» » Kallis John (2010)

Short summary

A romantic drama about a soldier who falls for a conservative college student while he's home on leave.
South Carolina US Army Special operations soldier John is on summer leave from his German base, visiting his widowed father. Being gallant on the pier, he befriends college student Savannah, a college student, and her buddies, a terminal father and his angelic son. John falls in love with Savannah, who diagnoses his beloved, gentle but weird father as mildly autistic. He plans not to sign up again, but 9/11 changes that, and she won't wait idly while their friends desperately need help.

Trailers "Kallis John (2010)"

"Dear John" is military slang for a letter from a girlfriend breaking up with a soldier.

The character of Alan was inspired by writer Nicholas Sparks' son, who is afflicted with Asperger's Syndrome, a form of autism.

The Swedish flag can be seen flying over John's camp in Afghanistan. This is an homage to director Lasse Hallström's home country of Sweden.

On its opening weekend in the United States, it went to number one, becoming the film to finally end the reign of James Cameron's Avatar (2009), which had sat at the top of the box office for seven consecutive weeks.

Amanda Seyfried wrote the song Savannah sings to John. Titled "Little House," the whole song is featured on the movie's soundtrack.

Amanda Seyfried shares her birthday with Channing Tatum's real-life ex-wife, Jenna Dewan.

The screenplay for this film was featured in the 2007 Blacklist, a list of the "most liked" unmade scripts of the year.

This is the fifth film adapted from a Nicholas Sparks novel. It is also the first of two to be directed by Lasse Halström and the first of two to be released in the same year; The Last Song (2010) was released less than two months later.

The first Nicholas Sparks adaptation not to be distributed by Warner Brothers.

Originally started in development at New Line before the screenplay was picked up by Screen Gems and Relativity Media.

The ending was hastily re-shot as the original did not find favor with audiences.

This is a list of the biggest differences between the movie, and the book that it was based on: 1. In the book, Alan is Tim's brother, not his son. 2. In the book, Tim had melanoma, not leukemia. 3. In the book, Savannah reveals that she was almost raped in her freshman year of college; the movie makes no reference to this. 4. In the book, Savannah was a brunette, with a small gap in her teeth; in the film, she is a blonde with no gap in her teeth. 5. The book ends before the film ends; there is no happy ending in the book. 6. In the book, John serves in Iraq, not Afghanistan, and often trains and/or works in Kosovo and other places not mentioned in the movie. 7. In the book, Savannah and Tim are Christians; in the movie, no reference is made to their religious backgrounds. 8. In the book, Savannah and John make love twice (in the same night), not just once (like in the movie). 9. In the book, the rehabilitation center Tim and Savannah created for kids with autism did not go out of business (although, in the book, the business did suffer due to Tim's illness). 10. In the book, Tim isn't married (until towards the end of the book). 11. The book takes place in North Carolina; the movie takes place in South Carolina. 12. In the book, John is on leave before September 11th (although, in the book, September 11th does occur while John is overseas, like in the movie). 13. In the movie, there is a party at Savannahs' parent's house after September 11th; there is no such party in the book. 14. In the book, at the beginning of John's relationship with Savannah, he leaves to continue his tour of duty; Savannah doesn't leave until later. 15. The kissing scene inside the unfinished house takes place at night, unlike in the movie. 16. In the novel, Mr. Tyree is never invited to meet Savannah's parents. 17. In the book, Tim and Savannah are basically about the same age; in the movie, Tim is older than Savannah. 18. All the letters written and read by Savannah in the movie are somewhat to completely different to the ones found in the book that this movie is based on.

