Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
Niidae Wiki
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Johnny Mnemonic (film)
(section)
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==Reception== {{Rotten Tomatoes prose|20|4.3|41|As narratively misguided as it is woefully miscast, Johnny Mnemonic brings the '90s cyberpunk thriller to inane new whoas -- er, lows.|access-date={{RT data|access date}}}}<ref name=critrep/> {{Metacritic film prose|36|25|access-date=9 May 2025}}<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.metacritic.com/movie/johnny-mnemonic/critic-reviews|title=Johnny Mnemonic|work=[[Metacritic]]|accessdate=June 10, 2024|archive-date=February 5, 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220205225049/https://www.metacritic.com/movie/johnny-mnemonic/critic-reviews|url-status=live}}</ref> [[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]{{'}}s [[Todd McCarthy]] called the film "high-tech trash" and likened it to a video game.<ref name=variety-review>{{cite web|url=https://variety.com/1995/film/reviews/johnny-mnemonic-2-1200441609/|title=Johnny Mnemonic|last=McCarthy|first=Todd|work=[[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]|date=May 22, 1995|accessdate=February 5, 2022|archive-date=February 5, 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220205225051/https://variety.com/1995/film/reviews/johnny-mnemonic-2-1200441609/|url-status=live}}</ref> [[Roger Ebert]], the film critic for the ''[[Chicago Sun-Times]]'', gave the film two stars out of four and called it "one of the great goofy gestures of recent cinema".<ref name="ebert-review">{{cite news|url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/johnny-mnemonic-1995|title=Johnny Mnemonic|last=Ebert|first=Roger|work=RogerEbert.com|date=May 26, 1995|accessdate=February 5, 2022|archive-date=May 10, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190510121201/https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/johnny-mnemonic-1995|url-status=live}}</ref> [[Owen Gleiberman]] of ''[[Entertainment Weekly]]'' rated it Cβ and called it "a slack and derivative future-shock thriller".<ref name="ew-review">{{cite magazine|url=https://ew.com/article/1995/06/09/johnny-mnemonic-2/|title=Johnny Mnemonic|last=Gleiberman|first=Owen|magazine=[[Entertainment Weekly]]|date=June 9, 1995|accessdate=February 5, 2022|archive-date=February 5, 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220205225048/https://ew.com/article/1995/06/09/johnny-mnemonic-2/|url-status=live}}</ref> Conversely, [[Mick LaSalle]] of the ''[[San Francisco Chronicle]]'' described it as "inescapably a very cool movie",<ref name="sfc-review">{{cite news|url=https://www.sfgate.com/entertainment/article/Mnemonic-Has-a-Cool-Head-Keanu-Reeves-in-3031695.php|title='Mnemonic' Has a Cool Head / Keanu Reeves in futuristic computer age|last=LaSalle|first=Mick|work=[[San Francisco Chronicle]]|date=May 27, 1995|accessdate=February 5, 2020|archive-date=September 23, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200923002757/https://www.sfgate.com/entertainment/article/Mnemonic-Has-a-Cool-Head-Keanu-Reeves-in-3031695.php|url-status=live}}</ref> and Marc Savlov wrote in ''[[The Austin Chronicle]]'' that the film works well for both Gibson fans and those unfamiliar with his work.<ref name="ac-review">{{cite news|url=https://www.austinchronicle.com/events/film/1995-06-02/johnny-mnemonic/|title=Johnny Mnemonic|last=Savlov|first=Marc|work=[[The Austin Chronicle]]|date=June 2, 1995|accessdate=February 5, 2022|archive-date=February 5, 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220205225050/https://www.austinchronicle.com/events/film/1995-06-02/johnny-mnemonic/|url-status=live}}</ref> Writing in ''[[The New York Times]]'', [[Caryn James]] called the film "a disaster in every way" and said that despite Gibson's involvement, the film comes off as "a shabby imitation of ''[[Blade Runner]]'' and ''[[Total Recall (1990 film)|Total Recall]]''".<ref name="nyt-review">{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1995/05/26/movies/film-review-too-much-on-his-mind-ready-to-go-blooey.html|title=FILM REVIEW; Too Much on His Mind, Ready to Go BLOOEY|last=James|first=Caryn|work=[[The New York Times]]|date=May 26, 1995|accessdate=February 5, 2022|archive-date=February 5, 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220205225051/https://www.nytimes.com/1995/05/26/movies/film-review-too-much-on-his-mind-ready-to-go-blooey.html|url-status=live}}</ref> <!-- plot --> McCarthy said that the film's premise is its "one bit of ingenuity", but the plot, which he called likely to disappoint Gibson's fans, is simply an excuse for "elaborate but undramatic and unexciting computer-graphics special effects".<ref name=variety-review/> Ebert's review mirrored this view. Sending a courier to physically deliver important information while avoiding enemy agents struck him as "breathtakingly derivative" and illogical outside the artificiality of a film when the internet is available.