NOTE IMDb
6,3/10
161 k
MA NOTE
Un drame romantique où un soldat tombe amoureux d'une étudiante conservatrice pendant sa permission.Un drame romantique où un soldat tombe amoureux d'une étudiante conservatrice pendant sa permission.Un drame romantique où un soldat tombe amoureux d'une étudiante conservatrice pendant sa permission.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 4 victoires et 8 nominations au total
Jose Lucena Jr.
- Berry
- (as Jose Lucena)
Keith D. Robinson
- Captain Stone
- (as Keith Robinson)
Mary Rachel Quinn
- Mrs. Curtis
- (as Mary Rachel Dudley)
Avis à la une
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.
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 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
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.
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.
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 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.
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
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesOn its opening weekend in the United States, it went to number one, becoming the film to finally end the reign of James Cameron's Avatar (2009), which had sat at the top of the box office for seven consecutive weeks.
- GaffesWhen John is in Hungary when he hears about 09/11 (as indicated by the signs on/near the coffee shop: Tigris Kavehaz, Muvesz...), and the TV news are in Serbian (even using Cyrillic - not Latin - script). This scene is not necessarily a mistake. Although not well explained in the movie, in the book John was stationed in Kosovo. He could simply have been standing outside a Hungarian-style coffee shop there, which explains the Hungarian language on the store front. Serbian is recognized as an official language of Kosovo, which explains the TV news being in Serbian.
- Citations
John Tyree: No matter where you are in the world,the moon is never bigger than your thumb.
- ConnexionsFeatured in Trailer Failure: Dear John, The Squeakquel and Bad Lieutenant (2009)
- Bandes originalesAmber
Written by Nick Hexum
Performed by 311
Courtesy of Volcano Entertainment III, LLC and The RCA/Jive Label Group, a unit of Sony Music Entertainment
By Arrangement with Sony Music Licensing
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Querido John
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 25 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 80 014 842 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 30 468 614 $US
- 7 févr. 2010
- Montant brut mondial
- 114 991 723 $US
- Durée1 heure 48 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant