User Score
4.6 out of 10

Mixed or average reviews- based on 24 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 24
  2. Negative: 10 out of 24

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    10 out of 10
    Rate this:
    out of 10
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  3. Characters remaining: 5000 out of 5000

  1. Sep 27, 2011
    4
    I could have given 2 more points if "Charlie St. Cloud" knew what morale it was going to present. Guess it didn't do its homework...
  2. Aug 12, 2010
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Charlie(Zac Efron) sees dead people, but he's not dead, technically. As the surviving brother of a fiery car accident, the film oversells the point of Charlie being dead inside by having him kill time in a graveyard. Yes, we get it. Time can stand still for the living, too; the living dead, like the caretaker, a selective clairvoyant who only sees dead loved ones. Played by Zac Efron, the star of "High School Musical", to everybody's surprise, didn't fare badly last year in Richard Linklater's "Me and Orson Welles", as he ingratiated himself admirably within an ensemble cast. But does he have the stuff that lead actors are made of? Like any young enterprising former teen star, Efron doesn't want to be singing showtunes in "High School Musical 37"(an old teen like Jeff Conaway in "Grease"), but the actor in transition plays it safe this time around in "Charlie St. Cloud", catering to his female devotees by remaining, against all probability, flawlessly handsome, since the car he was driving performed a couple of rolls on the highway. At Sam's funeral, Charlie, for the sake of versimilitude, should be in a wheelchair, or at the very least, have his arm in a sling. In other words, sport some evidence of having been involved in a vehicular crash. Poor Efron has to communicate emotional pain and inner turmoil with an unblemished face and undamaged body. A band-aid on his nose couldn't hurt. Johnny Depp, who once donned scissorhands and a face full of crosshatching scars to distance himself from the sex symbol status he attained from "21 Jump Street", would have insisted on that band-aid(a la Jack Nicholson in Roman Polanski's "Chinatown"), for starters. Depp treated his face like a curse. Efron won't go anywhere until he eschews vanity, and plays "ugly". Not only physically, but emotionally, as well. The moviegoer waits for the moment when Charlie tells Sam(Charlie Tahan) that he'll never be a starting pitcher for the Red Sox, an emotional climax to the utter futility of practice, but the moment never comes. As it turns out, it's Charlie who holds Sam back, even though the younger St. Cloud whines all throughout the movie about remaining loyal to their pact. "Charlie St. Cloud" is a lot darker than it lets on, but thanks to the film's unabashedly Christian underpinning, its good-naturedness and oversentimentality negates any real fallout(drugs and alcohol) from materializing. If "Charlie St. Cloud" went there, would Efron have the acting chops to follow? "Charlie St. Cloud" never captures the tragedy of wasted potential because the moviegoer can't truly feel sorry for somebody who looks like an underwear model. Expand
  3. Aug 19, 2010
    10
    This was an amazing movie! The acting had depth, and the audience was able to easily connect with all characters. If you are stuck in lifes' little moments or are looking for a more purposeful direction, one should really consider viewing this movie.
  4. Sep 4, 2010
    3
    Pretty bad. As a fan of the book I was pretty dissappointed with this movie. I don't think the acting was the issue. The issue definitely was the writing. A few details from the book remained unchanged but the majority of it was thrown out. This was the second biggest let down for me this summer. No movie will ever be as bad as The Last Airbender.
  5. May 11, 2012
    3
    It has good acting, but the story is very shallow. The unpredictability is common here. The lesson that you could've learned from this is missing.
  6. Dec 31, 2011
    1
    Zac Efron gives all his dramatic acting talent (which isn't much) and tries really hard to save this clear rip-off of the lovely bones. Sadly it fails worse than I described om the first sentence. I give this movie 15%.
  7. Dec 29, 2011
    5
    [SPOILER!] - So the brother dies sitting in the passenger seat and Charlie (Zac Efron) makes it out alive without a single scratch, cut or broken/fractured bone? Not very convincing. Touching movie - it's really hard to depict the emotional struggles and pain of a teenager dealing with the death of a loved one; especially close sibling in this case. Zac Efron did a great job communicating to the audience the pain behind that. The ending also didn't really work - I'm glad the two did end up getting together in the end, but everything that brought them to that point was just really confusing, with Efron talking to dead people and then almost dead people and then alive people. The spark and love between the two were well acted-out, however. This movie just didn't bring it all the way back home. Expand
Metascore

Generally unfavorable - based on 30 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 3 out of 30
  2. Negative: 12 out of 30
  1. 20
    You are not, in a movie like this, supposed to think too much; you are supposed to be transported beyond skepticism on a wave of pure, tacky feeling. Instead, in this case, you drown in sentimental, ghoulish nonsense.
  2. It's more like a shelved episode of "Touched by An Angel." The sappy script is a disservice to the naturally effervescent Efron, whose character is so mopey he makes Robert Pattinson seem like a song-and-dance man.
  3. 50
    The movie's central gimmick isn't enough, and when more supernatural twists that don't play by the movie's own fantasy rules kick in, it lost me.