User reviews

  • comment
    • Author: Vispel
    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.
  • comment
    • Author: Kahavor
    For starters, i'm not a big critic of movies. And sure, this one wasn't very complex, the characters weren't surprising and there was no big twist at the end--but i thought it was compelling. I had just seen Amanda Seyfried star in letters to Juliet, and was surprised at the contrast in her two that has to say at least SOMETHING positive about her. plus i just think she's cute and likable.

    and who knows, maybe i'm just a sap, or i watched it at the wrong time of day, but i did cry. It's the classic tragic love story. the relationship that everyone wants but no one really ever gets. and things just keep falling apart. Everyone knew the dad was gonna die and Savannah was gonna move on from John while he was gone..but something about seeing channing tatum cry broke my heart and i sniffled the rest of the movie through.

    i certainly don't think you should buy it. i probably wouldn't watch it again. ( i rented it on 99 cent Monday at my local movie store) but my time wasn't wasted at all. you just have to be a girl in the right mood :)
  • comment
    • Author: Uste
    Wow...I was expecting this movie to be awful after all of the bad reviews I've read. Nothing is wrong with this movie! Nothing is wrong with the acting. It's actually a pretty good movie. I am not usually one for romantic movies...usually because I find them to be lame. There are definitely moments in this one that tug at your heart and get you teary eyed.

    I really felt for John in this movie. His character had a tough life... and the relationship between him and his father...It made me really sad! That Nicholas Sparks! He knows how to stir up emotions...

    I have not read the book, so I can't compare the two but I say the movie is worth watching.
  • comment
    • Author: Kulabandis
    I have to admit I wasn't expecting to like this film. I don't hate this type of film, but I had heard mixed feelings on Dear John, there were those who said it was touching and others who said it was too clichéd. Well after been blown away by The Notebook(book and movie), I saw Dear John. After seeing it, I don't think it is as good as The Notebook, but it was surprisingly good in my opinion. The characters are clichéd, and the beginning was a tad too fluffy for my liking, while there are some pacing issues. But while the book is better, having more depth and emotional punch, I was surprised at how touching Dear John actually was. The story is nice and believable enough, and there is some decent scripting. The direction is good too, while the cinematography and scenery are breathtaking and the score beautiful. Channing Tatum(my sister kept raving at how hot he was) and Amanda Seyfried are great and are believable together, while Richard Jenkins is heart breaking as Tatum's autistic father(I immediately sympathised with him as I have real problems with communicating with people and feeling comfortable around people and places I am not familiar with). I also liked the ending, it was ambiguous but also clever and subtle, and I think an improvement over the ending of the book(the book's only weak link). In conclusion, touching and well made, definitely worth a peek. 7/10 Bethany Cox
  • comment
    • Author: Blueshaper
    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.
  • comment
    • Author: Yozshubei
    I'm not much of a critic but this film makes me dislike it so much with a passion. Not only was it not all that exciting and entertaining in the beginning and after in the first place, but when John finally got the letter from Savannah after waiting months (which was when I thought things were finally getting good) it turns out from then on ..nor John or Savannah try to get back in touch with each other after that. It turns out later on when he visits home to see his sick father on his death bed that she did go through with the marriage after all the feelings that were "supposedly" floating in the air and all around them. She didn't come to see his father while he was deathly ill, nor to comfort John for all the pain and mental suffering he's been going through with the war and now the only person that he really had all along is dying. And even after his father dies she didn't show up to the funeral. I mean my god.... it seemed where they lived was in a small area how COULD THINGS NOT SPREAD AROUND such things like someone dying? So that didn't even make sense. And then after all the bullshitting around they did when they finally spoke to each other after so long, she gives him a bullshit excuse as to why she dumped him in the first place, and even that didn't make much sense. She said she left him because Tim needed her, and so did his son...and she was lonely and not thinking... lol I'm sorry but if you really care and love someone and think about them every single freaking day then no way in hell can you go through that much torture successfully, unless you're emotionally messed up. She was being selfish and didn't know what she wanted, so let's just put it at that. So then, John takes his father's coin collection and sells it (ok ..good for him) but only to spend the money on Tim's expenses so he can have more time with Savannah lol ...that's about it as far the story itself goes ...we don't really know what happens between John and Savannah after that because the film was done poorly. I have never read the book and I'm sure as **** glad I didn't see Dear John in theatre's because I would of wasted my money.
  • comment
    • Author: invincible
    In the spring of 2001, the Sergeant of the Special Forces John Tyree (Channing Tatum) meets the medical student Savannah Curtis (Amanda Seyfried) while surfing in Charleston during his leave and they immediately fall in love for each other. They spend a couple of weeks together and Savannah meets John's autistic father Mr. Tyree (Richard Jenkins) and John befriends her friend Tim Wheddon (Henry Thomas). When the enlistment period of John and his platoon ends, there are the attacks on the World Trade Center and John and the other soldiers decide to reenlist for two more years. John corresponds with Savannah until she stops writing and two months later, Savannah tells that she will get married.

