Henry Johnson

Greetings again from the darkness. Show or tell ... films tend to lean one direction or the other. Visuals are obviously the key to the popularity of superhero movies and comic book adaptations, while on the other end of the spectrum we have 'Mamet-speak.' David Mamet is a Pulitzer Prize winning writer who has been nominated for Oscars, Tonys, and Emmys. Best known for his rapidly-paced labyrinthian dialogue, Mamet is known for both his stage and screen projects.

His 1976 play "Sexual Perversion in Chicago" was adapted into the film, ABOUT LAST NIGHT (1996), while possibly his best known stage-to-screen adaptation was GLENGARRY GLEN ROSS (1992), which was directed by the recently deceased James Foley). Other well-known Mamet screenplays include THE POSTMAN ALWAYS RINGS TWICE (1981), THE VERDICT (1982), THE UNTOUCHABLES (1987), WAG THE DOG (1997) and HANNIBAL (2001). Mamet has also directed some of his own screenplays: HOMICIDE (1991), THE SPANISH PRISONER (1997), and STATE AND MAIN (2000). I also must mention one of my favorites, his underappreciated 1987 film, HOUSE OF GAMES.

Since it's been about 17 years since he last directed a feature film, it seemed fitting to post a bit of a David Mamet history lesson. For this one (he again adapted from one of his plays), he directs a small cast working with an enormous script of dialogue. There are basically four sequences, the middle two combine for Act II. A mesmerizing 23-minute opening sequence finds Mr Barnes (Chris Bauer, "True Blood") in a rapid-fire debate with his employee, the titular Henry (Evan Jonigkeit, wearing what I believe to be Mamet's eyeglasses). The conversation is two-sided as the men discuss the finer points of the law, among other things - including a decision Henry made regarding an old friend. As the scene ends, we viewers and Henry get a big surprise from Barnes.

The next two sequences find Henry taking in the philosophy and life lessons from his cell mate Gene (Shia LaBeouf). This follows Barnes' comment from earlier when he reminded that one of the signs of a psychopath is immense charm. Henry is clearly taken in by all Gene has to offer - both in their cell and in the prison library, as they analyze the role of fear and other crucial lessons that master manipulator Gene is inclined to share. The final sequence is a tense standoff with an armed Henry holding prison guard Jerry (Dominic Hoffman, Mamet's REDBELT, 2008). Again, we find someone offering advice and counseling to Henry, who seems mostly capable of being taken advantage of and making poor decisions. Henry tells him, "Do what you want - people generally do." And I do hope Mamet lovers will check this one out and bask in the Mamet-speak that we are too rarely treated.

Available VOD beginning May 9, 2025.

I'll start by saying I'm a big Mamet fan. In many ways diving into his catalog of plays was what led me to begin a career in theater. Which is what made the last few plays of his- China doll, the penitent and the anarchist so disheartening- they sucked. A lot. They just lacked the sizzle of what makes Mr mamets work shine. But Henry Johnson is a linguistic banger with actors that elevate the words with ride or die commitment. Sure, maybe the jumps in time are a touch jarring, especially from the second to last scene to the last scene, but this is a true Mamet work in all the best ways, and for that I'm truly grateful.

What a bore fest!

Is this really the same David Mamet, the one who gaves us House of Games who wrote and directed this terrible script?

He lost it completely.

Non stop speaking ogwash to hide a non existant intrigue is not the way to go.

The film is painfull to watch from the first minutes (the first scene is 20mn long of non stop fast speaking with very bad directing and pace) I was hoping it would get better later but it doesn't.

The two next scenes are the same type.

After 1 hour who felt like 3, I decided to fast forward (an I'm the patient type).

Nothing special at the end.

This is just a very basic story excessively badly told.

Avoid!!!

It's hard to believe Henry Johnson was written and directed by David Mamet. There are only four scenes and five characters, but that's not the issue. The issue is how it leaves you feeling like you're watching something important without ever being allowed to understand why.

There is meaning here-but it's buried so deep under cryptic dialogue and missing context that it becomes exhausting to chase. My wife and I, both fans of layered storytelling, followed the plot. We knew what was happening. But knowing what's happening and feeling anything from it are two different things.

The main character, Henry, is a puppet-manipulated by everyone around him, devoid of agency, drifting through the film with no spine and no mind of his own. That might be the point, but it makes for an incredibly frustrating viewing experience. You keep waiting for him to wake up, push back, do something-but he never does.

Watching Henry Johnson is like trying to solve a puzzle with half the pieces intentionally missing. Or worse, like having sex with the worst person you've ever met: dull, one-sided, and strangely confident in itself. You suffer through it, holding out for something transformative, and get five seconds at the end that almost-but not quite-redeem the misery.

There's a version of this film that could've been brilliant. This isn't it.

Firstly it's not a 10, it's more an 8. But tue 1s and 2s it does not deserve.

This is a brief look at a broken system which can quickly drive someone to madness in a falling-down esque way.

The acting is precise and the monologues are engrossing and believable. It's cold and ruthless and meant to be drawn out and dark! You need to imagine yourself sat in the audience in a dark theatre watching only 2 ppl on a stage ignoring all that's around you and totally delving into their world. If you try it to look at this as a film then you will misunderstand and belittle it. But this is a triumph and a testament to the creators. I'm guilty of not following Mamet's work but now I'm intrigued and shall be driving into his back-catalogue.

This is not cinema at its best and it's not meant to be. It's designed to be a mere snapshot of a handful of characters over an unknown time period. We don't need a backstory or building of characters or any real plot. We just need to sit and admire how a basic premise here can open our eyes, albeit for a very short time, to catastrophic events that could happen to literally anyone given the circumstances.