User Reviews (260)

Add a Review

  • Warning: Spoilers
    For starters, i'm not a big critic of movies. And sure, this one wasn't very complex, the characters weren't surprising and there was no big twist at the end--but i thought it was compelling. I had just seen Amanda Seyfried star in letters to Juliet, and was surprised at the contrast in her two characters..so that has to say at least SOMETHING positive about her. plus i just think she's cute and likable.

    and who knows, maybe i'm just a sap, or i watched it at the wrong time of day, but i did cry. It's the classic tragic love story. the relationship that everyone wants but no one really ever gets. and things just keep falling apart. Everyone knew the dad was gonna die and Savannah was gonna move on from John while he was gone..but something about seeing channing tatum cry broke my heart and i sniffled the rest of the movie through.

    i certainly don't think you should buy it. i probably wouldn't watch it again. ( i rented it on 99 cent Monday at my local movie store) but my time wasn't wasted at all. you just have to be a girl in the right mood :)
  • nicki911229 May 2010
    Wow...I was expecting this movie to be awful after all of the bad reviews I've read. Nothing is wrong with this movie! Nothing is wrong with the acting. It's actually a pretty good movie. I am not usually one for romantic movies...usually because I find them to be lame. There are definitely moments in this one that tug at your heart and get you teary eyed.

    I really felt for John in this movie. His character had a tough life... and the relationship between him and his father...It made me really sad! That Nicholas Sparks! He knows how to stir up emotions...

    I have not read the book, so I can't compare the two but I say the movie is worth watching.
  • I have to admit I wasn't expecting to like this film. I don't hate this type of film, but I had heard mixed feelings on Dear John, there were those who said it was touching and others who said it was too clichéd. Well after been blown away by The Notebook(book and movie), I saw Dear John. After seeing it, I don't think it is as good as The Notebook, but it was surprisingly good in my opinion. The characters are clichéd, and the beginning was a tad too fluffy for my liking, while there are some pacing issues. But while the book is better, having more depth and emotional punch, I was surprised at how touching Dear John actually was. The story is nice and believable enough, and there is some decent scripting. The direction is good too, while the cinematography and scenery are breathtaking and the score beautiful. Channing Tatum(my sister kept raving at how hot he was) and Amanda Seyfried are great and are believable together, while Richard Jenkins is heart breaking as Tatum's autistic father(I immediately sympathised with him as I have real problems with communicating with people and feeling comfortable around people and places I am not familiar with). I also liked the ending, it was ambiguous but also clever and subtle, and I think an improvement over the ending of the book(the book's only weak link). In conclusion, touching and well made, definitely worth a peek. 7/10 Bethany Cox
  • Lasse Hallström, the Swedish director who gave us Chocolat (2001), Gilbert Grape (1993) and Hachi: A Dog's Tale (2009) is at it again - making chick flicks for guys. This means, unlike your stereotypical chick flick whose leading man is a hollow beefcakey stud with as much personality as the scenery, here we get a complex beefcakey stud whom the chicks can swoon over whilst the bros say "duuuuude he's cool."

    In this case the protagonist is "John" (Channing Tatum) who plays an Army Special Forces character who can kill you with a toothpick but has total control over his emotions. Until, of couse, he meets "Savannah" (Amanda Seyfried) over his 2 week furlough before going back to war.

    As you might guess, the story explores the ultimate long distance relationship as John completes his 1 year tour as a soldier while Savannah waits at home. Sounds boring? Well wait, there are complications. John's father is autistic and his mother abandoned them years ago. So John is forced to be the responsible one, but the whole war/love thing throws him out of whack.

    Meanwhile Savannah has a few secrets of her own (and I gotta admit I totally didn't see it coming). And on top if it all, 9/11 hits and this forces John to make a decision whether to stay with his platoon and most likely get his butt blown off, or retire once his initial tour is over. Oh, and the movie begins with John getting blasted by gunfire, meaning the story unfolds in a huge flashback leaving us wondering the whole time if John dies or not.

    This is a very sentimental flick, much like the other Hallström movies I mentioned, but it doesn't get sappy or predictable. In fact at least 3 plot twists took me by total surprise. And I'm talking like "whoa duuuuude I never saw THAT coming" surprise.

