It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

The biggest problem with this movie is it’s a little better than you think it might be, which somehow makes it worse. As in, it takes itself a bit too seriously, which makes most of the movie feel kind of dull.

It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

This independent film is perhaps one of the best take on American adolescence reality, without sex and drugs, close behind the darker and more visceral films from Larry Clark: Kids (1995) and Bully (2001). George Washington comes across as light even in the midst of tragedy and even more tragic life circumstances and reality. It seeks solace, redemption and contemplation in this contemporary boredom. It is poetic and profound at times and meanders in the mundane which it reflects well.Dialogues and monologues are well written and feel real. Imagery is impactful and uses elements like the cape and lizard mask to convey deeper beauty and meaning. Each character is explored even if briefly to reveal depth and allow for further thoughts. George's father which we see in one scene only, Damascus' explanation of why he hates dogs, Vernon's soliloquy and Sonya's secret are the best examples.The fragility of actions and consequences. Thoughts, feelings and circumstances.Although it may be missing an ethereal "je ne sais quoi" to bind everything together a bit more tightly, it achieves the ambiance and ambition of letting us into the life and preoccupations of our young protagonists.Recommended and good for multiple viewings.

Nothing could've prepared me for the depressing qualities of David Gordon Green's quiet masterwork George Washington. The film operates with such simplicity, yet such brave, unrefined naturalism that it becomes almost too much for your system to handle and processing it becomes more and more of a challenge. If there is a sadder, more minimalistic film out there I don't want to see it anytime soon.George Washington meshes the desolate loneliness of Gummo, the close friendships of Stand By Me, and the realism of teens from Kids and puts it to the backdrop of the urban decay shown in Boyz N The Hood. However, the film never feels like a cheap copy of any of those films. They share the same themes, function with similar imagery and auteur-like craft, but in no way do they feel like cheap replications of great cinema from years past. Green manages to infuse his own portrait of a decaying setting and successfully combine it with the pristine acting of the child actors and the beautifully haunting cinematography to make one of the best films I've seen this summer.The film revolves around four friends - Buddy, George, Sonya, and Vernon - all of whom are around twelve years old and live in the dilapidated urban area of North Carolina. They spend their days wandering around town, talking aimlessly amongst themselves, or just watching life passing them by, not taking advantage of its opportunities because the landscape is such a desolate roadblock to anywhere. One day, tragedy strikes and is inflicted by the titular character, a troubled soul already due to a skull-condition that greatly limits physical contact with friends. The four must now learn to cope with tragedy and deal with a situation like adults, when no one adults have given them any practical guidance or life advice in their lives.The film is almost totally plot less. Even when the tragedy strikes, not much is predicated off of it. The entire film isn't directly encapsulated off of that instance, and goes on to develop long after it happens, showing more and more problems the characters faced even before this happened. Consider George, who now lives with the thought that his lack of human interaction practically sheltered him in life and now he has the notion that when he does engage in contact it'll end badly. Vernon must now live with the nudging thought that nobody really cared about what happened. Sonya remarks how she has the inability to feel, even after something as serious as what just happened. She is an unmoved child, likely made that way by a bleak landscape with little opportunities and little order from parents. And Buddy is now crushed after his girlfriend just left him. I wanted to hug each one of these characters for an obscenely amount of time.That is because David Gordon Green knows how to make a story like this progress with subtly and poetic tendencies. The poetry on display comes largely from Tim Orr's cinematography, which is beautiful in the sense that is shows heat, decay, isolation, loneliness, sadness, and fear more than any screenplay could. When Green allows Orr's cinematography to do the talking and places the characters in the background is when George Washington is its strongest. I never thought I'd say something like that, being a lover of relatable, fully fleshed-out characters and extensive dialog.The less said about George Washington thematically the better. It's a film with minimalism just elaborate enough to make a point but just ambiguous enough to encourage thought and contemplation. Within the next few weeks, I will make it a priority to explore more of David Gordon Green's filmography; George Washington is the best start any filmmaker could ask for.Starring: Candace Evanofski, Donald Holden, and Paul Schneider. Directed by: David Gordon Green.

After only writing a few reviews, I promised myself I would not give a film a perfect score too easily, but I cannnot resist. George Washington is truly astonishing and touching piece of cinema. Some people have called one of the best films of the new decade. This is definitely not too far from the truth. As the summary had said it is told very deceptively but we do not know the director has up his sleeve both plot wise and emotionally.One of the best things about this film is its realism. David Gordon Green captured the essence of how kids today speak. Often we find in the usual "tween" movies that the young kids speak perfect English, always have good posture, speak with a clear voice, and have a wide vocabulary. I sound like one of my teachers. In the real world, this is not how kids actually talk and Mr. Green should be commended for bringing this to the masses.As many people know, this film has great cinematography and the location is an area rarely seen in movies today. It even rivals Malick's. The opening scenes in particular have great cinematography. They are a hook to the viewers that enchants them to keep watching. The sub-satisfactory location is turned into a beautiful not quite urban or rural town of mystery and intrigue.Yes, I will say it. This film is very moving. I know I will sound like a sap but it is moving in the true sense of the word. It is never overly sentimental or sappy. It feels so genuine. Few films recently have been so affecting on this level. The film has a very provocative take on redemption I like how the director used amateurs to add even more realism to the movie. The acting was pretty good, too. Stay clear if this movie if you do not have a good attention span (most reviewers are complaining about this). It is drawn out but oh so rewarding. Highly recommended.

This is one of the worse movies I've ever seen in my life. If you don't believe it, see it yourself. You'll be sorry. I can't believe the glowing reviews. This just plain sucks. Someone compared it to watching paint dry. Believe me watching paint dry is much more exciting. The movie has no entertainment value whatsoever.So Roger Ebert liked it and gave it '****'. So? He's an idiot. Rent this movie and see for yourself. No wonder Gene Siskel argued with him so much. He's probably rolling over in his grave after seeing Ebert's rating on this one.The glowing reviews on this website? They're out of their minds, period.