 2000s and I just found Garden State to be boring and uninspiring.

It seemed to me to be a typical indie film that lacked typical plot elements, and was just a slice of time out of the characters’ lives, without any real plot complication or climax, or resolution.

Some people like those kinds of movies, I’m not a huge fan.

Different strokes for different folks.

2

TheFudge t1_j6lfk4t wrote

This was crazy to read. I was about 21 smack in the middle of all of this and thought it was the most amazing time. But looking back I can’t imagine how a kid between 11-16 would handle all of that change in such a short period of time.

1

Barnitch t1_j6lmzqu wrote

Here I am mindless scrolling Reddit about a 19 year old movie…and I see FSU and Xennis mentioned. Hell yeah, my friend. C/O ‘01. Go Noles.

1

AlanMorlock t1_j6mxazi wrote

K find thst most of its downturn in reputation is from peoplmwho WERE the right age for it, were deeply, into it at thst certain point in ther lives and are now very embarrassed by it.

1

Griffdude13 t1_j6iasvp wrote

I think the thing that aged the worst is Sam's lack of change over the course of the film. She's there to inspire change in Andrew, and that's it. That's the achilles heel of the flick that keeps it from being something more.

There's a reason that this film is pegged as being the prime example of the problem with the "manic pixie dram girl" trope.

30

theyusedthelamppost t1_j6k51eg wrote

>I think the thing that aged the worst is Sam's lack of change over the course of the film.

It's a small-scoped movie that doesn't have enough spare time to tell more than one character's story. It has something to say about a character. I don't think it should be criticized for not having more to say about more characters.

Could it have been a better movie if it expanded the budget and extended the running time beyond 102 minutes to include more character development? Possibly. But Braff probably didn't have an extra million dollars laying around to make it happen. And I don't think he should be criticized for that.

4

ashinaclan123 t1_j6j12tn wrote

Reddit is the only place I’ve seen where people don’t like garden state lol

2

WiserStudent557 t1_j6j2y86 wrote

There’s a valid criticism here, I think it’s overblown on Reddit though.

11

ashinaclan123 t1_j6j4nlm wrote

Could summarize Reddit in general with that one sentence lol. Look at Velma for example.

2

Visible-Basket201 t1_j6owtmc wrote

Sam’s not the lead though. The movie isn’t about her character going through a change it’s about Andrew and his transformation. So everything else in the movie could be a banana or a shoelace as long as it serves that story. Sam is the girl that opens him up and brings him back to life. She served her purpose for the story.

2

SmittyFjordmanjensen t1_j6i9q8s wrote

I've seen a lot of pretentious filmmaking- and have read some pretentious things, too- and still don't understand the blanket criticism that this movie is pretentious. It seems honest and thoughtful and heartfelt- is that what pretentious means to some people?

14

BatmanMK1989 OP t1_j6iacco wrote

Yeah I dont get the prerenjous tag. I could maybe see self indulgent being applied, though I wouldn't agree with that either. The medicated aspect makes me think he had some personal experience with that sort of thing.

4

WiserStudent557 t1_j6j3rjq wrote

It’s weird because I think Zach is almost anti-establishment/anti-pretense in this but because his family and town is relatively wealthy that people read the movie as pretentious instead of the environment/characters?

1

Nord4Ever t1_j6ifvjc wrote

If a fun movie when you’re in college I don’t think it would work as well on me now

11

BatmanMK1989 OP t1_j6ig96j wrote

LoL. As a 50 year old now, I found myself wondering...would any of his drugs help my mental issues 🤪

1

warfield008 t1_j6io6af wrote

the best thing about it by far is the soundtrack

8

WiserStudent557 t1_j6j3xj8 wrote

Not even a criticism, it’s truly a feature of the film. I love when movies really use the music and Garden State does a few times really well

3

mikeyfreshh t1_j6i2ntq wrote

I think the movie is pretty overrated and pretentious but I do like The Shins

7

Owasso_Landman t1_j6iduna wrote

Careful. Reddit hates Zach because he stole Florence away from them.