    "Dear John" focuses on interpersonal relationships when duty comes into play - and I'm not just talking about duty toward your country (a cleverly woven parallel), but duty to parents, children and those who need help. This is juxtaposed against selfish happiness, or the storybook love. Pay close attention to the characters' choices & sacrifices, and how these choices are based on duty/selflessness rather than "getting the girl". I think that's what makes this a unique romance. Whereas most Hollywood romance flicks focus on the problems of 2 lovers, "Dear John" presents us with an ideal love that is complicated by external loyalties.

    The trademark of Hallström movies is some other issue (not just love) driving the characters, and that's why these films aren't sappy or predictable. Another trademark is is use of gorgeous scenery, in this case the beaches of Charleston SC. He achieves a very nostalgic beach feeling, even for those of us who have only been to the beach once or twice in our lives (see also his film "Safe Haven" filmed in Southport, NC).

    "Dear John" is a quiet, sentimental film, so don't expect action, car chases & robots. But it delivers a few tricky plot twists, so it's never boring. If you're not familiar with Hallström's style, I'd say it's artistic without being over-the-top artsy. Think of Kieslowsky (Blue, White, Red trilogy) or Wim Wenders (Paris Texas, Wings of Desire) or possibly even Steven Soderbergh (Sex Lies & Videotape, Solaris, Magic Mike) and you'll have a general idea of how this film feels.
  • I was really looking forward to watching this movie - although, my expectations were not very high - but it turned out to be worse than I expected. I knew Channing Tatum was not the greatest actor - although, he is gorgeous - so I wasn't expecting very good acting. It was decent but I just didn't feel the chemistry between the two actors. The "twist" which I won't mention was where I thought the movie went completely downhill. It was very poorly executed and if you've seen the movie, you'll probably agree. Throughout, the movie was very slow- moving and not very exciting but there were a couple emotional parts! So far, the only people I've asked that did like the movie, seem to be the younger ones (12-15).

    This movie is definitely NOT comparable to "The Notebook" like some people have been saying. It was nothing special, so I wouldn't watch it again, but I'd say it's good for a chick flick night. Another one of those movies like that looked SO much better on the commercials.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    (Synopsis) Special Forces Army Sergeant John Tyree (Channing Tatum) is home on a two-week leave from Germany. He meets Savannah (Amanda Seyfried) after he dives into the ocean to retrieve Savannah's purse that had fallen off the pier. John is smitten by Savannah and falls in love at first sight. Savannah is a college student at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She is on spring break and is helping build a house for Habitat for Humanity. John joins in with Savannah to help build the house. Along the way a budding romance occurs, and Savannah falls deeply in love with John. As she is about to go back to college, she promises to write John overseas during the next 12-months until he returns to her after completing his enlistment. Their love is put to the test when John reenlists after the 9/11 attack.

    (My Comment) "Dear John" tells the story of what happens to young lovers when time and distance from each other begins to test their true love. Over the next several years, they write love letters to each other telling everything about themselves. As time goes by, Savannah finds another who needs her more than John, even though she still loves him. She writes John a final letter saying good-bye. This is one story that happened many times during WWII and is still happening to our current soldiers today. Our brave soldiers are sacrificing their lives and some of them come home to heartbreaking consequences as a result of the war. That is why this story seems so real to the audience. The movie will make you laugh, cry, smile, and relate to the characters. Women will like the movie, because they can stand in Savannah's shoes. Men will like it, because they know that it is better to have loved and lost then never to have loved at all. The story is truly touching with all of life's ups and downs. Channing Tatum and Amanda Seyfried are very good in their roles, along with Richard Jenkins as John's father. (Screen Gems, Run Time 1:45, Rated PG-13) (6/10)
  • I had mixed expectations when I was going in to see Dear John. I had never really given any thought about how good or bad it might be, because it was a night out with friends and I was unconcerned at the moment. Eventually, we started to watch the movie. At first, it was just dull. I mean, I know it was trying to build up the characters and establish a good story line, but I was a tad bit uninterested, just because the characters were so plain at the time. Though it does set up things rather well, it lacks in any really high appeal from the moment it comes on the screen, if that makes sense.

    Anyway, on to the rest of the movie. Though there were times when I was very interested, it just overall was nothing special. The performances by each individual actor were extremely questionable. For instance, Channing Tatum was unable to display any real sense of emotion except for maybe two scenes in the entire movie, and Amanda Seyfried seemed like it was just too big of a role for her to play. While they both didn't do so hot separately, I have to say the chemistry between them when they were on set together was believable, intense and undeniably noteworthy; Certainly the best thing about the movie, in my opinion.

