JOHNNY MNEMONIC
A film review by T. Robin Sutherland
Copyright 1995 T. Robin Sutherland
On the up side, this was a fun way to spend the afternoon. A futuristic action movie with lots of whiz-bang special effects, a decent soundtrack, and not a few interesting shots and stunts.
But this will not be one of the science fiction films we look back on and say "this was a pivotal moment in cinema." In fact, it seems to me that somewhere along the line, the society which Gibson & Co. have helped to fashion with their ideograms of cybericity has caught up and now dictates to that work. Too bad. It would have been nice to seen a screenplay--so extensively modified from the original short story--take advantage of the transformation to continue to challenge its audience. Johnny Neumonic does not do this. It doesn't come close. Instead, it panders to the pop hysteria surrounding the Internet, hacker culture, and the glitz and glamour which has become associated (ironically) with the "power (computer) user."
Worse--it is as shallow a movie as that same pop hysteria.
I dunno. Maybe I was expecting too much when I found out that Gibbie was doing the screenplay. Maybe the cult following which has been cyberpunk is so much a part of our culture now is just too much to challenge. But I don't think so. It just all smells of a Hollywood which is much more concerned with flash and bucks than making a good film.
Acting? C'mon--this is sci-fi. We don't get much of the talent. Just watch the guys on DS9, B5, or SeaQuest. I hear they're remaking DEMOLITION MAN this year as DREDD. Keanu's prowess as an actor has never been in question as far as I've been aware, but the guy does have something besides a 1995 face, which I think I finally have figured out. He's Arnie for Generation X. And Gen-X doesn't use one-liners; they just let their phases hang there without any meaning. Done effectively, this will leave you going "What-?" and KR pulls this off from time to time.
But a lot of the scripting was just plain dumb. Much of it felt like ninja turtle fare. Two shots I immediately saw James Bond in. Lines like "You will regret this," "It's time to let your daughter die," and "You need to rest," come off as trite and cliche as they are, and there is finally no way to take anyone seriously. Reeves' forced intensity drives the whole thing, along with fairly quickly paced shooting sequences of fights, special effects, and loud music.
As for the story itself--the twins are still there, as is the dolphin and a guy named Ralphie (and a familiar bartender with a mechanical arm), but even Molly is gone, replaced with a Jane who's good in a fight, but has none of Molly's cyber-novelty. Many layers of story have been added, most of them pointless, some of them seeming to have the Gibson hint of obscure metaphor, but all drowned in a diatribe against dependence on the machine.
Despite all of that, it is fun to watch if you like mind candy and are not set up for a parable of our times. Gibson fans will go in droves and all of them will either be dazzled or disappointed. And on the upside once again, this was a short story. No one seems to have been stupid enough to go for the mother lode, yet. If anyone has any brains, they'll do one or two more short stories first.
I read an interview in WIRED with Gibson and Robert Longo, which said that this was originally designed to be a $1.5 million "artsy" movie, and then went to $30 million budget. I really wish now that I could have a chance to see the former.
-------------------- T. Robin Sutherland Sharon L. Sutherland http://www.interlog.com/~robin/rant/movies/movies.html
The review above was posted to the
rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the
review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright
belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due
to ASCII to HTML conversion.
Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews