source: A Glimpse Inside the Mind of Charles Swan III

It was meant to be weird, but I wanted it to be even weirder. It just wasn't weird enough.

This film with a very long title was a very weird watch to me ,there were some good staff and some scenes that made me laugh a bit but there were also far more staff that was very disposable and that just didnt worked in a ways they wanted that it works.You can call this film A Glimpse Inside the Mind of Charlie Sheen and nothing would be wrong with it since we are basiacly watching what Sheen life was in a nutshell before whole Aids scandal.Story in a film was a mess for much of screentime and it was even dragging in some scenes expecely towards end.This film wasnt so good start for A24 studio

I have to agree with much of what (but not all) critics said about this film. Yes, many of the things they say are true. However, I also agree with what Hoop posted here about this film. There is a 70s kind of scattered filmmaking feel to it that has appeal in the format of this type of film. It's one of those films I rate lower than how much I kind of liked it. It's not a brilliant work flawlessly executed, but it has a glisten to it in places, that kind of odd appeal that makes it worth having done it. You see, some projects I feel just had to be done so then we can move on. It's not that it shouldn't ever have been done, but that it allows for an entertaining time and it is merely what it was perhaps meant to be (which I'll leave to the viewer's POV). I just kept thinking, wondering, while watching it (knowing it was probably slammed by the critics which I know now, it was) that it is going to be one of those films someday, slammed at release and yet rediscovered and rethought later, and more appreciated then perhaps in historical ignorance as happens. But through that objective hindsight kind of way that allows us to, at some point many years later, appreciate the currently appreciable. Cheers!

This movie really worked for me. It's well passed, moves right along, doesn't get stuck trying to be or do one thing or another. It switches from flash back to present day to surreal, inside-the-mind-of type of shots with smoothness and balance. The movie doesn't demand that you follow the details of a complex plot, it more like an emotional canvas. And it's more than about Swan as well, which gives the story depth. All the actors performances are top notch. The music? The music is outstanding!!

'A GLIMPSE INSIDE THE MIND OF CHARLES SWAN III': Two Stars (Out of Five) Bad boy Charlie Sheen stars in this attempt at a comedy film written and directed by Roman Coppola. Coppola is the son of legendary film director Francis Ford Coppola and brother to the much more successful Sofia Coppola. He's also cousin to Nicolas Cage and Jason Schwartzman (Schwartzman co-stars in this film). His former writing credits include co-writing 'THE DARJEELING LIMITED' and 'MOONRISE KINGDOM' with Wes Anderson. Considering his family and impressive resume I expected a lot more from him. I also expected a lot more from a movie featuring this cast (which includes Bill Murray, Patricia Arquette, Aubrey Plaza and Mary Elizabeth Winstead) but the movie is a severe misfire. Anything featuring Charlie Sheen in the lead with multiple dream scenes and musical dance sequences should have spelled surefire doom though. The movie is really bad; the cast (minus it's lead) is the only good thing about it really. The film is set in the 1970s and revolves around a graphic designer named Charles Swan III (Sheen). Charles was a pretty big ladies man until he suffered a mental breakdown after his most recent girlfriend, Ivana (the gorgeous Katheryn Winnick), dumped him. Now he spends most of his time recollecting on the past with his friend, Kirby (Schwartzman), and manager, Saul (Murray), while trying to figure out where things went so wrong. Most of his thoughts and visions are played out in fantasy dream sequences and many contain song and dance numbers. The movie obviously had a lot of potential (the synopsis sounds great and the trailer made it look hilarious) but the execution is horrible. It has a few funny moments (mostly with Murray and Schwartzman) but they're way too few and far between. It would be easy to blame all of the movie's failings on it's star, Charlie Sheen, but it was mostly, most likely, it's writer/director's fault. When working with Anderson Coppola has shown some skill but he obviously wasn't ready to helm a movie like this (he has written and directed a feature film before, 2001's 'CQ', but I never saw it). I truly hope his next project is much better than this. Watch our movie review show 'MOVIE TALK' at: http://youtu.be/Kq2wN7LTcuo