    I do give Dear John a decent and satisfactory rating for it really strived to be a poignant and strong film, even though it fell a little short, and I was moved at times by the feelings Channing and Amanda expressed into their characters, though all together their performances were eh. It was interesting and entertaining, and I enjoyed it... lightly. With all that said, it again falls short of being rewatchable with it's extreme dullness throughout and lack of powerful, independent, likable performances. Not anything special, but certainly not anything bad, and I recommend you don't watch it with high expectations, because you'll be very disappointed, but if you're not an extreme critic and you're just looking to blow some time, or are extremely hard up for Channing Tatum shirtless, you can and will enjoy this in some way.
  • andapastides14 January 2019
    4/10
    WTF
    Warning: Spoilers
    Good at the start but this is the worst ending ever. She marries Tim because she feels bad for him?
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I will start by saying I have never read the book so I'm basing my review solely on the film.

    I actually found the film very hard to watch and cried most of the way through. It is a very beautiful film but I think what is unfortunately overlooked my many is that the strongest relationship in the film is that between John and his father and it is this relationship that made the film very emotional for me. In particular scene following his fathers stroke where John was reading the letter was beautifully done and very well acted and was the scene I found most upsetting.

    I think the film explores a number of important aspects in particular having an autistic parent which I could only imagine would be exceptionally difficult for any child, particularly when said parent is their only carer. As seen with the characters of both Aaron and Johns father relationships are often quite difficult for those with some types of autism, routine is important and going against a routine can cause a lot of angst and distress. Its unfortunate that a number of people continue to see autism as an excuse for peoples bad behaviour and I think this film brings and important note to an often misunderstood illness. It also points out the issue of autism in parents which is another issue often overlooked.

    The relationship between John and Savannah is only secondary to that of John and his father and I think its well acted by Channing Tatum and Amanda Seyfried. To me both actors seemed to really feel and understand their characters and the hurt between them and I did like how the ending between them was really left open to interpretation.

    In all a very well done film which explores some important social issues but no review will ever truly do this film justice. I for one could not watch it again because it made me so upset but this just goes to show how emotive the film is. Its a film that needs to be watched, even if it is only once.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    John Tyree (Channing Tatum) is on leave from the U.S.Army's special forces. It is the summer of 2001 and he has returned to his father (Richard Jenkins) and home on the Carolina coast. On the beach one day, a group of young adults are horsing around and a purse falls in the ocean. It belongs to beautiful Savannah (Amanda Seyfried) and she is upset over its loss. Without hesitation, John dives into the water, finds it, and returns it to her. She is happy, although one of her companions, a male with an interest in Savannah, is less than content. Nevertheless, from that moment, the two begin a tentative relationship. John tells Savannah that he will be out of the army in about a year and asks that she wait for him. Although they only share a few kisses, the young couple are in love. However, they part, vowing to write to each other often. Complicating things is the fact that John's dad is autistic, relating poorly to the community, and so is the son of Savannah's attractive neighbor, Tim (Henry Thomas). Savannah communicates well with each of them but John does not. Then, 9/11 occurs and John feels he must re-enlist, knowing his unit needs him. On a very brief leave, Savannah and John spend a few precious hours together. But, then John is gone. What does their future hold? This is, surprisingly, a most lovely film and worthy of praise. A story that could have been melodramatic and trite is, instead, genuinely moving. The cast is quite nice, with Tatum and Seyfried making a fine couple, while Jenkins and Thomas deliver especially notable turns. The scenery, costuming, production values, and Nicholas Sparks' tale are good as well. Most importantly, Hallstrom "mixes things up" and uses some very interesting camera shots and scene arrangements to deliver a film of great style. Dear viewer, don't think this is another teen flick with little to offer for the general public. On the contrary, most fans of romantic drama will find it enthralling.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I'm not much of a critic but this film makes me dislike it so much with a passion. Not only was it not all that exciting and entertaining in the beginning and after in the first place, but when John finally got the letter from Savannah after waiting months (which was when I thought things were finally getting good) it turns out from then on ..nor John or Savannah try to get back in touch with each other after that. It turns out later on when he visits home to see his sick father on his death bed that she did go through with the marriage after all the feelings that were "supposedly" floating in the air and all around them. She didn't come to see his father while he was deathly ill, nor to comfort John for all the pain and mental suffering he's been going through with the war and now the only person that he really had all along is dying. And even after his father dies she didn't show up to the funeral. I mean my god.... it seemed where they lived was in a small area how COULD THINGS NOT SPREAD AROUND such things like someone dying? So that didn't even make sense. And then after all the bullshitting around they did when they finally spoke to each other after so long, she gives him a bullshit excuse as to why she dumped him in the first place, and even that didn't make much sense. She said she left him because Tim needed her, and so did his son...and she was lonely and not thinking... lol I'm sorry but if you really care and love someone and think about them every single freaking day then no way in hell can you go through that much torture successfully, unless you're emotionally messed up. She was being selfish and didn't know what she wanted, so let's just put it at that. So then, John takes his father's coin collection and sells it (ok ..good for him) but only to spend the money on Tim's expenses so he can have more time with Savannah lol ...that's about it as far the story itself goes ...we don't really know what happens between John and Savannah after that because the film was done poorly. I have never read the book and I'm sure as **** glad I didn't see Dear John in theatre's because I would of wasted my money.
  • Not having read anything about the film (or book) beforehand, I went into the cinema with no expectations, (though I was worried it might be a soppy, pull-at-the-heartstrings epic like The Notebook).

