pretty_tay21 (24 May 2012)

Loved it!

Read the book loved it, saw the movie and loved it. Channing Tatum isso good in this movie. He really shows his acting chops! He had all thegirls in the theater crying in the scene when he reads a letter to hisdad. Amanda was OK her actions in the movie make you upset for the wayshe treats Channing's character. They alo changed a few things whichadded a bigger twist on the story but, kept the signifiant pointsright. I also loved the way they made the information on coins moreinteresting. You really get a sense of a bond between John and his dadthrough they're interest in coins. I enjoyed this movie a lot. Iactually think it's better then the Notebook!

janetki-imdb (23 May 2012)

BIG surprise

I know what you're thinking cause I thought it too. Here is how I gotto seeing this movie. I saw the trailer for it and I was like oh HELLno. Then, I heard the song from the trailer on Pandora. My ears perkedup to this vaguely familiar, sad song – and I thought – hey, that's agood song! I had to listen to the song on repeat for a few days andthen watch the trailer again. That's when I decided I actually neededto watch the movie. And I'm glad I did. Despite the horrendous preview(for my tastes), I sat through the movie, suspended by the good-lookingactors and decent love story! I do like to surprise myself from time totime, keeps me on my toes.There are several crucial elements to thismovie that makes it a good romance. First of all, the leading lady,Amanda Seyfried, is a charming and intelligent young woman. I canactually see why a stallion like Channing Tatum would fall madly inlove with her in two weeks. That's the problem with many of thesemovies (eg The Notebook), I just don't see what there is to love, but apretty face. Secondly, it's not just about two lovebirds, but aboutother important relationships and priorities. Channing Tatum's father,played by Richard Jenkins, is a neurotic shut-in with autistictendencies. I appreciated the inclusion of people with disabilitieswith subtly and grace. Fourth, I enjoyed the incorporation of 9/11 inthe film. I haven't seen very many movies where the writer/directorsuccessfully includes an important, recent historic event. Usually,it's a complete distraction and utter failure (eg Benjamin Button). Buthere, it fit well and flowed with the story. I even enjoyed the momentit happened – a creative and subtle reenactment of the experience.Maybe because it's personal for me, but that's almost exactly how Ifound out – on my way home from class in college. Lastly, there's anelement of keepin it real that I like – I don't wanna spoil anything,so I've got to limit it to that. I think this movie isunder-appreciated. If you like romantic movies, go for it, watch DearJohn. http://fatkidslist.wordpress.com/2010/09/21/dear-john/

(16 May 2012)

Leaves you hanging

My main problem with this movie is that it builds up this emotional conflict between the two characters, and then doesn't pay off on it satisfyingly. I don't mean we have to have a happy ending. I mean the audience needs a resolution at the end that doesn't fall flat and not actually resolve anything. If a movie that revolves around a couple's relationship and emotional hardships doesn't resolve the emotional issues well, the movie as a whole suffers. After watching this movie I felt like this was the case here.

jennywaltz (16 May 2012)

Great romantic movie!

I watched the movie and I loved it! Than I read the reviews afterwordsand I thought... oh, this was a great romantic movie and if the book iseven better - I have to get the book! So I read the book and I have tosay, that I liked the movie much more. I guess I would be the only onehere to say this.. I admit, the relationship between John and hisfather is described in more details in the book and that makes it moretouching, but I also understand that the movie cant be as descriptiveas a book. And also I have to add, that I loved both Channing andAmanda in their roles, they acted great, no, they were Perfect! I wasreally surprised they got such bad reviews on their acting here... So Igive it 10/10 and I made this one of the most romantic movies I haveever seen.

DarkVulcan29 (08 May 2012)

A beautiful well told story about love and war.

John(Channing Tatum) is in the armed forces, for now is now temporaryleave, lives with his withdrawn father(Richard Jenkins). John is kindof loner, until he meets Savannah(Amanda Seyfried), they instantlybecome smitten with each other, for two weeks they are bothinseparable, But then John has to go for a whole year in the service,but they both instantly write letters too each other, but will therelove survive? Channing Tatum proves he can act, His performance was great, and notannoyingly stiff like it was in G.I. The Rise of Cobra. Amanda Seyfriedgives quite an Oscar worthy performance. And she and Tatum have suchbeautiful chemistry. Supporting players don't disappoint RichardJenkins and Henry Thomas are quite memorable. If you love The Notebook,then give Dear John a look.

(08 May 2012)

A Surprising Gem

This film provides a (perhaps too) tight story about love, loss, tough choices, and redemption. A two-week introduction between the soldier and student "is all it took" (says the student) for the love to stick, bound with letters before and after 9/11.Hallstrom, ever the innovative and insightful director, provides a vehicle for stardom to Channing Tatum and Amanda Seyfried. Tatum, in particular, accepts the invitation with his stellar performance. Yes, he looks good with or without clothes but his mastery as an actor provides the emotionally-rich glue for the storyline. In a way rarely experienced in film today, you can viscerally feel what he feels (love, loss, pain, ...) whether he utters words or not. For her part, Seyfried even contributes to the score when she sweetly sings and strums in one scene.With its intimately composed shots, well-matched soundtrack (highlighted with the hauntingly beautiful and appropriate juxtaposition to the love scene), and storyline highlighting the enduring strength of love over loss, "Dear John" is a great addition to the romantic film genre.

(06 May 2012)

love=]

This review is from: Dear John (DVD) love love love this movie!! this is such a good movie with the story line and the characters i love this movie!!

Simon Weaving (05 May 2012)

Despite the narrative losing its way in a slow middle section, experienced director Lasse Hallstrom makes a warm and likeable film out of this contrived tale of two young lovers separated by war, commitment and ten thousand kilometers.

Kiryl Viarenich (02 May 2012)

Not so bad

Is the plot everything in the film? Well, the war is not so nice to beshown in the screen, but it wasn't a brutal action, anyway! Did younotice the cinematography? In my opinion it was exciting. The camerashowed what John saw when he was shot. John's love to Savannah? Atleast we saw it unlike it was in "The Kingdom" (2007). Didn't you likethe love theme? Well, it wasn't trivial. Did John have to make lovewith Savannah after her marriage? I think true gentleman are able toresist the hard life. John is a warrior after all. Wonder why we seeJohn's father dying in the hospital? Because John himself will diealone. But he will not even have children. That will happen because heis a warrior, remember?

(01 May 2012)

Movie

This review is from: Dear John (DVD) I bought this movie for a friend for Christmas. It arrived before the time it said it was supposed to, and my friend really appreciated the gift!

Jonny Fendi (25 April 2012)

Tatum's Mis-Cast??,.. Thiz Romantic Didn't Spark Like It Should Be,..

Nicholas Sparks is the mastermind of incredibly-moving "The Notebook"(2004). Lasse Hallström tried to bring another novel he wrote.Recently, we watched other Hallström's direction in heartwarming"Hachiko: A Dog's Story" (2009). Both of them made thiz romantic dramaworth it to be waited. But in the implementation, something is out oftrack. The story was about Savannah (Amanda Seyfried) who accidentallymet John (Channing Tatum) in one fine summer on the beach. Thosememorable two weeks based their continuance into long distancerelationship, when john sent away to his military mission. TheDirector, Hallström tried to capture it with simplicity. In fact,almost all of Hallström's movies fill with simplicity. Seem to me hissimplicity made the drama came out effectively and naturally. Seyfriedalways appears likable, her character was gratifying. She could be ablerepresent up and down of all emotions very well. Once again, he showedhis singing talent here. I already fell in love with her since firsttime I saw her on "Mamma Mia!" (2008). Inversely Tatum performance isawful. His character was vacuous and awkward. I doubt his acting skillat all. As the result, the chemistry is on serious gap. But once again,Nicholas Sparks's novels always worth it to be tell. Thiz is fifthSparks's adapted movie, since Kevin Costner's "Message in a Bottle"(1999), Mandy Moore's "A Walk to Remember" (2002), Rachel McAdams's"The Notebook" (2004), Richard Gere's "Nights in Rodanthe" (2008) andalso upcoming Miley Cyrus's "The Last Song" (2010). His stories werealways about long term and everlasting love. We could spend one fineevening with anybody or even a nice memorable summer, it could come andgo. But it's the person who always stands beside us in all these timeswho is truly the one.Visit My Blog on JONNY'S MOVEE : http://jonnyfendi.blogspot.com

