MovieChat Forums > Johnny Got His Gun (1971) Discussion > Am I The Only One Who Didn't Like This?

Am I The Only One Who Didn't Like This?

posted 15 years ago by bigturdyum
25 replies | jump to latest

No, I'm not a troll. I'm not here to make anybody mad. I'm just very curious as to why it seems that most everybody thinks this film is great. A 7.9 from imdb and 4.5/5 from Amazon (not that either are the greatest of indicators, but between the two that's over 4100 votes, mostly positive). I like all variety of movies. Don't think that I'm partial to action movies. I love a good story like the rest of you. I like weird movies, subtle movies, funny movies, classics, etc.

I read the book about two weeks ago and enjoyed it. For the most part it was excellent, but the ending was a little preachy. I have nothing against a good message, but it felt forced at the ending. The rest of the book I have no problems with. Good flashbacks, interesting thought processes, and some unique scenes. I wasn't sure what to expect with the movie, but I didn't go in trying to dislike it.

So I watched it on DVD today and I was not at all impressed. I felt that the acting was laughable in most scenes and his voice-overs were terrible. "No, not my arm, oh god not my other arm!" I would never normally laugh at something like this, but his delivery was somehow humorous.

Another thing is that the directing seemed horrendous. I'm sure it has to do with his inexperience, but isn't that something you should take into account when you judge a movie? Did nobody else notice how forced most of the scenes were and how cheesy the music was. "Here, feel this emotion. This is happy music!" I have never watched a movie that beat you over the head so blatantly.

Anyway, is this one of those movies that grows on you? I do know a few movies that I didn't like much at first, but eventually grew to love. And I don't think I'm just comparing it to the book too much. All of my problems are not with the story, it's just how the scenes were handled and presented. I don't mind the different ending. I'm not complaining at the lack of a few scenes. So am I going to look back on this in a few months or years and say, "That was actually pretty good." Or am I probably just going to continue to dislike it and move on with my life?

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] smerd_70 14 years ago

"You can only have one medium or the other, the other is always going to suck after spoiling it for yourself."

Not true. I've read plenty of books, then seen the film adaptation and enjoyed them both, or vice versa. Example, for years I'd seen Planet of the Apes('68), several times, then finally read Pierre Boulle's original novel- after reading all of the differences the film made from the book I didn't suddenly dislike the book because it wasn't like the film. I enjoyed them both for what they are. James Whale's Frankenstein is very different from the novel- yet both the book and the film are classics.

I collect dead pigeons then I press them between the pages of a book.

[–] aarone2884 13 years ago

To put it more simply.

Books are Subjective. Movies are objective.

Your vision of the story from the book (subjective) Is obviously diffrent from the directors subjective vision of the book.

He has put his objective vision to the film and it does not suit match your subjective vision of the book.

[–] hermasetas 14 years ago

Well I kinda enjoyed this movie.

It is true that some of the scenes were forced in and didn't make alot of sence (to me).

And yes the acting were not the best. I also laughed at the arm part and felt like I wasn't supposed to.

[–] OrangeCatholic 14 years ago

My first reaction was "this is mad cheesy." But I believe it's meant to be a child-like experience. Lots of innocence in this movie.

Metallica probably helped. Who knows if anyone would have remembered this if it wasn't Metallica's MOST FAMOUS song. Heh.

[–] Hoohawnaynay 14 years ago

I agree with the original poster, I really didn't care for it either. I did think the voiceover was really bad. Just my 2 cents.

[–] MagAmbersons 14 years ago

I found the film to be poorly executed as well. I haven't read Trumbo's book, but think the idea of the story is fantastic. Unfortunately, the staging of most of the scenes comes off as very inept. Supposedly surreal ideas (such as the "I'm the boss, here's the champange...Merry Christmas" line that is repeated ad nauseum during the party scene) that should be startling reek of hackneyed amateurism. It's difficult to appreciate the performances due to the weak direction and the fact that the majority of the film's dialogue appears to have been post-synched (badly).

All the same, many of the ideas are good ones. I particularly liked Donald Sutherland as a somewhat befuddled Christ; the shot of him howling from the engine of the locomotive is brilliant and makes me wish more of the imagery in the film matched its power.

[–] Movieman_Dionysus 14 years ago

I've just seen this movie for the first time, but here's my $0.02USD.

I really wanted to see this movie because of the Metallica song and video. In actuality, it wasn't until a couple months ago that I learned the movie in the video was an actual movie, and not just a film clip that Metallica made to go with the video.

I absolutely love the concept of the movie. The problem, however, is that the concept is about all the movie has really going for it, and tries to stretch it out over 90 minutes, when it could have been done in five (such as Metallica did). I'm certainly not saying it was a horrible movie -- far from it! I'm very happy I finally saw it, and would recommend it to people, but I'd have to agree that everything but the concept is only so-so at best.

[–] BrainGremlin 13 years ago

"I've just seen this movie for the first time, but here's my $0.02USD."

---
Very good, Louis. Short, but pointless.

[–] elliot-1 14 years ago

This movie has a terrific premise, and for a lot of people I guess that's enough. Plus they probably think that disliking a movie like this makes them look insensitive, or like a philistine. I personally agree however that the execution was decidedly lacking. The poor acting and direction turning some moments that should have been very upsetting in pure narm.

[–] timlin-4 13 years ago

Maybe it was more poignant in the Vietnam era, but it really is completely mediocre.

[–] aarone2884 13 years ago

Interesting,
how all of your claims are similar but with no alternative to the ideas:

Movieman_Dionysus:
"I absolutely love the concept of the movie"

elliot-1:
"This movie has a terrific premise"

MagAmbersons:
"but think the idea of the story is fantastic. Unfortunately, the staging of most of the scenes comes off as very inept."

I doubt all of your abilitys to understand the "Ideas" "Premises" "Concepts" of the film after your empty claims.

Idiots.

[–] esltr91 13 years ago

You're just as idiotic as you claim them to be if you can't discuss a movie without throwing out insults.

[–] aarone2884 13 years ago

Where i come from idiot is not so much a derogatory term a to put some one in there place.... like "i cant undo this Jar!?" I would then day "are you turnig it the right way" They would say.. "Ohhh i see" and i would exclaim.."idiot" or "you idiot"

And the same applies here because they all said the same thing but gave no reasons...and it is idiotic.. I pointed it out and said "idiots".

It is just that you cant here the tone through a web post.

[–] fivefids 11 years ago

Is someone who does not use the correct form of "their" instead of "there" as you did, an idiot? Is someone who does not use the correct form of "hear" instead of "here" as you did, an idiot? Is someone who types "day" when they mean "say" as you did, an idiot? Just wondering.

[–] armagezon 12 years ago

I felt the exact same thing, man. It was a little awkward and "funny".

[–] snabbdist 12 years ago

Am I The Only One Who Dont Understand Why The First Letter In Each Word Are Capitalised?