    This wasn't the case. There were so many times when I thought 'Oh, I hope this doesn't happen', or 'I hope they don't do what I think they're going to do', and they didn't. There are moments of sadness, but some of them could have been made a lot worse.

    The story isn't unique, (neither is The Notebook) but it is executed in a way that makes you feel as though you're watching something new. Channing Tatum is the lovable beefcake reminiscent of Marky Mark, and Amanda Seyfried is cute, delivering well executed dialogue. And I did actually think they had good chemistry, despite what other reviewers have said. Channing's John is an army boy who had a lot of issues growing up, so you can't expect him to be overly forthcoming with his emotions.

    Richard Jenkins gives a great performance as the father, and even Henry Thomas is likable as the neighbour (I must be the only person in the world who hasn't seen E.T. so I didn't recognize the name at first).

    To me, this was acted out a lot better (and even structured better) than Twilight: New Moon, which I assume is meant to appeal to the same audience. I know to some that isn't saying much, but perhaps our expectations are a bit high these days. If you want to see a sweet love story with likable characters, then you might just enjoy this film.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Green Beret John Tyree (Channing Tatum), home on two week/s' leave, falls for student Savannah (Amanda Seyfried) and vice versa. When he goes back to his unit and she goes on to university they console themselves with the fact that they will only be apart for a year until John's discharge and, during that time, they can bridge the gap between them with letters. Then 9/11 happens and John signs up for another tour. And it isn't long before John gets a "Dear John" letter (OK, so they all are, but you know what I mean).

    Much of this is amiable enough, mildly emotional if essentially somewhat inconsequential, and enlivened by some rather unexpected plot developments towards the end.

    An interesting wrinkle is added by John's father's borderline autism, sensitively portrayed by Richard Jenkins, who is head and shoulders the best thing in this movie. Jenkins is one of those actors who has been in loads of things, is always first rate, you always recognise him, and you can't remember his name. He is excellent here, although the character's condition begs the question of how he managed as a single father to bring up a son on his own: indeed, how he managed to have paternity attributed and custody awarded.

    I didn't care for the ending or how it was arrived at.
  • In the spring of 2001, the Sergeant of the Special Forces John Tyree (Channing Tatum) meets the medical student Savannah Curtis (Amanda Seyfried) while surfing in Charleston during his leave and they immediately fall in love for each other. They spend a couple of weeks together and Savannah meets John's autistic father Mr. Tyree (Richard Jenkins) and John befriends her friend Tim Wheddon (Henry Thomas). When the enlistment period of John and his platoon ends, there are the attacks on the World Trade Center and John and the other soldiers decide to reenlist for two more years. John corresponds with Savannah until she stops writing and two months later, Savannah tells that she will get married.

    I had great expectations with "Dear John", based on the previous works of the Swedish director Lasse Hallström. The beginning is nice, with Amanda Seyfried and Channing Tatum showing great chemistry in a pleasant romance. The reenlistment of John Tyree is acceptable based on a troubled moment of his country. However, the attitude of Savannah getting married with an older guy without any motive is inconsistent with her conservative profile and incoherent with the whole plot, and destroys the so far good romance, turning into a silly and disappointing soap opera. The terrible commercial last scene is corny and awful. My vote is three.

