Johnny Mnemonic

Usually when you watch a sci-fi film, the first half usually piques your interest only to sink into a confusing and badly written second half ("Star Trek V" comes to mind.). "Johnny Mnemonic" has the unique distinction of having a rather bad first half being saved by the second half. There were moments of badly delivered lines and situations, which I fully blame the director for. There were cuts where the demeanor of Keanu Reeves changed confusingly. Again I blame the director and continuity supervisor. There was, IMHO, more gore than necessary. But that's a matter of taste. And, to make matters worse, I wasn't sure of what I was watching.

There was a LOT of good things about the movie. It told a sci-fi story about a dark and bleak future....somewhat similar to "Blade Runner". And it did it well. There were an amazing amount of sets, extras, and really well done computer effects. There was even one really well filmed shot in a hospital that reminded me of the long scene from "Gone With The Wind" showing the dead and dying in the Atlanta train yard. Many of the secondary actors (especially Henry Rollins as "Spider" and Ice-T as "J-Bone") were surprisingly good and helped to raise my rating of the film from an initial 4.0 to an overall 7.0 rating.

If you aren't into a lot of foul language and/or gore, I'd steer clear of this film. But if you want to see a surprisingly well made piece of dark sci-fi, this is a film worth giving a chance to watch.

This is not a terrible film as claimed, but it had faults: poor pacing; weak atmosphere (visuals were there, but insufficient music track to back them up); and its largely unexplained universe.

Ideally, you need to have read Gibson's short stories and "Neuromancer" first, and then all the props - cyberspace, 'black ice', grubby streets, brand-name hardware, Yakuza assassins, muscle grafts, etc - make sense. The "Blade Runner" style information dump was no substitute. Incidentally, many of these props appear cliched, but remember that Gibson more or less invented them; it's merely that this film appeared long after they had become standard movie fixtures.

Gibson's written work has fairly sparse dialogue, and makes heavy use of precise and rather introspective visual description to convey character. Perhaps this just doesn't translate well to film.

I saw half of this movie on television once, and since I am a avid sci-fi fan, the story intrigued me. A couple of weeks later I went out to pick up a copy of this movie for myself, and ever since I've been watching it every now and then. Not every month, but at least once every 4 or 5 months. Sometimes more. There's just something about it that I like. Well, lets start from the beginning:

It is the year 2021 and the world has been taken over by large coorporations that do pretty much what they want to. Most of them are out to make money, however, and will do anything to achieve that goal. One of these coorporations is PharmaCom, a coorporation that deals in medicine and exists pretty much all over the world. From Beijing to Newark. 'Johnny' is a Mnemonic courier who carries an implant in his brain which allows him to carry a large amount of data there. But when he accepts a job where he is overloaded with data, he is not only experiencing trouble with getting rid of the data, but also finds that several bounty hunters and crime organizations are after his head and the information stored within. Over 24 hours he jumps around in the city of Newark, trying to find a way to get rid of the data and the bounty hunters.

A touch in this movie that many might recognize from the film 'The Matrix' is that in this movie they tend to hook themselves up to the internet, which has become a virtual reality like, àlà The Lawnmower man. But in the end of the film, Keanu's character completly hooks himself up to the internet for a short amount of time, walking around in it and controlling his actions as if he was in another world. Pretty much like he did in the Matrix. Wierd, huh?

The film presents a very interesting vision of the future. Coorporations, crime syndicates, virtual-reality, futuristic weapons and the like. The sets look authentic and the look and feel of the film is top-notch. The music seems to fit the mood at all times, too, which is a big plus. The characters are likeable and unique in their own way, but with one exception. Keanu Reeves plays 'Johnny' without any life or energy put into it and delivers his lines flat and in the most boring way. His worst acting job ever? Perhaps. You could tell he didn't like this movie very much.

Overall, its a very interesting sci-fi flick which has its ups and downs. The upsides is the setting, the music, the vision of the future etc. etc. while the downsides are Keanu Reeve's acting and sometimes lack of interest in what happens next in the movie. I give it a 7/10.

Oh man! Why so many bad reviews... if you wanted acting, WHY WERE YOU WATCHING A KEANU REEVES MOVIE?! If you wanted a thick plot with many twists and turns, you shouldn't have even went "Oh, lets go see a low budget b-film from '95!"!!! The movie didn't call for acting, they just needed a brief plot outline and charismatic actors to play the leads. When I saw this movie way back in '98 when it was on TV, I heard so many horrid reviews that were too over-analystic. When watching a film like "Dude Where's My Car?", are you going to look for the same quality you saw in a film like "The Usual Suspects"? Keanu Reeves did his role only good enough to support the movie... That's fine!!! The plot was a cliche cyber-thriller and you must have known that even just buy the back of the box or the trailer. It delivered a plot that was kind of cool, an star that does some one-liners, and action. If these three things were not what you wanted from this film then you shouldn't have went. It just delivers an action/adventure movie, nothing short of what promised. Don't be critical on films that are obviously intended as sheer dumb fun from start to finish... if these scripts even tried to be thinker, they'd be boring... AND YOU KNOW IT!

One Friday night in early 1994, I was one of the hundreds of extras who was hired to be moving scenery for this film. Basically, they convincingly turned Toronto's fabled Union Station into some post-apocalyptic hospice, in which we were all supposed to be shuffling around, getting food and suffering from some neurological disease. It's always amusing to see what filmmakers do to disguise Toronto as something else, to make it look like it takes place anywhere else other than (gasp) Canada. Still, whenever I go to Union Station, I am impressed with the makeover this location got.

I was anxious to see whether I made in the final cut or not, but the film's release kept on getting pushed back and pushed back. That is a sure sign that the movie is going to be a turkey. Well, it isn't terrible. William Gibson expanded his own short story-- so much so that the film is actually a mess. A beautiful looking one, however. Longo and DOP Francois Protat do a serviceable job in capturing the "plastic noir" of the future. But ultimately the movie suffers from having too many ideas-- some of them ludicrous, many of them poorly developed. It doesn't help either that the drama of the piece relies on the thespian abilities of Keanu Reeves or Dolph Lundgren. Yikes! Even so, Henry Rollins is pretty cool.

But for me, the great suspense was seeing whether or not I ended up on the cutting room floor. So for about two seconds, you get to see my face in a crowd shot. See? See? Wait! Damn!