Bad Johnson

Overall this movie was bad, not compelling, completely predictable (pun intended). The acting in it was fairly bad, as well as the directing and overall production of the movie. That sounds like a recipe for a 1 or 2 out of 10. But no, the writing and jokes in the script, although VERY crude, are hilarious to a certain audience. If that script had landed on the doorstep of the complete cast of This Is the End I think it would have been a success. The script and jokes therein are the only reason to watch this film. If nothing else, you can take away the one-liners and jokes from this crude and hilarious could-have-been. Jeff Tetreault needs a broader audience and larger scope of people to work with. And yes, I did have to look up him name on IMDb.

Ever say something you thought was funny but was sort of inappropriate? And for some reason you wondered what sort of scenario it would take to make it appropriate? This is the movie that creates the scenario that makes silly puns about genitals work.

There are few other qualities. There is also plenty of babbling and speculation about human love and relationships and the complexity therein. Although they generally try to treat the topic respectfully, the constant oversimplifications and stereotypes presented leave you shaking your head and simply saying, "No. It doesn't work that way, it's not that simple."

The implication that men can't help but think with their genitals is an old cliché that can really be fun if it's played well, but is still generally demeaning. Whereas the insinuation that women are so easily seduced by someone like this "Johnson" character is somewhat demeaning to the female gender.

All of it could have been done well, but really the whole film comes off pretty dry. It's only moderately entertaining, and not very romantic.

It also reminds me of a similar movie that came out in 1988 called "Me and Him." (tt2091325)

It should be said that "Bad Johnson" at least is a different kind of comedy. And when that is said, then it should be said that the movie was kind of a slow-paced and actually disappointing comedy.

Why? Well, for starters, then I didn't laugh a single time throughout the movie. And the little comedy that was incorporated in the movie just didn't really punch through on any scale.

The story is about Rich (played by Cam Gigandet) a guy who cheats on just about every woman that he goes out with. Until one day when he makes a distressed wish to be distanced from the source of his trouble between his legs. Waking up the next day, Rich gets a call from someone he knows intimately and things starts to go awry.

I will say that the idea behind the movie was interesting, but just a shame that it wasn't executed skillfully on the screen.

The acting in "Bad Johnson" was adequate, but the lead part could perhaps have been given to someone more enthusiastic and involved in the role. Cam Gigandet didn't really bring anything to the movie in any way.

"Bad Johnson" was a stale experience as comedies go, and I wasn't really properly entertained. As such, I am rating the movie a mere 4 out of 10 stars.

First off: this is a low budget, high concept film with no real pretensions, so don't come looking for deep meanings or Oscar-worthiness here. Second off: despite the frattish central conceit this isn't at all bad, and even manages to suggest, and comment about, matters of male sexual morality etc which much bigger, more earnest productions miss, or labour out of existence with good taste. 'Rich' Johnson, the titular hero, starts off as a helpless philanderer, losing a succession of girlfriends due to his inability to control himself. (He is however not entirely to blame, as one encounter demonstrates). After the most recent occasion of betrayal by him and the ending of another promising relationship thing rather personal separate and Johnson and his johnson have to learn to live with and then apart from one another.

The interesting thing about Bad Johnson is that Johnson's johnson is made human and not just a comic talking appendage. (It could for instance have been portrayed like 'Tonguey' in Kung Pow). Instead what we have is like that old Star Trek episode when the 'good' and the 'bad' Kirk co-exist after a transporter malfunction. The effect of this is to make the change less of a joke which runs out of steam after a few crude scenes, and the situation more susceptible to social comment, as the film ambles from its un-PC beginnings onto something more regular. Ultimately johnson shows himself in his newly independent form as a element of Johnson's ego (significantly this separate existence does not effect Johnson's libido)which is revealed as sometime-objectionable part of the male character. As Johnson gets along without his friend, so does his relationship with women improve and, surprise surprise, he becomes a much more likable fellow. Even if the words he later utters about the need to "say 'no'" seemed to this viewer to take the case against active sexuality a little too far, it is clear that the film does manage to pose some interesting questions about how much of stereotyped maleness is down to selfishness and a lack of self control and yet how both the good and bad parts of Johnson are together necessary for things ultimately to work.

The cinematography and direction are perfectly fine, and the cast acquit themselves well. I had a smile on my face throughout and, for a film like this, its all better than you'd expect.

Usually if I write a less than favorable review I feel I owe it to the people who made the film to watch the whole thing. This movie has made me break that rule. It is just slow and tedious. I'm about halfway through it and I think I'm going to bail when I'm finished writing this. The redhead love interest, who I'm predicting will show the main character the mEanIng oF tRue LoVe, is one of the only actors here that can actually ACT. Now the missing penis character is lecturing a potential rapist in the error of his ways. Do yourself a favor if you're in the mood for raunchy comedy and watch "Something About Mary" again.