    Title (Brazil):"Querido John" ("Dear John")
  • Movie should be about distance love and related consequences, unfortunately it's too flat because It doesn' t transmit any passions or emotions ti the watcher
  • I love Lasse Hallström. I love Channing Tatum. Amanda Seyfried is alright, and the book is one of my favorites. But there's something about this movie that is just.. off? I can't put my finger on what it is, but regardless of having all the right components of being a romantic classic, it's just not. It could be the tempo, the conversations, lack of charm and humour (even when jokes are made), or perhaps their chemistry - but it's something not working for me. However, I've probably seen it more than ten times. Needless to say, it's not a bad movie, definitely deserving watching, and it's romantically sexy, but it's unfortunately not magical like the book.
  • bkoganbing29 January 2015
    Channing Tatum and Amanda Seyfried star in a tender romantic story of a soldier on leave in South Carolina and a college student who have one of those once in a lifetime romantic affairs and who want to make it permanent. Tatum in fact is ready to leave the army once his enlistment is up, but the attacks on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon interrupt that. He and the rest of America go into a permanent state of war which sad to say we'll be in for the foreseeable future.

    Her main support in this world is Henry Thomas and his autistic son R. Braden Reed who ages into Luke Benward. One day while out with his unit on some unknown battlefield in the war on terror, Tatum gets that dreaded Dear John letter.

    Neither party though deeply in love is exactly truthful to the other. Tatum is not your average GI, he's in fact with Special Forces, otherwise known as a Green Beret. Patriotism is not something trotted out on the Fourth of July or other occasions. He may make the army a permanent profession.

    As for Seyfried her reasons for breaking off with Tatum border on the noble and self sacrificing. For that you see Dear John for, but I know in real life of a similar situation that Seyfried faces here.

    Also in the cast is Richard Jenkins who is Tatum's mildly autistic and eccentric father. His is a touching performance, the bond between him and Tatum runs very deep.

    Tatum and Seyfried are as romantic a couple as I've ever seen in the new century. If your taste in film runs to wartime romance this is definitely the film for you.
  • Rented the film primarily as a Sunday night chick-flick. I quite like warm and fuzzy films. I haven't read the book but actually on the face of the film wouldn't mind doing so. Felt it started a bit slow but liked the building tender relationship between John and Savannah. thought all the acting sensitive and not overly-dramatic. There were areas that could have been explored a bit more, quite a lot of big themes here that had to be whizzed through in under 2 hours, but the central one of John and Savannah was well, just purely romantic, in an old-fashioned way. I'm also not a great fan of overly-sugary endings targeted at the American market, but I don't think this was the case here. Having watched the alternate ending, felt the choice was right- enough to leave you thinking but more appropriate. Overall pleasantly surprised, had a good sob..what more do you want for a weekend film?
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I have read many reviewers that say that they have never written a review before, but they had to because of some movie that they really loved or hated. I have hated a lot of movies, I do not hate this one, but I rally really really did not like it. In fact I disliked it so much that I had to write a review.

    So.

    (NB! This review contains SPOILERS, do not continue reading if you do not want to know what happens. )

    This movie absolutely made no sense at all.

    The only good part was the emotional scene with John and his father, otherwise this was just completely crap. I mean, what? What happened?!?

    For starters, as a man who has worked in the military for several years, if you find yourself in a combat situation where someone is firing bullets at you, you NEVER just stand straight up like John did when he got shot! Yes he was hurt during a combat situation and that is sad, but did it have to happen like that? It was just so meaningless!

    And WHY did she even break it off? I didn't understand it, the explanation was just so lame! I can understand that she wanted to be there for Tim and Allan, but we never got any indication that there were any romantic feelings there, so why marry the guy? Couldn't she just BE there, without the marriage?

    Looking at the film as a whole, the character development was nearly non-existent and I never cared for any of the characters. The script was bad and the time jumps were even worse. It was hard to keep up with how many years had gone by, and the story just made no sense.

    As a side note I also find it highly unlikely that she did not know what happened with Johns dad. I will say it again: none of this made any sense!