    I had great expectations with "Dear John", based on the previous works of the Swedish director Lasse Hallström. The beginning is nice, with Amanda Seyfried and Channing Tatum showing great chemistry in a pleasant romance. The reenlistment of John Tyree is acceptable based on a troubled moment of his country. However, the attitude of Savannah getting married with an older guy without any motive is inconsistent with her conservative profile and incoherent with the whole plot, and destroys the so far good romance, turning into a silly and disappointing soap opera. The terrible commercial last scene is corny and awful. My vote is three.

    Title (Brazil):"Querido John" ("Dear John")
  • comment
    • Author: Bolv
    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
  • comment
    • Author: Malodora
    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.
  • comment
    • Author: Gnng
    I will start by saying I have never read the book so I'm basing my review solely on the film.

    I actually found the film very hard to watch and cried most of the way through. It is a very beautiful film but I think what is unfortunately overlooked my many is that the strongest relationship in the film is that between John and his father and it is this relationship that made the film very emotional for me. In particular scene following his fathers stroke where John was reading the letter was beautifully done and very well acted and was the scene I found most upsetting.

    I think the film explores a number of important aspects in particular having an autistic parent which I could only imagine would be exceptionally difficult for any child, particularly when said parent is their only carer. As seen with the characters of both Aaron and Johns father relationships are often quite difficult for those with some types of autism, routine is important and going against a routine can cause a lot of angst and distress. Its unfortunate that a number of people continue to see autism as an excuse for peoples bad behaviour and I think this film brings and important note to an often misunderstood illness. It also points out the issue of autism in parents which is another issue often overlooked.

    The relationship between John and Savannah is only secondary to that of John and his father and I think its well acted by Channing Tatum and Amanda Seyfried. To me both actors seemed to really feel and understand their characters and the hurt between them and I did like how the ending between them was really left open to interpretation.

    In all a very well done film which explores some important social issues but no review will ever truly do this film justice. I for one could not watch it again because it made me so upset but this just goes to show how emotive the film is. Its a film that needs to be watched, even if it is only once.
  • comment
    • Author: Windworker
    (Synopsis) Special Forces Army Sergeant John Tyree (Channing Tatum) is home on a two-week leave from Germany. He meets Savannah (Amanda Seyfried) after he dives into the ocean to retrieve Savannah's purse that had fallen off the pier. John is smitten by Savannah and falls in love at first sight. Savannah is a college student at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She is on spring break and is helping build a house for Habitat for Humanity. John joins in with Savannah to help build the house. Along the way a budding romance occurs, and Savannah falls deeply in love with John. As she is about to go back to college, she promises to write John overseas during the next 12-months until he returns to her after completing his enlistment. Their love is put to the test when John reenlists after the 9/11 attack.

    (My Comment) "Dear John" tells the story of what happens to young lovers when time and distance from each other begins to test their true love. Over the next several years, they write love letters to each other telling everything about themselves. As time goes by, Savannah finds another who needs her more than John, even though she still loves him. She writes John a final letter saying good-bye. This is one story that happened many times during WWII and is still happening to our current soldiers today. Our brave soldiers are sacrificing their lives and some of them come home to heartbreaking consequences as a result of the war. That is why this story seems so real to the audience. The movie will make you laugh, cry, smile, and relate to the characters. Women will like the movie, because they can stand in Savannah's shoes. Men will like it, because they know that it is better to have loved and lost then never to have loved at all. The story is truly touching with all of life's ups and downs. Channing Tatum and Amanda Seyfried are very good in their roles, along with Richard Jenkins as John's father. (Screen Gems, Run Time 1:45, Rated PG-13) (6/10)
  • comment
    • Author: Kea
    I watched the movie and I loved it! Than I read the reviews afterwords and I thought... oh, this was a great romantic movie and if the book is even better - I have to get the book! So I read the book and I have to say, that I liked the movie much more. I guess I would be the only one here to say this.. I admit, the relationship between John and his father is described in more details in the book and that makes it more touching, but I also understand that the movie cant be as descriptive as a book. And also I have to add, that I loved both Channing and Amanda in their roles, they acted great, no, they were Perfect! I was really surprised they got such bad reviews on their acting here... So I give it 10/10 and I made this one of the most romantic movies I have ever seen.
  • comment
    • Author: Xor
    I had mixed expectations when I was going in to see Dear John. I had never really given any thought about how good or bad it might be, because it was a night out with friends and I was unconcerned at the moment. Eventually, we started to watch the movie. At first, it was just dull. I mean, I know it was trying to build up the characters and establish a good story line, but I was a tad bit uninterested, just because the characters were so plain at the time. Though it does set up things rather well, it lacks in any really high appeal from the moment it comes on the screen, if that makes sense.

