I don't know which is the better way to say it - this wasn't a very good movie but it had some humorous moments, OR, this film had some humorous moments but it wasn't very good. I guess it works both ways, my second option at least starts off with sort of a compliment.This is the kind of film I would have related to a lot better when I was around the same age as the principals, but a lifetime of living (and watching thousands of movies) has offered a somewhat different perspective. I really don't have anything against the picture per se, it's just that the characters and situations are fundamentally shallow and made quirky for the sake of being quirky. Where else for example would you find an armor wearing Renaissance actor, a silent-Velcro inventor guy or a guardian of the infinite abyss? All a bit too pretentious to be taken seriously, not to mention Natalie Portman's invisible epilepsy and inability to speak the truth. Then there's the entire question I have about the ethics of a father prescribing medication for an immediate family member. Seems to me like there could be some kind of grounds there for medical malfeasance there, in fact I was bothered enough by that to look it up. To keep it simple, the A.M.A. states that physicians generally should not treat themselves or members of their immediate families because professional objectivity may be compromised when an immediate family member or the physician is the patient.Anyway, without scorching the picture, I'd give Zach Braff some credit for coming up with a relatively decent first time writing and directorial effort. I thought he did a nice acting job on 'Scrubs', but because of that, probably should have nailed that business on the doctor/patient relationship. He probably knows better by now.

I was lucky enough to find a DVD copy of this film in my local library. Being a die-hard fan of Scrubs and Zach Braff, I decided to rent this film out not expecting much. Two hours later, I was sitting in my living room amazed by this little film. It's difficult to summarize this film because, well I found anyway, it takes multiple viewings to fully understand Garden State. At first viewing, it's a story about an actor trying to re-connect with his family after his mother's death. Then, another viewing and you appreciate the love story between Andrew (Braff) and Sam (the always wonderful Natalie Portman). Another viewing and understand Andrew trying to re-connect with people he knew from growing up, such as Mark (Peter Sarsgaard). It is here that you realize just how out of place Andrew now is at home.After a fourth viewing, you see that it is about a struggling actor trying to find his purpose, and a woman who gives him purpose.This film will make you think, and think and think and think again, and those are the best types of films. With possibly the best soundtrack of any film of all time, Garden State is worth more than the multiple viewings it warrants. It is now one of my go-to films.

Garden State (2004): Dir: Zach Braff / Cast: Zach Braff, Natalie Portman, Peter Sarsgaard, Ian Holm, Jean Smart: Target audience is not totally focused but its title seems to address several themes including death, beauty and revaluation. Written, directed and starring Zach Braff who arrives home for his mother's funeral. He doesn't look forward to facing his father who has kept him under strict medication throughout most of his life due to circumstances that led to his mother being in a wheelchair. Concluding scene between he and his father lack the emotional impact that it needed. Braff does a fine job behind and in front of the camera as someone searching for explanation and experience. Natalie Portman steals scenes as a convulsive liar he is attracted too whom he spends much soul searching time with. Peter Sarsgaard is well cast as one of his friends who digs graves and smokes dope. Unfortunately Ian Holm as his father is underused and his scenes lack the emotional power needed to make them work. Jean Smart plays the mother of the Sarsgaard. She is a recovering alcoholic who has faith in her son. Considering his great performance in The Sweet Hereafter this is indication that Holm is wasted. Decent independent filmmaking that works on some levels while misfiring on others but it contains an interesting theme regarding direction and one's mind set. Score: 6 ½ / 10

A quietly troubled young man (Zach Braff) returns home for his mother's funeral after being estranged from his family for a decade.This film hit a generation hard and was in no small way responsible for popularizing indie music, with the Shins in particular. Soundtracks with Shins, the Bravery and more started floating around. Thanks, Zach Braff, you single-handedly changed the music industry.Interestingly, this film features Jim Parsons before his big break. Not that his role is huge, but it is big enough that anyone watching today (2015) will recognize him as Sheldon (and probably not much else).And this was back before Natalie Portman switched from fun films to critically acclaimed work. She does both very well.