    I have been in a long distance relationship where my man was employed in the army and shipped off to distant and terrifying places. I never knew what was happening and I was always scared for him. This was 4-5 years ago, and I was hoping that this film would touch upon some of the things that I felt, and that I know my honey felt. But "Dear John" just did not cut it! They did not capture any real emotions (except maybe the scene with John and his dad), and I am deeply disappointed.

    I am a movie-crier, I cry a lot when I see emotional films, but THIS film only made me angry with all the lost potential. This was just not worth seeing. My review had more emotions than this film.

    1/10, and really not recommended at all.
  • The_Fifth_Echo30 January 2010
    I saw "Dear John" at a special screening and I wasn't expecting much. I thought it was going to be a decent romance film. I hoped this movie came halfway as good as "The Notebook". My very low expectations of this film were pretty cynical. But I said Hey, what could happen? And when the movie finished, I was fulfilled. I didn't think it was going to be one of the best romance movies ever and it definitely wasn't. This movie is definitely for couples. The girls will like it cause they can connect with it.I recommend for everyone to see this film. It is touching, okay acting, and it does stick to the book. This film doesn't come close to the "Notebook", but people will like it no matter what. So if you want to buy a sad, romantic film. Then I'd recommend this film.

    7/10 A Pearl
  • Dear John,

    Romance is a bitch, ain't it? Especially when you don't hear from someone for longer than the usual duration, blaming the delay on everyone else except the sender, then the sledgehammer comes aimed squarely at your heart, smashing it to bits, and it had to be done when you least expected, without preparation, without a chance at attempting to put things right again.

    Been there, done that my friend, although you did demonstrate you're a decent chap who can forgive and extend a helping hand toward someone who had essentially taken advantage of your situation given the pitiable situation. You're out there defending the notion of freedom for your country, and that's exactly how a countryman capitalizes on your absence. You're a soldier, so you'll probably know that all is fair in love and war, just too bad that you got on the losing end as you're fighting with one hand tied behind your back.

    Hope you don't get stuck or conned again by another confused girl, but sometimes, once bitten we're still not twice shy, and we go into the same old, tried and tested loop again, don't we?

    Your Friend, Stefan S

    At least that would be my letter to John Tyree, a Special Forces GI Joe type which Channing Tatum seemed dangerously stereotyped to play, and the girls like Savannah Curtis (Amanda Seyfried) go gaga over when he plunges into the water to rescue her girlie bag which had dropped in. So boy meets girl by chance, they like each other, and spend the most incredible two weeks hanging out and declaring their affections before summer's over. It's like the opening shot in Grease, only that they take a pledge to keep one another in their minds, and write each other from miles away, since Mr Career Soldier is assigned a stint overseas, made worse with the events of 9/11, finding himself being torn between his lady love, and the call of duty to fight for freedom.

    You've got to take your hats off to the novelist Nicholas Sparks, who can craft a romance as easy as spreading butter on toast, be it an elderly one (Nights in Rodanthe), or a teeny- bopper puppy first love between a quietly violent man and a teenage girl, both of whom do not know exactly what they want except to spend as much time with each other as possible, before they got to have to carry on with their lives. Peppered with enough romantic scenes in the first half such as stolen glances, the rain, the long walks on the beach and such, nothing's really gonna prepare you for the relatively more brutal, more realist development.

    Characterization in this film was spent more on John I felt, than on Savannah. After all, we're following his story from the onset, and his relationship with his dad (played by the wonderful Richard Jenkins) had a lot more oomph than that between Savannah and her parents (very superficial), or even between the lovers themselves. There's a very thorough, meaningful and moving sub-story with regards to father and son's coin collection, which I deem as the ultimate highlight of the film, rather than the gimmicky sending and reading of letters back and forth across time and space, which other stories such as The Lake House had utilized.

    I haven't read the book so I cannot comment on the ending if it stayed through, but the way it was delivered by Lasse Hallstrom, of the latest Hachiko fame, one would have thought that it would be planned in a better manner, rather than to rely on a convenient and somewhat abrupt finale that unfortunately in today's screening, the music wobbled at a critical point, making it all seem rather amusing rather than touching. At least the story steered clear of the usual romantic twists and as such keeping it fresh though safe, and tolerable rather than to roll your eyes at another cliché.

