Rating: 
Summary: Excellent, enjoyable -- also manipulative, unsurprising
Review: I agree with most of the praise AND insults below. This is a highly enjoyable film, very well made. Great sets, acting, music. But it's also highly manipulative -- a paint-by-number Hollywood tearjerker, full of cliches, that pushses all the buttons. Have you seen the trailer? Then you know EVERYTHING in this film. The trailer told the ENTIRE STORY, including how it ended (so many trailers do that, it seems). Here's what you get from the trailer: A black teen genius in the ghetto befriends a reclusive white writer. Writer teaches the teen in return for keeping his secret -- where he's living. Proving his mettle, the teen gets transfered to a rich white school, then he gets stereotyped, and falsely accused of plagiarism by a somewhat racist teacher. Looks like he's done for. But then the white writer gains courage (through the teen's help) to leave his shell, and vindicates the teen genius to much applause. Break out the hankies. It was all in the trailer -- the entire film -- all 136 minutes of it. This is also one of those films that can't decide on an ending. It "ends" several times. You think, okay, that's it. But new endings keep getting tacked on. Like the director couldn't settle on an ending, and so uses them all, each meriting still more tears. I disagree with some of the below remarks that this breaks some stereotypes. The smart black ghetto kid, vicimtized by a racist "system", has been a cliche since the 1960s. Still, I enjoyed the film. Like E.T., you know the whole story going in, but it's so well made you still like it. PS: There's a MAJOR BLOOPER in this film. The teen is told that if his copying was with Forrester's permission, that that "would be different." NOT! If he had Forrester's permission, if would not be copyright infringement -- it would STILL be plagiarism. Think about it. If you buy a term paper from someone, and hand it in as your own, you have the author's permission -- but it's STILL plagiarism, no? I wonder if the filmmaker didn't know this, or did but hoped that the audience would miss it.
Rating: 
Summary: An excellent screenwrite, Connery couldn't be better, A+
Review: Harlem is a place where even the police are afraid to patrol at night. Scene's of car fires highlight the darkness of the evening as Jamal walks home in the pouring rain. Jamal and his brother live with their mother in the apartment projects. Jamal's brother works as a parking supervisor. Jamal's father is no longer with them, he had a problem with drinking and one day, his father got tried of trying and abandon the family. The family homelife and environment does not become a dismal factor in the movie. For the most part, the director moves the characters environment into a rich private prestigous academic setting and Forrester's book filled think tank home. Forrester apartment becomes the holy sancuary for the exchange of ideas, it is a place where social idioms are excluded. Jamal mimicks an strong adoration to be the next Michael Jordon. Basketball is a vehicle for gaining acceptance with his friends, but writing is his real passion. To remain popular Jamal maintains average class room test scores but his intelligence test scores reveal phenomenial intelligence to everyones surprise. Jamal's mother is shocked at her son's performance and tells the principle that she sees Jamal's constantly reading books and writing but never believed he was so intelligent. Jamal defiance surrounding a young black boy stereotype painting him as ignorant; this annoys him as so he humilates the owner of a BMW with historical BMW triva. Jamal seems very vocal about hipocracy and patronization. The director explores some of the common stereotypes about young black boys. But stereotypes is not what this film is about, so alot of the darker realities are disquised in humor or confrontation. Jamal's scores attract the attention of a private school who is willing to pay for his tutution in return for him coming to learn and play basketball. Why do they want Jamal: Brain power build prestige, prestige attacks money, and money keeps the school going. So why did Jamal need to play basketball? The story line breaks into two themes. Jamal must prove he has something to offer the rich private school community: A basketball state champions and quality submission for the annual writing contest. Forcing the theme, "an athletic scholar." It seems like the basketball had very little to do with the story. The director created a very believable scenerio about how Jamal meets Forrester. Jamal plays basketball with his friends on the basketball court outside his apartment. The friends talk about Forrester, who seems to watch something, everyday from his balcony window. Jamal later learns that Forrester is a bird watcher. The original strangeness of Forrester behavior leads his friend to a challenge him to take something from Forrester's apartment. Jamal takes the dare. The challenge goes bad, as Forrester spoils Jamals dare by surprising him. In the process of fleeing, Jamal drops his backpack in Forrester's home. Later Forrester puts the backpack in the window taunting Jamal. Eventually Forrester throws Jamal his backpack. Upon inspecting the contents and notes, Jamal realizes Forrester has add comments to his notes. Jamal returns to Forrester's apartment and wants him to read more of his writing. Forrester tells Jamal to write five thousand words why you should stay out of my house. Forrester agrees to review some other writings by Jamal. Jamal engages in small talk for which Forrester tells Jamal that "Asking questions is to get information you need." Start typing, sometimes the rythm of punching the keys will start the flow of ideas. Forrester encourages confident telling Jamal to punch the keys. Forrester gives Jamal a publisher article to copy and creating into his own story, telling Jamal sometimes using another story will help create a story that is uniquely yours. Jamal sits in confusion. Forrester tells him when your creating the draft write from your heart. After your done proof the writing with you head, concluding the best feeling in the world is when you've finished your first draft before the editors cut it up and change it. Forrester viewed writing as intellectual liberation. Jamal assumed Forrester's book was not popular which lead to a challenge for him to acquire a copy. The public library had twenty four copies of his book and all the copies were checked out, so Jamal had to be put on the waiting list. Jamal follows Forresters technique in using a conjunction to start a sentence.