7

BatmanMK1989 OP t1_j6ie3p1 wrote

LoL. Yeah I don't see it with her. At ALL. ATJ a million times over.

1

gggh5 t1_j6i6c63 wrote

I saw a tik tok awhile back about how manic pixie dream girls really just come off on screen like women with autism without being intentionally written that way.

I don’t know if it holds for every MPDG trope but it definitely works for Natalie Portman in Garden State.

6

Owasso_Landman t1_j6ie0oj wrote

Citing TikTok film criticism is peak Reddit.

5

OfferOk8555 t1_j6ijk6d wrote

Lolol tbf MPDG has been a thing for a minute

3

Owasso_Landman t1_j6ilnnk wrote

Yes and the guy who coined the phrase regrets it and wishes he hasn’t ever talked about it.

5

OfferOk8555 t1_j6irlsz wrote

Interesting, like in what context?

Like he came up with the concept to fetishize said type of person? And then regretted cause dudes on the internet are weird and took it too far??

Or like he came up with it to critique what he saw as a new flawed character archetype in movies but thinks the criticism is over used or improperly used?

Or something else?

3

Creeping_Death_89 t1_j6kfywk wrote

Per the article:

>the term was coined in 2007 by The Onion's "A.V Club" film critic Nathan Rabin, who found it grating, as he believed it to be the result of Wish-Fulfillment from stir-crazy writers. He explicitly compared it to the Magical Negro, in that a Manic Pixie Dream Girl exists to help the protagonist achieve happiness without ever seeking any independent goals herself. Rabin would later disown the term, because instead of creating awareness of the "lack of independent goals in female characters", the concept was misunderstood as a condemnation of ALL quirky and fun female characters.

8

OfferOk8555 t1_j6kj92d wrote

Lolol that fact that people came to that conclusion from that criticism is so goddamn lame…. I completely agree with the criticism as far as wish fulfillment goes but the fact that people missed that mark that hard is embarrassing

1

Owasso_Landman t1_j6izjp1 wrote

Essentially, he came up with the idea for a very, very specific type of character and now every wannabe film critic uses it to describe and undermine every female character.

6

gggh5 t1_j6j5vl0 wrote

The Bechdel Test has entered the chat

5

WiserStudent557 t1_j6j3haw wrote

I see this a lot. People come up with an observation that isn’t wrong but people pretend it’s a complete eye opener and all media must now be assessed though that (one) lens so things are still inaccurate (lol) but consistent to a certain angle/take

Makes me think a bit of how Malcolm Gladwell is mostly fluff on top of common sense but the fluff is what really engages readers

3

BatmanMK1989 OP t1_j6i6v5r wrote

I didn't even know this was a category lol. What other characters fall into this group?

4

gggh5 t1_j6i73r8 wrote

There’s a lot actually https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ManicPixieDreamGirl

Natalie Portman I think is the most solid example, but there were a lot of shows/movies made with them in the 90’s / early 2000’s.

Zoey Deschanel in The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy is also a pretty good example.

5

jngjng88 t1_j6iavra wrote

That's pretty much Zooey being Zooey if we're being honest lol (not a criticism, I like her)

5

bupde t1_j6jpold wrote

Dharma from Dharma and Greg. There is also a whole show I didn't watch much of called manic pixie dream wife about a guy who marries his manic pixie dream girl (which is basically Dharma and Greg).

It is all over the place.

1

herewego199209 t1_j6hztk7 wrote

I never really liked Garden State. Some of it is a bit too pretentious to me and that has plagued all of Zach Braffs movies and I have iffy opinions on how he funded his second movie, but you can tell right away Garden State is a movie that he poured his heart and soul into it. It has that raw feeling to it. I can appreciate his first two features for that. You can tell they're super personal pieces of work for him.

5

BatmanMK1989 OP t1_j6i0cgq wrote

Can you elaborate on the funding? Was that Last Kiss?