    Anyway, on to the rest of the movie. Though there were times when I was very interested, it just overall was nothing special. The performances by each individual actor were extremely questionable. For instance, Channing Tatum was unable to display any real sense of emotion except for maybe two scenes in the entire movie, and Amanda Seyfried seemed like it was just too big of a role for her to play. While they both didn't do so hot separately, I have to say the chemistry between them when they were on set together was believable, intense and undeniably noteworthy; Certainly the best thing about the movie, in my opinion.

    I do give Dear John a decent and satisfactory rating for it really strived to be a poignant and strong film, even though it fell a little short, and I was moved at times by the feelings Channing and Amanda expressed into their characters, though all together their performances were eh. It was interesting and entertaining, and I enjoyed it... lightly. With all that said, it again falls short of being rewatchable with it's extreme dullness throughout and lack of powerful, independent, likable performances. Not anything special, but certainly not anything bad, and I recommend you don't watch it with high expectations, because you'll be very disappointed, but if you're not an extreme critic and you're just looking to blow some time, or are extremely hard up for Channing Tatum shirtless, you can and will enjoy this in some way.
  • comment
    • Author: Nea
    I suspect this board will soon be full of comments from over-emotional people praising "Dear John" as a "pearl" and a "rollercoaster ride" and all the other vacuous words this film's target audience typically employs.

    I am most definitely not this film's target audience, but I do not dislike romantic dramas either, as long as they are well made, so here is my objective take on the flick.

    It is not good.

    It's not a bad movie either. But the plot meanders, development stagnates where it should've been moving forward (right around the middle, to be precise), and as for the almost felt as if they had run out of ideas so they suddenly said, "Hey, let's just film a last scene real quick, put some sentimental string soundtrack over it, and end it that way." Even Amanda Seyfried's beauty could not save this. Channing Tatum too gave a good performance, but you can only do so much with a flawed script.

    Speaking of the music, it is unbearably predictably and kitchy. From the smokey voiced, irritatingly high-pitched female folk singer schtick (surely chosen to appeal to the majority of college-age girls that will go see this movie) to the overused "shimmering strings and piano" combo, it only annoys anyone paying more attention to the film as a whole rather than to his own "feelings." The film has a good beginning and the major conflict that launches us into the second act were all promising. So was part of the second act itself, as the story unfolded. Then the film just dropped the ball. Beyond that, I'd have to give spoilers.

    "Dear John" is not a bad movie, but it doesn't work as it should either. If you want to see a truly moving film about prolonged love waiting to be reunited, go watch "Notebook," which was truly superb.
  • comment
    • Author: deadly claw
    Dear John does what it sets out to do, be an effective romantic little film in my opinion. I really enjoyed how they developed the relationship between Tatum and Seyfriend. It felt real and it really hit home for me, because It felt like true love to me. Some movie buffs might find this movie to be too corny or rather contrived, but I'm a sucker for some good romance, a rare bird as far as guys go. The story was very well done, and held my attention throughout. But what really made the movie for me was the chemistry between Tatum and Seyfried. Channing isn't the world's greatest actor, but he showed a lot of promise here. I also found the war scenes to be quite realistic and well done, even if there wasn't very many. I went into Dear John. Thinking it was gonna be your typical Romdrama that they seem to put out these days. To my surprise it's fairly intelligent, romantic, and wonderfully emotional, I enjoyed my time with it.