The F word is used as an emotional expression, first by Forrester when yelling at Jamal for breaking into his home, and second by Jamal when Forrester refuses to defend him from the board. Harlem changed, Forrester didn't. Its been fifty years since Forrester went out among people. His first experience going out into public was a basketball game that lead to a disaster with Forrester cowarying in a supply closet until Jamal found him. Jamal takes Forrester to a baseball stadium built by Babe Ruth on his birthday. Why did Forrester only write one book? Forrester and his brother were very close before the war. They would go to the baseball games together. After the war, his brother start to drink heavily. Forrester promised his mother, he would help his brother through this time. The nurse tells Forrester his book meant so much to him as his brother was dieing. Friendship and privacy provide the cohesive element to Jamal and Forrester relation. Jamal promises to protect the identity of Forrester. Jamal promised the writings created in the apartment would stay their. Jamal comes under scrutiny from the private school professor because of his dramatic improvement in writing skill. Jamal comes under the influence of dangerous terms with the professor, he has embarrassed. Jamal submits work labeled under a title Forrester has published in the New Yorker. The professor researches the title and wants to expel Jamal. Jamal want Forrester to clear him, but Forrester wants to maintain his anonymous nature. Friction developes between the mentor and student. Later a trade is negotiated between Jamal and the board. Jamal will help the school win the basketball championship and everything will be dropped. Jamal throws the game. Obviously, academic excellence becomes more important than athletics to Jamal. This seems to be the director's secondary theme's intent. Forrester comes to Jamals school and reads a letter sent to him after the failed game. Charges against Jamal are drop by the chairman of the board. Jamal is esteemed as a brilliant sixteen year writer. Forrester leaves for his home land of Scottland and dies of cancer.
Rating:
Summary: A real Movie is something that moves, this one is a gem
Review: A real Movie is something that moves, this one is a gem. Hollywood needs more such gems. Enough talking, time for another good movie...
Rating: 
Summary: This Was A Pretty Good movie
Review: Don't get me wrong, it was a great movie with a wonderful storyline. it wasn't the best Sean Connery movie ever, but it was still good. Rob Brown did a good job as Jamal. I just wish people would quit knocking Sean Connery. And one other thing: TOOmuch language. Sorry folks, but I just don't like that, and there's no sense in it.
Rating: 
Summary: This is the most boring movie ever.
Review: If you want to see a good movie that is very similar to this one, see Good Will Hunting. It is along the same lines, only about 100 times better.
On to this dreck. This movie was awful. Every movie needs a story. Guess what? This one doesn't. It's 130 minutes of the black guy talking to a pissy Sean Connery, who, by the way should retire because he hasn't been in a good movie since The Rock and wasn't in anything good before that, with the acception of the Bond films. I don't understand the average rating of 4/5 stars on this one-it should be one at the most.
So if you have sleep apnea and have trouble sleeping, just put in Finding Forrester-it is gaurunteed you will be knocked out within 20 minutes.
And don't be worried about missing a big plot development because THERE AREN'T ANY.
So if you want a good, heart-fealt, smart, well-written/acted/directed, try Good Will Hunting over this.
Rating:
Summary: Thank you Nick.
Review: People, please!! Are you kidding me with these comments? The director of "Forrester" is the same director of "Good Will Hunting." Of course there are similarities. Your point? And while you're nitpicking, know that "Hunting" is also a variation of "The Karate Kid," "Scent of A Woman," "Dead Poets' Society," and a film from the 60's, "Lonliness of the Long Distance Runner." So film plots borrow from one another. How come this film is the only one being crucified? Though I'm riding on NickLauria's bandwagon from down below, I'm telling you: watch the sublime, tender, witty, beauty of this movie and judge it on its own merits, please. The "conjunction" sequence between Connery and Brown, where two literary minds debate proper grammar. Or the scene @ Yankee Stadium where a broken Connery delivers a monologue which should've garnered him an Oscar nomination. And the DVD has a nice appendix of the making of the film along with the original trailers. Isn't there room for appreciation of this movie along with all the others? After all, how different is THE WIZARD OF OZ from ALICE IN WONDERLAND?
