Le château de verre

I read the book many years ago when it first came out and found it fascinating. The film may not be up to some people's wants - there is not enough time to tell the whole story. Four children born into a very dysfunctional family. An eccentric mother who probably should not have had children, married to an alcoholic dreamer - and a talker of his dreams. BUT neither take good care of the children and the children end up raising themselves. I have always felt that all families are dysfunctional - with varying levels of function. Woody's character has many issues from his childhood and only one is made known. He has many demons to fight and mostly he doesn't fight - he dreams. I am not a fan of Woody Herrelson however this is a good role for him. I am most impressed with the acting of the younger cast - to be able to show the real emotions of those siblings - well done. I think it tells the story well given the obvious time constraints of a film. The emotions ere and believable.

Raising children is not easy. Being a child growing up in an unstable relationship and general instability character wise (parents wise that is), is not easy either. This movie is not easy to watch is what I'm trying to say. But it is rewarding if you are into dramas and really good performances. The lines are blurred between good and bad, and what parenting is about and how or what you should learn from the usually most important people in your life.

Woody Harrelson gives a powerhouse performance, which elevates but is also enhanched through the other great performances. As the saying goes, what doesn't kill you ... So if you like slow moving drama with a distraught time line, this is the one you may like

The book is wonderful, one of my favourite and most memorable reads in recent years. It was thought-provoking, harrowing and poignant, with a chillingly troubled but complex portrayal of dysfunctional family life. So there were high expectations on that front, as well as that a great cast were involved.

Seeing 'The Glass Castle' last night, it is a pretty well done film on its own terms despite a few faults. On the other hand, it is very understandable why it has been said that as an adaptation it is mishandled. Although always striving to judge a film adaptation always as a standalone, if asked which is better between the book and the film the answer's a no brainer. The book feels much more balanced and more complex and the ending rang true far more. Although 'The Glass Castle' has a huge amount to recommend and is better than some of the mixed critical reception suggests (personal opinion), its ending and some tonal issues are its biggest faults.

Particularly in the case of the ending. Not just because it is drenched in sentimentality that is hard even for the strongest of stomachs. Even more so because things feel wrapped up too tidily and patly, the ending is far more realistic in the source material and should have made it on film, definitely would have preferred something more daring than a conclusion that really did not ring true and felt tacked on. Another issue with the ending is that we are told up to the end one thing about Rex and Rose Mary, and it is so overwhelming in evidence that it's easy to believe, then at the end it does a complete 180 degrees and it was just hard to buy.

While not as problematic, things do get a little melodramatic in places and the point of view of the film is somewhat too one-sided, with much more development to Rose Mary and showing her as equally accountable there would have been more complexity.

However, 'The Glass Castle' is a beautifully shot film and the production values are never less than top drawer. The music is neither too intrusive or too low-key and the direction is skillful visually, handles most of the tonal and time shifts well and with good attention to making the portrayal of the family as real as possible.

Script flows naturally and is thought-provoking and nuanced. The story has its problems, but mostly it is very compelling, hard-hitting and pathos-filled. It's particularly good in its careful balance of laughter and tears, the intense but also profound understanding of the central father-daughter bond and in the twisted but troubled portrayal of the dysfunctional family. Apart from Rose Mary being underwritten and underused, the characters are more than archetypal clichés, Jeannette is especially well realised.

Woody Harrelson gives a courageously gutsy performance as a pretty reprehensible human being, while Brie Larson's Jeanette is powerfully conflicted. All the children are well cast, with Ella Anderson in particular being an absolute revelation. Naomi Watts does a very good job with what she has.

In conclusion, adaptation-wise it is mishandled and the ending really doesn't ring true at all, but it's a well made emotional roller-coaster with a believable portrayal of dysfunctional family life and stellar performances deserving of some kind of award recognition (Harrelson, Larson and Anderson in particular). 7/10 Bethany Cox

As the sister of someone extremely like Rex, I was disturbed, heart- broken, and reminded of my life growing up with an unpredictable, intelligent, unstable, and sometimes very charming man. His children loved him inexplicably but they are still living with the effects of their tumultuous life.

This movie, in my opinion, was fabulous. It was well paced and the dual story lines of past and current day melded beautifully. All of the acting was superb. Woody Harrelson deserves an Academy Award and all of the child actors were phenomenal. I was especially impressed by Ella Anderson who played young Jeannette. She expressed so clearly her emotions, both love, hurt, and anger at her father and with that I believe she also deserves kudos.

Go see this movie if you enjoy deep, emotional, thought-provoking films.

One of The Glass Castle's strongest aspects is how it takes an experience unique to a small amount of people, and makes it so relatable to the masses. 99% of the people watching this movie have not had an upbringing like Jeanette's, but the film crafts the story in a way that you can form parallels to your own life. This isn't just telling the story of someone's childhood; it becomes a commentary on the ups and downs of family life itself. And that's where The Glass Castle becomes something more profound. Some may have seen this relatability as a simplification of child abuse. But I would disagree. The movie never painted what happened in the film as a good thing. It never tried to spin that the parents for justified for how they chose to raise their kids. Instead, they showed that, when you boil it all down, the dysfunction between Jeanette and her parents stem from the same place as other people's parental issues. Instead of isolating the audience by showing us something completely and utterly foreign to us, they chose to make it relatable so that we could draw comparisons to our own lives...