    Performances. Channing Tatum still has work to do, but he was actually solid here for the most part. He had a few wooden moments, with that somewhat annoying blank expression on his face, but his effort was clearly there. He's growing up. Amanda Seyfried is delightful in her role. We are able to feel for her character, and become very attracted to her charming ways. She was especially good near the end. Richard Jenkins was the heart of the movie for me. His autistic performance was truly a sight to behold, and I really did feel for him. His hospital moment with Tatum was heartbreaking and heartfelt. Henry Thomas is excellent as the goodhearted, yet Weaslish Tim.

    Bottom line. Dear John was a very pleasant surprise for me. It's just a very nice romantic movie, that I think even guys like me could get into, if in the right frame of mind. Grab your wife, girlfriend, or whatever love interest you have, and enjoy.

  • comment
    • Author: Tebei
    Having read this story a while ago I was very excited to see the movie. I read the book again. It is one of my favorite Nicholas Sparks books. What I think what makes the story is the relationships. That was the down point for me in the movie because I think the relationships were poorly expressed in the movie. I have no idea what the point of changing main characters roles (Tim's and Alan's characters). The movie didn't at all capture John and Savannah's relationship. Maybe if you haven't read the book you might like this movie, but I thought it was so dull compared to the book. I thought Channing was a great pick for John,but I had a feeling he was going to bring all young adults out to watch it, so I think it was more geared towards them. The ending cuts the whole point of the book out so I was also unhappy with that. I was hoping the movie was more like the notebook or a walk to remember and the way they captured the books. I do feel like I wasted a Friday night out and 10 bucks on a sappy love story, not at all the story I was expecting to see.
  • comment
    • Author: Pumpit
    I have read many reviewers that say that they have never written a review before, but they had to because of some movie that they really loved or hated. I have hated a lot of movies, I do not hate this one, but I rally really really did not like it. In fact I disliked it so much that I had to write a review.


    (NB! This review contains SPOILERS, do not continue reading if you do not want to know what happens. )

    This movie absolutely made no sense at all.

    The only good part was the emotional scene with John and his father, otherwise this was just completely crap. I mean, what? What happened?!?

    For starters, as a man who has worked in the military for several years, if you find yourself in a combat situation where someone is firing bullets at you, you NEVER just stand straight up like John did when he got shot! Yes he was hurt during a combat situation and that is sad, but did it have to happen like that? It was just so meaningless!

    And WHY did she even break it off? I didn't understand it, the explanation was just so lame! I can understand that she wanted to be there for Tim and Allan, but we never got any indication that there were any romantic feelings there, so why marry the guy? Couldn't she just BE there, without the marriage?

    Looking at the film as a whole, the character development was nearly non-existent and I never cared for any of the characters. The script was bad and the time jumps were even worse. It was hard to keep up with how many years had gone by, and the story just made no sense.

    As a side note I also find it highly unlikely that she did not know what happened with Johns dad. I will say it again: none of this made any sense!

    I have been in a long distance relationship where my man was employed in the army and shipped off to distant and terrifying places. I never knew what was happening and I was always scared for him. This was 4-5 years ago, and I was hoping that this film would touch upon some of the things that I felt, and that I know my honey felt. But "Dear John" just did not cut it! They did not capture any real emotions (except maybe the scene with John and his dad), and I am deeply disappointed.

    I am a movie-crier, I cry a lot when I see emotional films, but THIS film only made me angry with all the lost potential. This was just not worth seeing. My review had more emotions than this film.

    1/10, and really not recommended at all.
  • comment
    • Author: Hatе&love
    The movie starts in spring 2001. A soldier named John Tyree (Channing Tatum) falls in love with college student Savannah Cutis (Amanda Seyfried) while on break. Within the space of two weeks they fall madly in love with each other (!). But he has to go off to war and she has to go to college. They do but keep in touch by writing to each other. Then 9/11 happens. He wants to reenlist--she wants him to stay home. What will they do?