2

herewego199209 t1_j6i18dp wrote

His second feature I wish You were Here was done through crowd-funding. My issue was that asking fans who love you and are probably just making ends meet to fund your movie when you made 10s of millions of dollars on Scrubs is fucked.

4

BatmanMK1989 OP t1_j6i1usb wrote

Wish I was Here, just looked it up. I think I saw it, but if I did, I retained none of it lol

1

PrismaticWonder t1_j6i66sv wrote

I agree. I loved Garden State when it came out, and I still love it, although it is flawed. But I get the impression it’s a movie people love to trash-talk a lot, like it’s a go-to “bad” movie, but I don’t think it deserves that much hate.

5

bobpetersen55 t1_j6ih83m wrote

When I watched this recently, a quote stood out to me where the doctor asks him if he is alright and he said "yeah!". Then the doctor followed up with: "Yeah, you're alright. You're alive." It was just so simple and a heartwarming piece of dialogue that easily can get lost in a movie but meant a lot.

4

EdgerQuintero t1_j6i5pua wrote

My best friend works in the industry, in front of the camera. Saw him in October. He was and does work on major TV shows and movies. Asked him in 30 years of doing this professionally who was the worst to work with, and he said without hesitation. Zack Braff. I said no way, and he said he's acts like an entitled a hole and pretentious as hell. And I thought of 6 or 7 folks before I asked the question.

However, I still love Scrubs and Garden State, but it does make me look at a few scenes with a little more scrutiny.

2

BatmanMK1989 OP t1_j6i6ppq wrote

I mean, I could accept this for sure. That's why I qualified my statement with " what we see as fans". It's disappointing, but not surprising. Also, do you find it interesting that he's never been a part of the franchises out there that so many actors have jumped on? Your MCUs, DC type stuff. Personal choice or a product of his difficulty to work with?

3

EdgerQuintero t1_j6ip491 wrote

When talking to someone who works on set, it's interesting to know that unless your a DeNiro or Pesci or Baldwin level actor, he's worked with all 3, 2 were a holes, word gets around. I'd say, IF Zack was truly hard to work with, big budget movies don't want to put up with the nonsense. Making movies and TV shows is a lot of work and money. So, the producers and the casting managers typically avoid even having these folks read for roles. So, to answer your question in a long, winded way, the latter. Interesting add, my friend is based solely in NYC, so there are probably other actors dealing with these problems as well, especially those that shoot on locations or are shot in LA. Zack might have more "connections" being in LA, and it's possible that the powers that be are okay with him being a douche of a person.

2

luckydayisascam t1_j6i84hq wrote

It's been ages but I remember the end they decided not to stay together and to part and they talked about it somewhat in depth, then in the end fuck that noise and they decided to just stay together. And I hated that. I would've rathered they part, would've actually been somewhat interesting and different.

2

BatmanMK1989 OP t1_j6i8m3o wrote

Like I said, been a while since I saw it. I did not remember how it ended, but I would have been disappointed had he not gone back. Cliche of course, but only a crazy man would leave her behind. I would totally watch the next phase of their lives together. And maybe they don't last. Maybe they do. Maybe she goes to LA to help him pack up his life there. Maybe he gets an offer to good to turn down and she stays and becomes resentful as success goes to his head. Just spitballing lol

2

hardgeeklife t1_j6ion7h wrote

I remember being really into this movie when I was in college. I think there was something I connected with, feeling numb and disengaged from the world with a lot of bottled up emotions that your family really doesn't understand or refuses to engage with. I was obsessed with the soundtrack and gushed about the movie whenever asked

I came back to it a little later, older and better adjusted emotionally. I think there's still something there very honest and true at the heart of the story, but I see some cracks now I didn't notice before. Some shots seem to exist for their own sake, and while they're beautiful, they don't quite feel organically incorporated into the film. Similarly, there are some needle drops that last maybe two seconds and feel out of context; thinking specifically of the Colin Hay lyrics while the camera flies up awkwardly to a top-down shot; another example: the Theivery Corporation slo-mo walk seems to exist to look cool but doesn't connect with anything before or after it.

