Chapter 27

source: Chapter 27

Chapter 27 was conceived by its first-time writer/director as a way of showing the final two days of Mark David Chapman's existence before he plugged six bullets into John Lennon. Perhaps he thought going in to it that he would get a stirring and harrowing chronicle of this man's madness, but what he didn't figure on, apparently at any point in writing the script, was giving us a story or any kind of real sense of who Chapman was aside from a mumbling nut-case obsessed with Catcher in the Rye. According to reports, yes, he was attached to that Salinger book a lot, and yes he loomed around the hotel Lennon was staying at. But Scahefer misses any real chances to make the character compelling by sidestepping what is actually interesting about him- his past, only hinted at, with his wife and his time spent teaching Vietnamese children, being raised in a strict Christian upbringing apparently- for 84 minutes of the same muddled, pretentious beat over and over again. Since when was assassination this boring? And the blame on how bad this movie is can be spread out. Some of it is truly the Schaefer's fault just on the design of the narration. Sometimes narration can be really effective (I kept thinking back to the Informant, another movie about a mentally unbalanced individual with an inner-monologue as a prime example), but here it's nothing except dull diatribes and complaining and waxing and waning on how he feels or thinks that has nothing to say about Chapman himself or anything interesting about his situation. And some of the blame falls on Jared Leto. Packing on the pounds simply is not enough, not when the character is the same lump of a presence in the entire running time and we're left with absolutely nothing to feel for him except hate - not even so much for his impending crime but for his construction as a character- and while his voice isn't terribly annoying when acting in scenes, it's somehow unbearable in the narration. It's a colossal waste of listening space. Some of the other actors do try, but are also left slim pickings. Lindsay Lohan doesn't do too terrible, but that's considering what little of her character, another Lennon fan hanging out at the hotel, is revealed as. There's also a question, barely answered, as to why she wants to be around this loose cannon, who never once gives the impression of stability even in casual conversation (i.e. "I hate movies" dialog). Judah Freidlander fares a little better, but he too is only on screen so long as to just play a one note character the best way he can. And yet it says a lot that an actor like Leto, who can be talented and show range as in Requiem for a Dream or Panic Room, is reduced to being upstaged by his fellow performers who seemingly have less to do than him. The movie made me angry at how it unfolded, because there was no progression of anything. I kept thinking about how much of a better, or just more fascinating, story it could be showing how Chapman developed into this deranged and lonely persona, or even just giving us more to chew on about his life before his notorious act. It's telling a situation before a story, and one that, surprisingly, is dull and meandering and, often, laughably ill-conceived in every facet of production. I almost weeped at the end not because of a sense of loss for Lennon, or for the soul brought down forever due to his own madness as Chapman, but because I had to endure a filmmaker's lack of having anything to really say, and saying it poorly, pretentiously, and with a lack of respect for the audience.

Again on another day, i was waiting to show some thrilling films on STAR MOVIES, but when they showed title, i was little bit intrigued about the movie. When i started to watch movie, i slowly realized that movie is extremely painful and there were brilliant moments in movie, which may have happened in most of men life around the world. The scene where he remarks about the money is one which i had personally felt about money, at some point of life. Again, i can't compare movie to "TAXI DRIVER", which depicted urban men's life in many cities around the world. This movie too had some moments of urban men's life in 1980s. But having said this, i should certainly say that the movie is really a good one. Jared leto and Lindsay gives good performance and script is also good. 8 out of 10 stars for this surprise movie

