Expected more

A Major Disappointment

The movie is surprisingly subdued in its pacing, its characterizations, and its go-for-broke sensibilities.

Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

Like some other people posting here, I caught "johns" randomly on cable one night. The great acting and storyline totally captured me within 2 minutes, and I could not take my eyes off of the television. I also have to admit how surprised I was of David Arquette's ability to take on a more serious role --I'll be honest, at first I was skeptical, but as I became sucked into this film, I actually grew to respect David Arquette as an actor, if only for his role in this title.This is not a trashy sex film; it's great for lover's of the indie craft and resembles, in my opinion, a mixture of Gus Van Sant and Larry Clark, with a dash of Greg Araki's Mysterious Skin.A great film, full of heart and sentiment without leaving behind a nasty taste in your mouth.

The film is rough and gritty, yes, but also a little corny and cliched. The best reason to see it is for the acting. Lukas Haas is great, as usual. But David Arquette is downright brilliant. When I first saw this film, I felt like I was watching a young Marlon Brando. I was convinced Arquette was going to be the Next Big Thing in Hollywood. Then he yucked it up in the wonderful "Scream" films, making a bigger splash as a comic charicature. And then came his 1-800 AT&T commercials, and all his talk show appearances in oversized zoot suits, and his marriage to Courtney "Friends" Cox. The poor guy may be Hollywood's biggest untapped talent! Check out "Johns" if you want to see a side of David Arquette you've never seen. (I just hope his performance isn't ruined by your memories of those phone commercials.)

Some might find this film distasteful; in truth, it's realistic. It has a hint of Shakespearean tragedy in the death of the protagonist, John (David Arquette). Although its frank depictions of homosexuality, prostitution, and life on the streets are not for the timid, this movie should not be written off as merely trying to push the limits of cinematic expression. The cinematography is almost documentary-like, adding to its realism and tragic theme. This movie is not meant to be perverse, rebellious, or even remotely sexual. It is merely meant to be a proper depiction of the everyday sadness to which real life subjects its less fortunate inhabitants.

Reading the various user comments by viewers makes me wonder if there is more than one movie called `Johns' with the same cast. I can't help but think that the negative reviewers never really watched the movie, or did so without any experiential background that would help them tune in to the movie's pathos. While I never was a hustler myself, I've known many and seen something of this world in Toronto. The point is that everyone on the street is looking for something in the wrong place and hence, not suprisingly, they never find it. Hustlers are looking for the sense of personal worth (reflected through others), for respect, for love, for pride of accomplishment and, most of all, for all these things to happen in a real community of folk, some of whom accept, love or reject their presentations. This movie brilliantly and realistically captures this pathos of impossible efforts to achieve normalcy. It is no wonder that Donner, brilliantly played by Lukas Haas, considers himself an `entertainer'. He knows that what others see in him in not a human being to relate to but an object of amusement. Oddly, and realistically, enough he does not realize that his efforts to attach to another in this context are equally futile. His desired object of attachement is unreceptive in this street world. His `love buddy' only wants to act out his fantasy of normalcy by spending Christmas (the quintessential time of naive, childhood joy) in a fancy hotel room. There are many things to admire in this movie but one cannot brand it `phony'. Bringing a portrayal of this kind of futile world populated by largely unfulfilled people requires a deft directorial hand, an understated script and some sensitive acting. We get all these things in `Johns'.