POINT/COUNTERPOINT: ‘Dear John’

Editor’s Note: We like to give fresh, honest perspectives on movies at Red Carpet Crash. That’s why we sent Matt Rayford and Amy Reeder to review Lasse Hallstrom’s “Dear John.” Their previous joint review of “The Twilight Saga: New Moon” can be found here. If you think you know how each person thought about the movie… think again.

I’m a 25-year-old man. I like movies with guns, explosions and a completely unnecessary abundance of curses that make the MPAA shudder. That being said, let’s talk “Dear John,” the movie based on a novel by Nicholas Sparks, a man who women adore and men despise. Sparks’ most noteworthy accomplishment, “The Notebook,” forces this generation’s man to forever be contrasted to the overtly-jaded and embellished picture of what love and a relationship should be, leaving a foul taste of disappointment in the mouth of any girl encumbered within its grasp. In Sparks’ most recent novel-turned-film, he attempts to strengthen the façade in which he’s laid upon the reality of love, only this time with much less fanfare and – lucky for us men – much less success.

“Dear John” follows the story of John Tyree, played by Channing Tatum. It saddens me to say I’ve seen more than one film in my lifetime that starred Channing Tatum but luckily the other included the aforementioned “guns” and “explosions” that I adore so heavily softening the feeling of shame I have. Channing Tatum has the acting chops of an Easter Island statue and quite jealously the same jaw line. John, a member of the Army Special Forces falls in love with Savannah Curtis (Amanda Seyfried) during a short leave. When called back to serve his country, the relationship is tested and unenthusiastic attempts are made to pull at your heart strings.

While a montage of seemingly endless love letters back and forth – equating mostly to “I miss you,” “I miss you more,” “No, I miss you more” – may bring about a plethora of emotions for some, but a two-week relationship that turns into a love so powerful it could withstand years apart is anything but believable to me. This fact, essentially crumbling the whole foundation upon which “Dear John” is built leaves all ancillary events meaningless.

Although not enough to win over this opponent of “Hollywood love,” “Dear John” did have a few redeeming qualities deep within it. John’s father, played excellently by Richard Jenkins (who I hardly recognized as the dad on “Stepbrothers”) brings an unexpected relationship that you actually care about to the table. That is, until Tatum’s glazed stare and dead face suck all attachment out of any situation. Another notable role is that of Tim, played by Henry Thomas, a friend of the family whose small yet meaningful role plays a huge part in adding depth to an otherwise cut-and-paste love story.

I’ll give partial credit to “Dear John” for attempting to give us a story much different than simply what the trailer hands to us, and while successful at doing so, failed to do it in a manner we care about. Aside from what I’m hoping I mistakenly saw as a jump cut (fancy film term), Lasse Hallström directs a film which isn’t better or worse than the majority of what we’ve seen in theatres. Sadly, this film is hindered by uninspired, passionless acting and a hollow story. “Dear John” offers enough to please the most sappy, romance craving movie goers but falls short of being the masterpiece Sparks delivered in “The Notebook” but hey… who needs two classics anyway?

–Matt Rayford

“Dear John” Rated PG-13 • 105 minutes Starring Channing Tatum, Smanda Seyfried, Henry Thomas, Richard Jenkins Directed by: Lasse Hallström Written By: Jamie Linden (Based on novel by Nicholas Sparks RCC Rating: Worth Watching On DVD

Let me preface this by saying that I truly believe that “The Notebook” is the best romantic film of our generation. I feel like the book by Nicholas Sparks and the movie based on it take us through a roller coaster romance that everyone secretly wishes they could experience. I was never hoping to find the same thing from “Dear John,” another movie based off of a Sparks novel. However, as I sat with a cup holder full of tissues, I was expecting to walk away with puffy eyes and a full heart.

First off, I can almost recommend any movie, sight unseen, that lets me stare at Channing Tatum’s half naked, wet body. His broad, freckled shoulders were almost enough to distract me from his lack of acting skill set. Tatum’s attempt to be serious often left him looking dumbfounded, but his fun-loving moments with Amanda Seyfried were undeniable. He should probably stick to throwing down some sweet dance moves in “Step Up” or being an action hero “G.I. Joe.”

Seyfried’s smile could charm almost anyone. It is unfortunate that she took a back seat in this film. Her voice does remain as an almost constant through the film as she narrates her “Dear John” letters, but it didn’t have the desired effect. Instead, they carried through long, dragged out Army scenes that seemed superfluous to the plot line.

The two supporting roles of the film, Henry Thomas as Seyfried’s neighbor and Richard Jenkins as Tatum’s father, were brilliant. Both characters had an immensity that lacked from the starring duo. It was almost more enjoyable to watch these men’s characters develop than Tatum’s or Seyfried’s.

All-in-all, I feel like this movie was a little mishandled. There seemed to be lulls between huge events, instead of a seamless, coherent story. Maybe after I read the book, I will better understand if this feeling of nothingness was by fault of Nicholas Sparks, director Lasse Hallström or screenwriter Jamie Linden. The teens who will flock to this film in search of another Romeo and Juliet film, I fear, will be left feeling a bit of the apathy that I fell now. I actually kind of feel like I need to watch “The Notebook” before I go to bed so I can get the tearjerker that I am still looking for.

–Amy Reeder