The paradox that is Zach Braff's "Garden State"

The first time somebody sees Garden State, they love it. Absolutely. And why not? The intimitely told and cleverly acted story of one man's coming of age was directed with grace and dignity, with a killer soundtrack (The Shins, Nick Drake...etc.) And it's a love story (also, I have four words for you: Peter Skarsgaard on Ecstasy.) Then you watch it again. But here's the thing: it's a pretty terrible film. Early on in the script, clearly when he was less sure of the film, Braff relies heavily on sight gags (his shirt matches the bathroom wall [see below], walking past a series of motion-sensitive faucets, they all go off...), and then quickly drops them once he gets into his stride. The dialogue (dutifully noted by Nate) is awful... you want a sample?

Kelly: Well, we just ate all this fucking 'X', so what the hell else are we supposed to do?

I believe, as Nate put it... "Terrible line. Terrible delivery." Nate's fun that way. He would also like me to remind you about one line that comes in the middle of what can be called the emotional epicenter of the love story, where Portman sums up the film with the cringe worthy... "That's life." But he was right. The problem with Garden State is that it simultaneously takes itself way too seriously at the same time that it's groaning under the weight of it's own self rightousness. Another problem: Zach (writer, director, star) can only write good dialogue in two-person scenes. The stuff between Portman and Braff is usually pretty good, but the problem comes in other scenes... when other characters enter the mix. It's just a bit depressing. The acting is solid, which counter acts the oddly placed drug sequences. Inside the mess there is a good story to be told, but it just didn't come out right. Ah well. As of right now, I can't get my head wrapped around this film. I think I'll go watch it again. My grade: ???