Dear John

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

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.

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.

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.

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.