    Hysterically bad romantic drama. The leads ARE attractive--Tatum is certainly a handsome man with beautiful green eyes and a hot body (he's introduced walking shirtless out of the water after surfing)...but he can't act. Seyfried is a beautiful woman and she tries...but the dialogue here is horrible. When I saw it me and a friend of mine were fighting hard NOT to laugh out loud at some of the "romantic" dialogue at the beginning. It was just HORRIBLE. For the first hour or so I was either bored by the ridiculously predictable drama or amused by the horrendous "romance". Then, after that first hour, tragedy kicks in and, I must admit, had me in tears. However the filmmakers go out of their way to make sure that you're crying with death, funerals and meetings with people breaking down in tears. How can you NOT cry? This would have worked if the acting were better. Tatum's face never changes expression--not ONCE! He always had a blank look on his face. Seyfried was a LITTLE better but not much. To make it worse Tatum and Seyfried had no sexual chemistry on screen at all! They barely looked like they liked each other let alone love each other. There was some beautiful photography of the Carolinas but this is a boring and stupid romantic "drama". A 1 all the way...and I usually love silly romantic dramas like this!
  • comment
    • Author: Hap
    This movie had the potential to be a very good movie in my eyes, Nicholas Sparks is a great romance author and this movie had every chance to be just as great as The Notebook but whats sets the two apart is the notebook had a dream team of leads in McAdams and Gosling but here the balance is thrown miserably off by the inept acting of Channing Tatum

    I felt a lot of the scenes were uneven purely because of his performance, a lot of the emotion in various scenes is lost because he cant act, leaving an awkward and uneven situation, Amanda Seyfried given a great performance only to have Tatum drop the ball and the mood is lost and the scene cant recover.

    This story deserved to be cast right, but what it got was a pretty boy who cant act. Tatum should stick to what hes good at, movies that are more about his physical ability, albeit horrible, like GI JOE, step up, and Fighting. The less he talks the better.

    Try not to think of me as a jaded hater of Channing Tatum I went in to this movie with an open mind, because I've been surprised many a time by the likes of Adam Sandler in Reign over Me. I gave the same chance to Tatum I didn't view him here as the sum of his past roles, purely just by his performance in this movie, which sadly was a letdown
  • comment
    • Author: WinDImmortaL
    John Tyree (Channing Tatum) is on leave from the U.S.Army's special forces. It is the summer of 2001 and he has returned to his father (Richard Jenkins) and home on the Carolina coast. On the beach one day, a group of young adults are horsing around and a purse falls in the ocean. It belongs to beautiful Savannah (Amanda Seyfried) and she is upset over its loss. Without hesitation, John dives into the water, finds it, and returns it to her. She is happy, although one of her companions, a male with an interest in Savannah, is less than content. Nevertheless, from that moment, the two begin a tentative relationship. John tells Savannah that he will be out of the army in about a year and asks that she wait for him. Although they only share a few kisses, the young couple are in love. However, they part, vowing to write to each other often. Complicating things is the fact that John's dad is autistic, relating poorly to the community, and so is the son of Savannah's attractive neighbor, Tim (Henry Thomas). Savannah communicates well with each of them but John does not. Then, 9/11 occurs and John feels he must re-enlist, knowing his unit needs him. On a very brief leave, Savannah and John spend a few precious hours together. But, then John is gone. What does their future hold? This is, surprisingly, a most lovely film and worthy of praise. A story that could have been melodramatic and trite is, instead, genuinely moving. The cast is quite nice, with Tatum and Seyfried making a fine couple, while Jenkins and Thomas deliver especially notable turns. The scenery, costuming, production values, and Nicholas Sparks' tale are good as well. Most importantly, Hallstrom "mixes things up" and uses some very interesting camera shots and scene arrangements to deliver a film of great style. Dear viewer, don't think this is another teen flick with little to offer for the general public. On the contrary, most fans of romantic drama will find it enthralling.
  • comment
    • Author: Jox
    This is by far one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Not because of the actors but the plot. You have a decent young man who joined the military and turned his life around. He decided to continue to serve after 9/11 even though he really didn't want to do it. Also, it was a stretch to believe that he didn't know that there was a problem with his father.

