Ryan Chillas The movie revolves around a young man in his teens, Ryan Gosling(Lealand). He is completely separated from the world because of his thought process on life. Lealand believes that there are two ways to looks at life one of which is seeing the good and allowing it to fill your life with happiness. The other however is simply that life is full of misery and no matter what you do unhappiness will overcome all.Lealand sees this imperfection in life and act upon it in what some believe to be a passionless crime against a defenseless mentally retarded boy. Lealand winds up in special handling corrections only to fascinate the teacher of the troubled boys, Don Cheadle. When Cheadle decides to pry into Lealand's mind to find a motive and for personal reasons he is not ready for the difference Lealand will make in his life and the difference Lealand made in every one's lives that he encountered.

adrianedler Disclaimer:After reading many positive reviews, I noticed that many people really liked this movie. I might not have liked it as much because I saw it in German, and missed some of the intricacies of the dialog. (Because I am a native English speaker.) But that being the case, this review reflects what I think about this movie.Great movies can be divided up into two categories, potentially. The first are encouraging movies. They might encourage us to do is to realize our true potential, like The Return of the King, with Aragorn becoming what he was meant to be. Other great movies have themes which could give us some kind of hope, to laugh in face of adversity, or to see something from another perspective. Great movies like these, such as It's a Wonderful Life, speak out about the value of life and of every individual, ring true in everyone's hearts. These are the movies which help us to face life. And then the second class of great or good movies, are ones that may not be so profound, but distract us from the seeming futility of our lives, without perhaps such a deep theme, but with a lot of entertainment value. Movies like James Bond, which for a couple of hours, spirit us away into a fantasy world of superwomen, super-cars, super-spies, and super villains. Die Hard is another one like this. This is commonly classified as escapism. But this movie is neither escapist nor encouraging. It is also not a thriller, in the true sense. Rather it seeks so replace hope with despair, causing us to focus upon the pointlessness of life, and give excuses for someone taking the role of God. These kinds of seed thoughts could encourage murder, if dwelled upon, and taken to their logical conclusion; it leads us to think that pity is sufficient grounds for murder, and that we should admire someone who murders when they did it because they felt sorry for someone. Of course this sounds sick, and it should. But this is honestly what the movie portrayed. And the fact that it is not portrayed with a cold cynicism is what makes it the scariest. It is not the only one of its kind, but the moral vacuum in which the movie is played is the same as a horror movie, but with less blood. Basically, the word justice is put into the furthest corner, away from view, and the word Despair, Pointlessness, Meaninglessness, Lostness, Fear, Doom, and Disappointment are projected in the front, making the question we are supposed to ask painfully clear, "What is wrong with doing something wrong if I feel that it is right? And if I feel that it is right, doesn't the pointless nature of life make that which I feel right, ruling out all sense of right and wrong?" In other words, "Because life has no meaning either way, does it matter really what I do, as long as it has a meaning to me?" The obvious counter to this reasoning is also shown in the movie. The pain which going with my urges may inflict others is made apparent in the parallel story of Pearl and his girlfriend, as though it were not clear enough in the grief of the victim's family. Perhaps this element was kept intact, in order not to downplay the consequences of the murder too much. But this thought that my actions actually do have a meaning, and that there is a right and wrong, despite of my feelings or urges does not seem to be the dominant theme of the movie. If one does not think too much about it, one is left with a pretty neutral attitude towards murder, thinking that maybe he even did the "right thing."If nothing else, the movie allows people to reflect upon the impulsive nature of crimes, with misguided motives, combined later with the horrible pain that they can cause others, as well as the guilt for those who commit them. But I had to really think about it to come with this conclusion. It might have been just a depressing movie about a boy who murdered his neighbor because he was so stinking depressed himself that it just didn't matter. And that is pretty disgusting.