<ref name=ebert-review/> In his review for the ''[[Los Angeles Times]]'', Peter Rainer wrote that the film, when stripped of the cyberpunk atmosphere, is recycled from [[noir fiction]],<ref name=latimes-review>{{cite news|url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1995-05-26-ca-6141-story.html|title=MOVIE REVIEW : A Head Case Named 'Johnny Mnemonic'|last=Rainer|first=Peter|work=[[Los Angeles Times]]|date=May 26, 1995|accessdate=February 5, 2022|archive-date=February 5, 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220205225048/https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1995-05-26-ca-6141-story.html|url-status=live}}</ref> and LaSalle viewed it more positively as "a hard-boiled action story using technology as its backdrop".<ref name=sfc-review/> Savlov called it "an updated ''[[D.O.A. (1950 film)|D.O.A.]]''",<ref name=ac-review/> and Ebert said the film's plot could have worked in any genre and been set in any time period.<ref name=ebert-review/> <!-- directing, visuals, sfx --> James criticized the film's lack of tension,<ref name=nyt-review/> and Rainer called the film's tone too grim and lacking excitement.<ref name=latimes-review/> McCarthy criticized what he saw as a "unrelieved grimness" and "desultory, darkly staged action scenes".<ref name=variety-review/> McCarthy felt the film's visual depiction of the future was unoriginal,<ref name=variety-review/> and Gleiberman described the film as "''Blade Runner'' with tackier sets".<ref name=ew-review/> Savlov wrote that Longo's "attempts to out-''Blade Runner'' Ridley Scott in the decaying cityscape department grow wearisome".<ref name=ac-review/> Savlov still found the film "much better than expected".<ref name=ac-review/> LaSalle felt the film "introduces a fantastic yet plausible vision of a computer-dominated age" and maintains a focus on humanity,<ref name=sfc-review/> in contrast to Rainer, who found the film's countercultural pose to be inauthentic and lacking humanity.<ref name=latimes-review/> James called the film murky and colorless;<ref name=nyt-review/> Rainer's review criticized similar issues, finding the film's lack of lighting and its grim set design to give everything an "undifferentiated dullness".<ref name=latimes-review/> McCarthy found the special effects to be "slick and accomplished but unimaginative",<ref name=variety-review/> though Ebert enjoyed the special effects.<ref name=ebert-review/> Gleiberman highlighted the laser whip as his favorite special effect,<ref name=ew-review/> though James found it unimpressive.<ref name=nyt-review/> <!-- acting --> Although saying that Reeves is not a good actor, LaSalle said Reeves is still enjoyable to watch and makes for a compelling protagonist.<ref name=sfc-review/> McCarthy instead found Reeves' character to be unlikable and one-dimensional.<ref name=variety-review/> James compared Reeves to a robot,<ref name=nyt-review/> and Gleiberman compared him to an action figure.<ref name=ew-review/> Rainer posited that Reeves' character may seem so blank due to his memory loss.<ref name=latimes-review/> Savlov said that Reeves' wooden delivery gives the film unintentional humor,<ref name=ac-review/> but Rainer found that the lack of humor throughout the film sapped all the acting performances of any enjoyment.<ref name=latimes-review/> Gleiberman said that Reeves' efforts to avoid [[Valleyspeak]] backfire, giving his character's lines "an intense, misplaced urgency", though he liked the unconventional casting of Lundgren as a psychopathic street preacher.<ref name=ew-review/> Rainer highlighted Lundgren as the only mirthful actor and said his performance was the best in the film.<ref name=latimes-review/> James called Ice-T's role stereotypical and said he deserved better.<ref name=nyt-review/> Reeves's performance in the film earned him a [[Golden Raspberry Award]] nomination for Worst Actor (also for ''[[A Walk in the Clouds]]''), but he lost to [[Pauly Shore]] for ''[[Jury Duty (film)|Jury Duty]]''. The film was filed under the Founders Award (What Were They Thinking and Why?) at the [[1995 Stinkers Bad Movie Awards]] and was also a dishonourable mention for Worst Picture.<ref>{{cite web |title=1995 18th Hastings Bad Cinema Society Stinkers Awards |url=http://theenvelope.latimes.com/extras/lostmind/year/1995/1995st.htm |website=The Envelope |publisher=[[Los Angeles Times]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070103155139/http://theenvelope.latimes.com/extras/lostmind/year/1995/1995st.htm |archive-date=January 3, 2007}}</ref> Audiences polled by [[CinemaScore]] gave the film an average grade of "C+" on an A+ to F scale.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Home |url=https://www.cinemascore.com/ |access-date=2023-10-07 |website=CinemaScore |language=en-US}}</ref>
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Niidae Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
Encyclopedia:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
Johnny Mnemonic (film)
(section)
Add topic