Rating:
Summary: A Misunderstood Statement
Review: I first saw Finding Forrester at an English presentation put on by a former Chemistry teacher of mine, who doubled as a writer. I found myself completely engrossed in the film from the start, and it was all I could think about when it was stopped midway through at the end of the first part of the presentation. After watching the rest, I remember thinking of Finding Forrester as one of those few movies done so well that it could have been a perfect rendition of a true story, even if it wasn't. What it was was a touching and thoughtful film, one that didn't need special effects and such to bring about its success. Sean Connery and Rob Brown complemented each other very well as the movie progressed, and I hope to see Brown step off from his first movie into a possible acting career. I would also like to say this: If you are one of the people who feels the need to deride and downplay this film because of its similarity to Good Will Hunting and other films, you are ignorant and short-sighted (and there's plenty of you on this site). Hey, I can only go where the evidence leads me. Movies, in my opinion, are made to be enjoyed, not judged in relation to other films. If you do that, you shouldn't be writing movie reviews, whether you are an individual who went to the theater or a professional movie reviewer (and sometimes, even in that case, the reviewer doesn't have a clue). Finding Forrester is a statement about life, and that sometimes the way we see it isn't always right: the fact that an urban hoops-shooting black 16-year-old male could actually be something other than the common stereotype, a real writer with real talent. Forrester helped him break free and show the world his gift. It's a good story, not, like many of you believe, a stab at a "cheap Oscar." But it did deserve one. -Nick Lauria
Rating:
Summary: Manipulative and Shameless
Review: In extremely rare cases, a quick glance at the trailer or even a read of the film's synopsis is all you need to determine whether a movie is gonna be a bust. Gus Van Sant, having survived career suicide after his remake of "Psycho," directs "Good Will Hunting" again, only this time with a different cast, an urban setting, and none of the unexpected charm of the script by Matt Damon and Ben Affleck. Sean Connery plays the crusty old teacher who befriends a milquetoast African American student. I dunno about you, but from the looks of things, the above adds up to a recipie for a disaster of a movie willing to bend over backwards for an Oscar. Thankfully, it never happened. For all that looks promising, "Finding Forrester" smells like a manipulative tearjerker that waves one too many red flags. There are movies that are unmissable; this one is skipable.
Rating:
Summary: Good Movie!
Review: A famous, reclusive writer living in his old Bronx neighborhood improbably becomes a mentor to a black teenager in the neighborhood who turns out to be a gifted writer himself in the making. It's one of those triumph of the human spirit movies. You will love the movie if you like literature or basketball.
Rating:
Summary: Not a bad rewrite
Review: Even without its cheekily reminiscent title, or the involvement of Gus Van Sant and Matt Damon, this film was always going to be a poor relation to 'Good Will Hunting'. At one point writer Mike Rich has Forrester tell Jamal that one can kick start the writing process by beginning with someone else's work: start by rewriting it, and when you find your own voice, let it takeover. Perhaps this is what Rich did with Damon and Affleck's script. While the parallels are remarkable, the film that results isn't. The premise is virtually identical: a dazzlingly talented kid from the wrong side of the tracks enters into a relationship with an older man, and both learn and grow from the experience. Now there's nothing wrong with telling this story again (Damon and Affleck were hardly the first to do so) as long as it's told well. But 'Finding Forrester' isn't. It lacks a crucial element that makes 'Good Will Hunting' so marvellous. That film is driven by a strong central conflict: Will does not want to spend time with Sean and resents the interference of him and other authority figures in his life. He only gradually comes around to admitting his core emotional problem and, in doing so, drags Sean and Gerald into the light with him. In 'Finding Forrester', Jamal wants to spend time with Forrester and, after a few early quibbles, Forrester is only too delighted to help him. There is no conflict here. Jamal falls out of favor with his new teacher, certainly, and there is a minor rivalry with another student on the basketball team, but these are secondary to the central relationship of the film and seem to have been superimposed to add some spark. That central relationship needs to be the emotional powerhouse it was in 'Good Will Hunting', but it just isn't. The result is a story that drags and dawdles along to its pleasant and inspiring though gratingly obvious conclusion: Jamal finds his voice, Forrester regains his. To be fair, this predictability wasn't helped by a stirring preview which gave away every key story moment (save the redundant epilogue). Hollywood marketers are going to have to do better than this if they want to continue to rely on their most effective advertising medium: word of mouth.
| 