BernardoLima The United States of Leland is about a meek teenage boy named Leland P. Fitzgerald (Ryan Gosling) who has inexplicably committed a shocking murder. In the wake of the killing, his teacher in prison (Don Cheadle) tries to understand the senseless crime, while the families of the victim and the perpetrator struggle to cope with the aftermath..I just watched The United States of Leland for the second time and it is an outstanding piece of work and it's close to being one of my favorite films of all time. Why it was so poorly received by critics is beyond me because I think it's a good example of great film-making in all accounts. The backdrop of the film is the crime that Leland committed and from then on, the film becomes a character study giving us insight into Leland and also showing the viewer what happened prior to the murder trough flashbacks. But, despite being a character study, the film does so much more then that; it poses very interesting questions about good and evil, about life, about our nature and humanity and so forth. The film was beautifully shot and the soundtrack couldn't be more suiting. These two things combined with an impeccable direction resulted in a great ambiance. The acting was absolutely fantastic with the exceptionally talented Ryan Gosling delivering an Oscar-worthy performance. The entire supporting cast did a good job but if someone hold its own with Gosling, that was Jena Malone. I was very, very impressed with her.This is not a happy film, it's sad and melancholic and that will push some people away. Maybe you have to have gone trough depression or extreme sadness to relate to the film, that would explain why some people just can't connect with this story, I don't know. Either way, I think this is a truly amazing film and I hope Matthew Ryan Hoge returns to the business at some point.9.5/10

fedor8 There are many fascinating things I've learned about life and people in this wonderful movie. Let me list some...1. To cure autism it is best to kill the person who carries it.2. When you spew fortune-cookie wisdom, some viewers consider that "deeply intelligent".3. In order to kill someone who is in jail, do the following: fake a criminal act, get arrested and then hope that you'll be sent to the same prison and then same section as your intended victim.4. Male teens who have been neglected and ignored by their fathers turn to killing autistic kids for comfort.5. Male teens who grow up in dysfunctional families are wise beyond their years - which naturally leads them to kill retarded children.6. Murderers aren't such bad people after all.7. Sheer sadism has nothing to do with people who kill retarded children.8. Good actors, such as Kevin Spacey, are often not all that bright. He produced this baloney.9. Playing cheap college-radio alternative soft pop as a background for silly, "tragic" events will cause certain viewers to cry.10. Playing cheap college-radio plinka-plonka crap is still considered "deep" enough for certain supposedly emotionally-laden scenes.11. Ryan Gosling can't act.12. Sherilyn Fenn is still being underused in films.13. Lena Olin is still being overused.14. I do not enjoy watching Fenn make out with a 15 year-old. Clearly, the director does.15. Jena Malone and Ryan Gosling should never again play a romantic couple. They have no chemistry.16. Supposedly intelligent killers of retarded children wear a dumb facial expression all the time.TUSOL is a pretentious little wanna-be intellectual exercise, but fails on nearly ever level. The movie has an absurd premise, dull characters, dialogue that is supposed to be insightful but comes off as shallow and trite, and we don't really get to care about ANY of the characters. All of them are DULL.Gosling asks: "Why do people only say that ("I'm only human") when they've done something wrong?" Is this supposed to be "deep"? I have no idea why Cheadle simply doesn't respond like this: "Because, you murdering moron, they ARE only human. Because that IS an (all-purpose) excuse of sorts. And because they won't say 'I'm only human' when asked to order a meal in a restaurant, or when asked how old they are."Another example: "You want a why, but maybe there isn't one. Maybe this is something that just happened." (Gosling) This is something either a moron or a liar would say. In reality, a murder - especially of a defenseless victim - does not occur for "no reason". Psychopathic or insane personalities commit them, yet we are to believe that Leland is neither. He is a "misunderstood genius", a "victim of a sad childhood". Yeah, right... If every kid with a troubled adolescence killed someone, soon there would be no people left on the planet.Leland's pathological pessimism merely underlines an inborn fault in his DNA code. It is not a result of his environment, but the environment merely sped up the accelerated development of that trait. However, Hollywood's liberal, environment-influence-is-all-that-matters, Marxist approach to psychology is trying to tell you something else.Leland is like the Dalai Lama, minus the old age and the phony grin: he says things that are supposed to hit a nerve in the viewer - and in the character whom he is speaking to - but these words are on closer inspection (something like a 3-second inspection) empty, holding nothing relevant, intelligent or new. Hence this movie can only appeal to people who are quite impressionable, easily carried by their easy-to-manipulate-emotions, people who would rather not think but let the director think for them hence deciding for them what is right or wrong, who is intelligent and who isn't. Frankly, I see no particular intellect in Leland, and this is made even more difficult by Gosling's one-note, apathetic "performance", which seems to very ironically imply that Leland might be autistic, too.