Chapter 27 (2007) ** (out of 4) Jared Leto gained 60-pounds to play Mark David Chapman, the man who murdered John Lennon. The film takes place the three days leading up to the murder as we see Chapman battle his own demons in trying to make up his mind on whether or not to kill Lennon. The screenplay, by director Shaefer, tries very hard to be dark and disturbing like Taxi Driver but it ultimately fails because the screenplay is so paper thin that the only thing you learn is that Chapman went to NYC to kill Lennon. Without the credits the film runs under 80-minutes and the entire time we see Chapman talking to himself and when he isn't doing this we're greeted with voice-over narration that once again tries to say something deep yet nothing is ever said. The movie doesn't try to make us feel sorry for Chapman nor does it try to make us understand him. I'm really not sure what the point of the movie was because anyone going into the film is already going to know what happens so what exactly they were going for here is beyond me. Leto was certainly brave for gaining the weight and he's certainly trying hard but his performance really gets lost in the screenplay. Leto is fine in the role and he certainly has the voice down but in the end I think he went through all of this for no good reason. Lindsay Lohan steals the film in her few scenes as a woman, named Jude, who tries to befriend Chapman but soon realizes that the guy is nuts. When the murder finally takes place there isn't any suspense, drama and by the time it happens you're pretty much ready to leave the theater. The effort is certainly here because you can tell everyone involved was really trying to do something deep but with such a weak screenplay all hope is pretty much lost.

J.D. Salinger's novel "Catcher in the Rye" was written by a sick and bitter mind with sympathy for the devil- so too was this film. I felt like the makers were expressing sympathy for Lennon's killer (who SHOULD remain nameless)so much so that they granted the killer's wish- his dream has come true with this abomination- a whole movie about him! Happy, Leto? It also makes me wonder a little about Jared Leto & Lindsay Lohan, considering the recent turns their career's have taken lately. This film is as exploitive as a film can be, and I feel the same as I did when I finished Catcher in the Rye all those years ago- I want my 84 minutes back, and now I have a third reason to detest J.D. Salinger! (FYI, I actually am not a huge Beatles fan, but I hate murder.)

I saw this at the Waterfront Film Festival in Saugatuck, Michigan. Starring Jared Leto as Mark Chapman, it follows him over the course of a few days until December 8, 1980 when he killed John Lennon. It was pretty good, but nothing special. Jared Leto did a nice job as Chapman and was in virtually every frame of the film. Lindsay Lohan played a minor role as one of the fellow Lennon fans, but she's barely in the film. The film could really work as a one man show on stage. The problem with the film is that it's very repetitive. At 84 minutes, it's pretty much 84 minutes of Chapman narrating, "I have to meet John Lennon,I have to kill John Lennon." I don't know much about the real Mark Chapman, and I don't know if this film is extremely accurate, but there could have been a better way to tell the story. Overall, I was pretty disappointed with this film, it's an okay movie but it could have been so much better.

There is no question that Jared Leto completely immersed himself into this role and did a fine job. There is no question that Lindsay Lohan proves once again (small role that it is) that she is a terrific actress and, should she be able to get her act together, could be around a long time and do more great work. Finally, there was some remarkable detail in both location and wardrobe making this look and feel like the early 1980's New York. BUT, did we really learn ANYTHING? Even the details I may not have been aware of left me asking, "So?" And was it really necessary to cast a guy named MARK Linsay CHAPMAN in the John Lennon role??? It seems like a slap in the face to Lennon and his family, especially since they choose to never show the actor clearly. He didn't even look like Lennon in the album photo! ANY actor could have played this part, and certainly many actors resemble Lennon more than this guy. It was just insensitive to use him and made the entire project seem less credible. The entire film was filled with sadness and dread. If that was the only feeling or point that the filmmakers were trying to make, then well done. But nothing was particularly interesting about this guy, and nothing was even remotely redeeming about him. Not his illness. Not his attempts to go elsewhere with someone. Nothing. It really was a shame as what should have been a Career Performance by Leto seems rather self-indulgent in the end.