Aaron Hillis (24 April 2012)

Sometimes the leads pull off genuine tenderness, and other times their gauzily written caricatures can't elevate such overwrought housewife bait, but chances are, given its literary pedigree, most viewers are preordained to love or loathe it.

hanin84 (23 April 2012)

Don't read the book if you want to see and/or like this movie...

I'll try to make this short and sweet, like the two weeks the twocharacters spent together before all hell broke loose:If you read the book, lower your expectations. If you haven't read thebook,...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, orwatched the trailer on YouTube a million times. I bawled my eyes outwhen I read the book- both times I read it. Last night, I went to seethe movie knowing full well that it wasn't going to live up to thebook. Unfortunately, I was right.What made 'Dear John' different from all the other love stories we'veread and seen was taken away in the movie. I don't know how I wouldhave understood what was going on in the movie if I hadn't read thebook. Scenes were rushed (especially the two weeks where the two maincharacters fall in love), and characters weren't well developed at all.Heck, one of the main characters barely resembles (both appearance- andpersonality-wise) the character in the book. *cough*Savannah LynnCurtis*cough*. That said, there were a couple of scenes where the dialogue was sweetand funny. I also enjoyed the music, but that may be because I'm a hugefan of acoustic. Also, the scenery was absolutely beautiful. Not tomention Channing Tatum's body (pretty much the only thing worth mymoney). As far as acting goes, Channing Tatum was the stronger one in thisfilm. While I'm still personally neutral about my opinion on AmandaSeyfried, I found she's done better. She may be better off with comedyor musicals. And Richard Jenkins was lovable, as always. If you've read the book, don't expect anything similar to it. I can'tpoint out a single scene that even resembled that of the book. Part IIof the book, especially, was almost non-existent. You will definitelybe able to pick out the noticeable differences between the book and thefilm. Hopefully, you won't be TOO disappointed.But like I said, you're more likely to enjoy the film if you haven'tread the book.

(22 April 2012)

Awesome!

Great transaction, item arrived on time and in said condition. This is a terrific movie a must see! Heartfelt and romantic, very touching yet sad at times. Channing Tatum and Amanda Syfried shine in this movie, based from a Nicholas Sparks novel, well done. Great cast too.

(22 April 2012)

(2.5 STARS) Likable, But Needs a Better Storyteller

John Tyree (Channing Tatum), a sergeant on leave, meets a college student Savannah Curtis (Amanda Seyfried) on spring break in his hometown in North Carolina. Knowing that they have to go back to their life in two weeks, they fall in love with each other. But John and Savannah maintain their relationship through letters, and John will soon leave the army so that they can live together, but things turn out not the way they planned."Dear John" is based on a 2006 book written by Nicholas Sparks, original author of such romantic dramas as "Message in a Bottle," "A Walk to Remember," "Nights in Rodanthe" and yes, "The Notebook," but the film somehow lacks the emotional charge of the Ryan Gosling / Rachel McAdams romance. It seems director Lasse Hallström, known for "My Life as a Dog" and "The Cider House Rules" is trying too hard to make everything so sweet or so bitter, without allowing us to know the central characters John, John's father, Savannah and her neighbor Tim (Henry Thomas). In "Dear John," most characters are nice (like in any Nicholas Sparks adaptations), but their motives for takings action are not always convincing. To explain the decision made (one that is hard to do), one character says, "I had no choice." Sorry, but I just don't believe it. The consequences may be heartbreaking, but they are contrived. The final act is rushed, as if several key scenes are deleted. The subplot about John's quiet father (Richard Jenkins) and his childhood memories don't add up to much.Channing Tatum and Amanda Seyfried are doing their best, injecting some much-needed passion into the characters they play, but under Hallström vapid direction, they have no chance. "Dear John" is an unabashed tearjerker (and that is not a bad thing), that needs a better storyteller.

brutkopp (21 April 2012)

If you want to like this movie, skip the book! If you want to like the book, skip the movie!