    You have a extremely selfish woman who decides that she can't deal being alone and marries someone who needs someone to looks after his kid when he dies. How pathetic. I noticed some people liked the book this was adapted from. Get a life, if the book was the same then I feel sorry for you.
  • comment
    • Author: Gholbithris
    Just watched this touching drama based on Nicholas Sparks' novel with my movie theatre working friend this afternoon. While I haven't previously seen any movies based on his other books, nor any of director Lasse Hallstrom's other films (other than segments of ABBA videos shown on "The Midnight Special"), I knew they both had a reputation of doing quiet dramas based on believable situations and characterizations. So I was looking forward to this tale of an Army man named John (Channing Tatum) falling for a college girl named Savannah (Amanda Seyfried). There were also some compelling supporting characters in John's father (Richard Jenkins) and a neighbor friend of Savannah's named Tim (Henry Thomas, who can still deliver years after his breakthrough as Elliott in E.T.). Now, I've only just found out about the changes from the novel but while watching the movie I was emotionally enthralled by the whole thing and, for the most part, I was satisfied by what I saw. Also, how cool was it to see Ms. Seyfried sing and play guitar to her own composition here especially after her recent stint in Mamma Mia! And how dramatic were those battle scenes not to mention the fate of John's father. So for all that, Dear John comes highly recommend.
  • comment
    • Author: Worla
    I was looking forward to seeing two bright young actors appearing in "Dear John," but it was very slow moving; and I felt that both the screenplay and the direction hampered the flexibility of the principle performers. I usually do enjoy film adaptations of these novels. Ironically, I did think the movie did an excellent job of depicting realistic military action.

    The cinematography was very good at segueing through love letters, focusing just enough on a key word or phrase in each letter. I felt that Channing Tatum became bogged down in what became a very "hang-dog" series of expressions in response to loss.
  • comment
    • Author: Xaluenk
    Based on a recommendation I went to see this movie a few hours ago. Have to say it captured the pain of love with someone who is on active duty in the military - commitment, not only to to your loved one but your duty as a serviceman in a time of peril.

    The theme of commitment runs in 3 paths - to one's loved one, to one's duty and to those whose family members need care.

    I thought it was a beautiful movie and in staying for the credits (a trick that a friend of mine, a movie connoisseur, taught me) - co-star Amanda Seyfried is multi-talented having sung in some of the movie's soundtracks.

    One of the posters here expressed disappointment in the movie; having read the book. Each to his own, my opinion is certainly no better or worse than the others, but in my humble opinion, movies based on best selling books rarely run in perfect parallel; those movies that do follow a book 100% in the screenplay can be disappointing (Flags of our Fathers is one example for me).

    I think most people would enjoy the movie.
  • comment
    • Author: Lianeni
    Wow loved this movie! Channing was amazing in it. He proves in this movie that he's not just a cute face! This boy can really act, and it was impressive. You are cheering for him the whole time! The scene where he reads a letter to his dad, had every girl in the movies wiping their eyes and sniffing because his performance was so impressive. Amanda was cool in this movie. I personally didn't see what all the fuss was about this chick. Through her actions I got the sense she didn't love Channing's character as much as she claimed to. This was basically Channing Tatum's movie through and through.But, yeah it was wonderful. I'm actually seeing it again today and taking my brother and his friend.
  • Cast overview, first billed only:
    Channing Tatum Channing Tatum - John Tyree
    Amanda Seyfried Amanda Seyfried - Savannah Curtis
    Richard Jenkins Richard Jenkins - Mr. Tyree
    Henry Thomas Henry Thomas - Tim
    D.J. Cotrona D.J. Cotrona - Noodles
    Cullen Moss Cullen Moss - Rooster (Dan Rooney)
    Gavin McCulley Gavin McCulley - Starks
    Jose Lucena Jr. Jose Lucena Jr. - Berry (as Jose Lucena)
    Keith Robinson Keith Robinson - Captain Stone
    Scott Porter Scott Porter - Randy
    Leslea Fisher Leslea Fisher - Susan
    William Howard William Howard - Daniels
    David Andrews David Andrews - Mr. Curtis
    Mary Rachel Quinn Mary Rachel Quinn - Mrs. Curtis (as Mary Rachel Dudley)
    Bryce Hayes Bryce Hayes - Yellow Shirt
    All rights reserved © 2017-2019