Likewise some ideas seem to be thrown out but never elaborated on, or if so then only superficially. There's a strong undercurrent about Mark, his aspirations/potential, and his relationship with Andrew, but we don't get a payoff for any of it. We learn about Sam's epilepsy, but it's never followed up on, making it seem like it was just context for the helmet scene.

The ending was always a mixed bag for me, but leaning away from enjoyment as I age. Of course I cheered when I was younger when they stay together, but having been through my own relationship experiences now, it seems a little too neat and Hollywood. It fits the film's message of "Live your life now! Chase your joy!" but at the expense of its subtler lesson of "make time to process your trauma before it damages the relationship around you" as exemplified by the father.

Still, there's a lot to like about the film. Jim Parston's scene is great. Peter Sarsgaard's Mark is believably chill but smarmy, yet friendly enough that you accept him anyway. The "getting pulled over by an old high school acquaintence" scene is hilarious. And the scene with Braff and Ian Holm is cathartic; very well done by both actors.

All in all I still found it enjoyable, but some of the critiques are valid (if sometimes overblown).

2

lnickdog t1_j6lcid0 wrote

Loved that movie in high school. Watched in again last year and boy was it blah. Not a very good screen play. Just filled with emo/generic one-liners.

2

Grizzhead86 t1_j6i48zg wrote

Zach Braff is a genius. Wish I was here was also a really really good film. Existential crises all over his films. You can tell he really has some depth to him and has a great feel for writing. His dialogue and pacing is top notch. I think an underrated filmmaker for sure.

An aside: sucks he go so much plastic surgery I saw him a year or so ago and was like ouch!

0

BatmanMK1989 OP t1_j6i4l5a wrote

Hadn't noticed that

1

Grizzhead86 t1_j6iaa10 wrote

I don’t keep up with how films are funded, I do think that’s not a great thing to have your film crowdfunded, I don’t like that. It’s like are you going to hand out free tickets? You want me to pay for the film and pay for the ticket?

That being said the film was borderline great. Both films are. Go check it out again. I think he’s the best writer/director/actor of this generation. It’s difficult enough to write. It’s extremely difficult to direct, and then to be in front of the camera all in the same film? I can’t think of a better example of someone who does this.

1

BatmanMK1989 OP t1_j6iaqpv wrote

Man, you are gonna take some incoming shots lol. Costner, Eastwood. More recently, Favreau, Affleck. Just to name a few. And I'm not saying I agree with all those choices and I'm sure we will be provided with many we missed.

2

Grizzhead86 t1_j6ibcz8 wrote

Afleck is top notch. Eastwood is the generation before as well as Kevin Costner. Favreau is solid for sure but the amount of depth is lacking in his film making. It depends on what you’re looking for but I don’t think it’s a challenge except the lack of films that Braff has made. He needs to get hooked up with a streaming service to get some stuff produced.

1

BatmanMK1989 OP t1_j6ibubx wrote

Here's the one thing that changed the way I feel about movies Affleck has directed. The Town. It's almost exactly Heat. Once I realized that, I didn't care for it anymore.

1

Grizzhead86 t1_j6ic73i wrote

I think the town is the only one of his I haven’t seen. I have heard nothing but good things though. He has the eye and the depth to his filmmaking though that is pretty amazing though I’m not a huge fan of his acting on a consistent basis. It’s odd that he’s a much better filmmaker than just an actor. He can write a screenplay but chat read and dissect a screenplay? Seems like one would go hand in hand with the other.

2

BatmanMK1989 OP t1_j6icg3y wrote

I think he didnt say no to a lot of things he should have, as an actor. In an effort to carve out a career for himself. Changing Lanes and Forces of Nature come immediately to mind

1

Grizzhead86 t1_j6jrlzt wrote

Ummm gigli? Come the fuck on. He should’ve been more selective he just does anything which makes him a movie star and not a real actor.