How could this film be described? I think a coked-up fever dream of Charlie Sheen's is accurate. When you leave the viewing you leave covered in shame at the fact that this movie was okayed. I think that the story has potential. You can see an interesting take on how success; measured by society and masculinity does not always lead to happiness. That this material and shallow existence can leave us feeling empty. Unfortunately, the director Roman Coppola chooses Charlie Sheen to play the lead Charles Swan III. As you watch, you quickly realize that this is not a deep film about the human condition. No, you realize that Roman has made a homage to one of Hollywood's most recent jerks, Charlie Sheen. A Glimpse Inside the Mind of Charles Swan III's casts Charlie Sheen and the man struggling with a broken heart suddenly loses it's sympathetic and appealing overtones. The plot itself isn't even the worst part of the movie though. This award goes to the blatant objectification of women, the utilization of Native American garb and gestures to hit punchlines, and the fact that Charles Swan stalks his girlfriend and bugs her house, yet somehow ends up with an amicable breakup. One of the worst bits comes from Charles Swan III's comedian friend Kirby Star played by Jason Schwartzman. The jokes about how crazy women are for being upset that their boyfriends are giving their numbers to random servers. How is this unreasonable? I don't know Kirby; I think she's got a point. Maybe if' you're in a relationship, you shouldn't be giving your number to random women. The whole movie makes you feel weird. It's this celebration of Charlie Sheen and the homage to his sexual adventures that makes you cringe at how just eight years ago this was acceptable. I guess Roman believes that society's obsession with these disgusting characters is still alive. Luckily, this movie tanked not only with critics but also with the box office. Racking up a whooping $45,000's domestic and if this says anything about Russia $134,000. Maybe, America had enough of Charlie Sheen by then. I think this movie was the last of an era where awful people were idolized in films. It's interesting that it comes just a few years before the #MeToo movement. I have a strong feeling that today, this movie doesn't see the light of day. Unfortunately, Bill Murray has a role in this movie as Charles Swan III's accountant Saul. As does my celebrity crush Aubrey Plaza as Marnie Charles Swan III's sassy assistant. Although she gets a few jabs in at the misogyny of Charles Swan III, her role is a sad depiction of how women must tolerate horrible men to keep their jobs. I watched this one, so you don't have to. Unless you like to watch the train wreak that is Charlie Sheen in film, playing Charlie Sheen, in a film. I suggest you skip right over this one. The laughs are cheap, the depth is stolen away by Charlies real like persona and at the end of the movie you're sitting there just staring at your screen wondering why we as American's give these idiots the time of day.

Review: What the hell is going on in this film. The movie is all over the place and it wasn't that funny. It's good to see Bill Murray and Charlie Sheen back on screen, but this movie didn't make that much sense to me. I think that it's supposed to show the thought within Charlie Swan's mind during a break up, but the director had a funny way of portraying the story. I was hoping for a witty comedy, but there wasn't much flow to the film because it skips from one scene to the next. I just hope that Charlie Sheen doesn't make this to be his last movie because its a bad way to go out. Disappointing! Round-Up: I don't know if there was a moral to this story, with what is happening in Charlie Sheens life at the moment, but I didn't get it. The director really wasted the cast, and the concept didn't have that much thought. I thought that it was a bit weird that I hadn't heard about this film because of all of the media surrounding Charlie Sheen. Anyway, this is a very strange movie and you need a warped sense of humour to find it remotely interesting. I recommend this movie to people who like there out of the ordinary comedies/drama about a man whose going through turmoil after his girlfriend leaves him. 2/10

What. The. Ƒµ¢ƙ?? Really, Mr. Sheen? Really? Do you really want us to believe that this heinous exercise in self-indulgence is your true artistic expression? Really? I don't believe it... so much as I don't believe that he could also drag people like Bill Murray into this stinkin' little hole of his. And what's with the Coppola family these days? We once had the great and iconic Francis Ford with his almighty Godfather Trilogy, Apocalypse Now, and now we have Sofia that once made Marie Antoinette and Lost in Translation some years ago and this year just got mediocre with Bling Ring... and Roman with this? What the hell?? Was he with a gun being pointed at his head all the time to direct this? Did they make him an irrefutable offer? Was he on a killing spree?? I don't know. I just laughed twice the whole movie, that's it. It wasn't even real laughter, it was just one of those mouth corner laughter, you know, almost ashamed of laughing, trying to understand what the heck is going on... and the "Garota de Ipanema" version that I have to admit, was good and I just loved to hear it in Portuguese, my mother tongue, I just hate those English versions coming around, so yeah, great job with that! But again, there was no connection with anything! Terrible movie, terrible, no fun, no joy, just a huge Charlie Sheen commercial, and in case you just forgot that, they just remind you at the end! Simply put: dreadful, almost as dreadful as Movie 43. Avoid it!

A GLIMPSE INSIDE THE MIND OF CHARLES SWAN III is just that. A quick glimpse inside the mind of a self-obsessed, sex-addicted album cover artist who's sanity and life are put into question after his latest girlfriend breaks up with him. Charles Swan III is lightly played by Charlie Sheen, who, looking worse than ever, might seem perfect for the role but only makes it that much harder to care for the character. His mind, life and the film are a chaotic mess. His regrets, his pain and loss come off so insincere, it's boring to watch. What keeps us watching the film is the genuine laughs brought by Jason Schwartzman and Bill Murray, who play parts in Swan's real life and multiple roles inside his warped mind. It is the scenes they are in that save the entire film from being a complete failure. Roman Coppola's bizarre odyssey never takes itself too serious, creating a world where anything goes. That, in itself, is a great achievement for a writer/director. It's hard to tell if it's Charlie Sheen's lack of a performance or if it's the written character's lack of genuine heart that holds this film back from becoming what it was hoping to be: a film for those of us who crave originality and appreciate dark chaotic comedies no one else dares to make.