Warning: I didn't see this film. I refuse to see this film. This is a review about the fact that this film exists. This is one of those cases where filmmakers go too far with their craft. I'm a huge John Lennon and Beatles fan, and Lennon's murder was one of the saddest things to ever happen to humanity in general, let alone the musical community. I don't want to see a film about the man that killed him. What are the producers trying to prove? That Mark David Chapman had good reasons for his actions? No! He was a psychopath obsessed with killing John Lennon who unfortunately got to do his ultimate deed. Enough said. Why do you have to make a movie about it? Were you not considering the feelings of Yoko, Julian, and Sean? Who wants to see a movie, let alone know that a film exists, about the guy who killed your husband or father? Famous or not. It would be the worst thing in the world to me. In that sense, I empathize with Sean when he was upset by knowing that Lindsey Lohan, whom he considers a friend, was partially responsible for getting this film green-lighted. What's worse about this is that this is EXACTLY what Chapman wanted. He wanted to be famous, and this is damning evidence to prove it! I usually try to be a pragmatist and give filmmakers the benefit of the doubt, but this is one subject that didn't need to and shouldn't have been explored beyond the usual historical media, such as news, documentaries, books, etc. But a dramatic feature film? It's just too much. Unfortunately, there really isn't much anybody can do now though, seeing as how the film has been out for nearly 4 years already, except just to urge film buffs and Lennon/Beatles fans to not give this film or any other film regarding Mark David Chapman any consideration, and instead consider the feelings of Lennon's relatives and pay tribute to John by simply listening to and enjoying the greatest thing he could have left behind, his music.

Chapter 27 had become one of my favorite movies. I rented the movie just out of curiosity and it turned out to be a masterpiece! Then got it on DVD myself. It's an amazing story. I can relate to it. Not that I wanna shoot my idols or anything like that. Just the way the guy acts. The way he feels. I love the book The Catcher In The Rye and the fact that the movie is made around that is fantastic. You get such a warm feeling when you hear the guy talk. I feel like I wanna protect him. The acting of Jared Leto… Wow! He's so deep. The way he's this geeky humble kinda guy who's almost living The Catcher In The Rye. The way he feels that John Lennon has betrayed him but still is a fan a heart. He plays the mental and confused guy so amazingly that it takes my breath away. The directing is fantastic too. It's really capturing the atmosphere. And the coloring works so well. This is a movie that, by most people, will be looked down on. You know…for portraying a man who killed a legend. But in some years this is going to be a cult classic. It's an art movie and it's hard to understand if you don't see it. I mean like really SEE it. It's beautiful and people should really give it a chance. Watch it. SEE it!

Step into the mind of a deranged stalker…Listen to the tortured, obsessive, thoughts as he rambles on and on. That's the premise of this strange but well-done film about the man who killed John Lennon. If you're looking for a good date movie, forget it—unless your date is a forensic psychologist or a CSI fan. This film is not "entertainment." The director's intent was to explore the internal state of Mark David Chapman in the three days leading up to his murder of Lennon. For those who are upset that this film was ever made, be assured that it in no way glorifies Chapman. Though the director wants us to empathize, i.e., understand the mind of the killer, he does not try for sympathy. Chapman is presented as the pathetic loser he actually was. Jared Leto, who gained 60 pounds for the role (the resemblance is eerie) gives us a portrayal of a weird, annoying pest. So annoying in fact that it's hard to believe that Jude, the Lindsay Lohan character (who may nor may not have existed), would want to pal around with him. I guess she is supposed to feel sorry for him. The other Chapman—Mark Lindsay Chapman (no comment on the name, that's been done to death, pardon the expression, elsewhere) is equally good in his all too brief role as John Lennon. As the director, J.P. Shaefer, has said elsewhere, he wanted someone to play Lennon as a real person, not an icon. Mark Lindsay Chapman's portrayal is down-to-earth and matter of fact—just like the real Lennon. He sounds eerily like the real Lennon too. MLC is a brilliant choice and cosmically appropriate. He was chosen from a field of 200 to play Lennon in a TV movie back in 1988 (when he was calling himself Mark Lindsay). When Yoko Ono found out his real name, she fired him—bad karma. Now it has come full circle and MLC finally gets to play the role--almost as if it was his destiny. The film is somewhat artsy (which is both good and bad) but it is fairly good at capturing the essence the obsessive stalker mentality. Leto is excellent in the role, making you believe that you are actually seeing Mark David Chapman. But if you want to know why he did it, you'll have to look elsewhere. It does not explore Chapman's background—his religious fanaticism, his teenage obsession with Lennon, or the crushing disappointment when Lennon announced jokingly that the Beatles were more popular than Jesus. Chapter 27 won't be everyone's cup of mocha latte. It's disturbing and weird—just like Mark David Chapman. It's not a film you will "like," but it is a film that you may find interesting. It may not give insight in to the "why" but it does paint a striking picture of the "how." Arcania