    Dear John has its moments, though I don't exactly call this one a date movie, unless you're watching this for the first half. Oh, and the way the lovers make love one fateful night was deemed too risqué by the censors, so their recommendation to have it badly butchered was heeded if the distributors wanted a safer PG rating, to the groans of the female audience who were all anticipating more of Tatum's John (pardon the intentionally bad pun). So there. We can see blood spurting out of John's uniform when bullets pass through his shoulder, but we have a lower tolerance for love.
  • I'll try to make this short and sweet, like the two weeks the two characters spent together before all hell broke loose:

    If you read the book, lower your expectations. If you haven't read the book,...well, you can raise your expectations just a bit higher.

    I was one of those girls who squealed every time they saw a TV spot, or watched the trailer on YouTube a million times. I bawled my eyes out when I read the book- both times I read it. Last night, I went to see the movie knowing full well that it wasn't going to live up to the book. Unfortunately, I was right.

    What made 'Dear John' different from all the other love stories we've read and seen was taken away in the movie. I don't know how I would have understood what was going on in the movie if I hadn't read the book. Scenes were rushed (especially the two weeks where the two main characters fall in love), and characters weren't well developed at all. Heck, one of the main characters barely resembles (both appearance- and personality-wise) the character in the book. *cough*Savannah Lynn Curtis*cough*.

    That said, there were a couple of scenes where the dialogue was sweet and funny. I also enjoyed the music, but that may be because I'm a huge fan of acoustic. Also, the scenery was absolutely beautiful. Not to mention Channing Tatum's body (pretty much the only thing worth my money).

    As far as acting goes, Channing Tatum was the stronger one in this film. While I'm still personally neutral about my opinion on Amanda Seyfried, I found she's done better. She may be better off with comedy or musicals. And Richard Jenkins was lovable, as always.

    If you've read the book, don't expect anything similar to it. I can't point out a single scene that even resembled that of the book. Part II of the book, especially, was almost non-existent. You will definitely be able to pick out the noticeable differences between the book and the film. Hopefully, you won't be TOO disappointed.

    But like I said, you're more likely to enjoy the film if you haven't read the book.
  • I watched the movie and I loved it! Than I read the reviews afterwords and I thought... oh, this was a great romantic movie and if the book is even better - I have to get the book! So I read the book and I have to say, that I liked the movie much more. I guess I would be the only one here to say this.. I admit, the relationship between John and his father is described in more details in the book and that makes it more touching, but I also understand that the movie cant be as descriptive as a book. And also I have to add, that I loved both Channing and Amanda in their roles, they acted great, no, they were Perfect! I was really surprised they got such bad reviews on their acting here... So I give it 10/10 and I made this one of the most romantic movies I have ever seen.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    My first review...I'm not even finished with the first sentence and I can already feel the pressure to make a good impression. Sure, the easiest way to do so would be to fall in line with most of the mainstream critics and slam "Dear John", you know, using such witty stingers as "'Dear John' is nothing to write home about." Har dee har har. I mean, my God, do some critics base their entire opinion of a film on their ability to sound clever in its review? And, let's be honest, "Dear John" lends itself fairly well to zippy, yet scathing one-liners..."Return this one to sender," for example. But, you know what, I actually liked "Dear John" and, what's more, I think that most of you will too. It has its problems, including an awkwardly-executed twist that leads the film into a murky second half, but the love story at its core is charming and its two leads, Channing Tatum and Amanda Seyfried, inject it with passion and electric chemistry that carry it even when its occasionally weak narrative does not. On top of that, one of my favorite working actors, the incredible Richard Jenkins, delivers a remarkable supporting performance that, though limited in duration, is packed with emotion and honesty. When the film is dissected beyond the superficial, one realizes that his character is just as integral, if not more so, to the plot than even Seyfried's, though she receives much more screen time.

    Please Read My Full Review Here: www.the-last-review.blogspot.com
  • shalinu22 September 2019
    Warning: Spoilers
    This is unbelievable. How can this even count as a romantic movie? I mean really?? You just swing around like that without consequences? She had options and she chose the worst one. You can really take care of people without naming the relationship. There is difference between feeling pity, giving support and utter stupidity. I am not gonna name anyone so that this could be max half the spoiler and half you can figure out by yourself. But if I would have been dieing and have few months left, I die making things and not breaking it. Stay away, this movie is not about love and sacrifice. Its about wrong choices and misuse of the most important emotion of Humankind.
An error has occured. Please try again.