1

OfferOk8555 t1_j6ik18v wrote

It’s definitely in the 500 Days of Summer, Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind vein of “Mr, nice guy” movies.

Has a lot of heart but flawed and will probably continue to age kind of poorly.

0

MartinScorsese t1_j6i0dft wrote

I think Garden State has some strong images, but it has not aged well. Once you realize that Natalie Portman's character is a Manic Pixie Dream Girl, the whole thing kind of falls apart.

EDIT: I should also add that Portman fulfills a similar role in Beautiful Girls, which I think is a better movie.

−1

rxneutrino t1_j6i30cx wrote

I do see this perspective, but I have a different take on it. Just because you can give a name to a character trope doesn't mean the whole surrounding film is bad as a result. Garden State cleverly depicts the transition into adulthood using subtleties and symbolism, even if some of the characters are cartoonish and unrealistic. This doesn't just apply to Portman's character. The overall result is still a good film that can elicit emotion.

9

MartinScorsese t1_j6i3qv0 wrote

> Just because you can give a name to a character trope doesn't mean the whole surrounding film is bad as a result.

Well, yes, except this film is entirely about one man's growth - with a young woman as the primary catalyst for it - and when said catalyst is unrealistic, then the whole endeavor rings false.

> using subtleties and symbolism

There's nothing subtle in Garden State.

> The overall result is still a good film that can elicit emotion.

Bad movies can still be manipulative.

0

flexwhine t1_j6i34yg wrote

JD is the most selfish, self centered asshole character and scrubs would have been a thousand times better without him

−1

BatmanMK1989 OP t1_j6i3dyu wrote

Wow, you have strong feelings. I would counter that there would have been no Scrubs without him.

6

HampterDumpster t1_j6i494z wrote

Zach likes young women

−1

BatmanMK1989 OP t1_j6i4u00 wrote

Well, as long as it's not law breaking young, there isn't a real issue, is there?

5

HampterDumpster t1_j6ia1co wrote

Zach likes em young is all.

−2

jngjng88 t1_j6i5d0s wrote

Scrubs is so pedestrian though

I liked Garden State when I was like 20 & heavily depressed, but tried to watch it again last year & nah

−1

BatmanMK1989 OP t1_j6i5wgk wrote

The relationship with JD and Turk. The amazingness of Cox. The guest stars. Never a huge Elliot fan, but this show is fantastic. Opinion of course. Not every show is for everyone. This was one of the last network comedies that was truly exceptional, IMO.

6

jngjng88 t1_j6i7jpp wrote

Just to name a few:
Arrested Development
Parks & Rec
Brooklyn Nine Nine

Scrubs is so utterly middling & lazily written, the whole setting is just a prop, it's like a comedy version of a Bruckheimer procedural, just being honest.

−4

BatmanMK1989 OP t1_j6i9lk1 wrote

Wow, great list. Arrested and Parks are all time favorites of mine. The Netflix stuff kind of fell flat, but I still appreciate it existing. And, coincidently, going through the last season of B99 right now and sort of really dislike it. This is not the show I look to for viewpoints on real life events, such as police issues. And ooh, Rosa is high, wow how great is it that weed is now available everywhere!? Holt and Jake's interplay has always been the best of that show for me. Braugher breathed life into a truly memorable character. Impeccable delivery.

3

jngjng88 t1_j6iagg2 wrote

We don't talk about the last season of B99 ☠️
absolutely ruined a great show.

Completely agree with everything you said & yeah absolutely loved Braugher/Holt

1

BatmanMK1989 OP t1_j6iauo1 wrote

Ok, glad it wasnt just me who was bothered by the way it was. 5 episodes left.

1

jngjng88 t1_j6ib7vs wrote

There were like a few laughable moments in the last season, but mostly a huge disappointment

1

FNG_Red t1_j6i5zrx wrote

Same liked it when I 16-22 but don't like it now mid 30s

1