I recently read Dear John by Nicholas Sparks and was so excited that itwas a movie. Within the first 5 minutes I could see where it was goingand it was very disappointing. The movie failed to capture thesweetness, tenderness and joy of John and Savannah's relationship. Italso failed to portray their characters as they were in the book. Thebook was so beautiful and moving that had the director chosen to staytrue to the story, it could have been magical on the screen as well.They were so out of character at the ending because the movie didn'tend like that. He also never broke up with her in the book, no matterhow hopeless it seemed. He lived for her all the years they were apart,even across the sea at war. There were so many inconsistencies with thebook. I really cannot recommend this movie. Leave it to Hollywood totake something perfect and ruin it.

Tom Cox (20 April 2012)

It's a shame the whole thing resembles a schmaltzy video for a wet female singer, as there's some real pain here and a twist that retains an impact somewhere deep in the chest.

jc-osms (20 April 2012)

Tanks and hankies

A big old-fashioned weepie, set in the recent past and coloured withits references to 09/11 and the succeeding war in Iraq. The story ofstar-crossed lovers- strong, silent, but with a violent streak, soldierJohn & beautiful, intelligent guitar-strumming Savannah, theirrelationship is put to the test by the intervention of the war andtheir coincidental interaction with people with autism, namely John'sfather and Savannah's family friend's young son. If that sounds like a fairly contrived story-line, then the reason thathe ends up receiving her "Dear John" letter while serving abroad willstretch credulity even further as will the way that it still ends upall happy ever after for the two by the very end. One senses too thatlife in the army today is not quite the buddy-fest that is portrayedhere. The film is beautifully shot in warm colour tones and in the actingstakes, As Savannah Amanda Seyfried gives an appealing and attractiveperformance. I was less convinced by Channing Tatum as John, althoughhis surly character certainly gives him less to play with.Correspondingly I didn't quite buy into their relationship and actuallythought that his receiving the title letter was the end of the film,rather than the springboard to reunion it later turned out to be. That said, it was nice to watch a latter-day film in the old tradition,without profanity or violence, the love scenes between the couple inparticular being sensitively filmed. All in all, a pleasant film mywife and I could both watch together quite happily although there wereprobably too many coincidences in the story for it to properly hangtogether.

(18 April 2012)

DVD or the book?

I must say, the movie version is way better than the book. I mean, Sparks' version is more elaborate and some of the relationships had deeper thoughts in them. However, let us keep in mind that a movie is a movie; there's a limited time for a movie. Having said them, I found the chemistry between Savannah and John to be brilliant on screen. In the book, I questioned Savannah's love for John a few times. This is probably why the different endings matched each presentation (movie and book). I understand the nature of the title, "Dear John", is supposed to be a break up letter, but let's not over generalize the situation. There is hope in the movie and that's what movie viewers need. We've all seen the tragic events, and it isn't just a happily ever after that viewers long for, but don't they (John and Savannah) deserve it? How can anyone cheat on John like that? He's got this responsibility in him that makes him really remarkable. I haven't been an army's wife, but my boyfriend is always away from home because of work. I find that the distance really draws us back together. It's a lovely thing. Finally, for those of you who are in the army, please don't let Sparks' version shatter your dreams. Your girl is waiting for you, back home.

Karen Krizanovich (18 April 2012)

Despite its flaws, this is a wonderfully filmed romance that will have even the toughest of guys dabbing away the tears.