Customer Reviews

Chapter 27

5 star:		(9)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

Mark David Chapman is one of the darkest figures of modern time. He is the man who wanted to be famous, to be the next Holden Caulfield so bad, he killed John Lennon. And now, there is a movie about him.
How do you approach Chapman's clearly deranged psyche and then make a movie out of it? Well, first, you go for the motives. Although the movie only spawns the infamous three days of Caulfield's life, there is enough implied background for us to begin to understand this character. I would never imply Chapman is someone to be understood or forgiven, and neither would Jarrett Schaefer, who directs this movie respectfully and cautiously. He puts Chapman in a number of seemingly random and ordinary situations that all echo the plot of J. D. Salinger's "Catcher in the Rye". Like its protagonist Houlden Caulfield, Chapman also goes on a trip to New York City to "find" himself. An on and off Christian and a Beatles fan, he often ventures into philosophical musings about justice and the state of the world, and it seems that every single thing in life can be accociated with the biggest star in the world at the time, the peace activist John Lennon.
Chapman is played by Jared Leto, in one of those great movie transformations. The overweight Leto may not reach the heights of Nicole Kidman as Virginia Woolf or Charlize Theron as Aileen Wuornos, however, he is suitably creepy and disturbing. Lindsay Lohan plays Jude, a young Lennon fan who befriends Chapman. She gives an interesting performance, seeming friendly (bordering on flirty) in the beginning, but then becoming more cautious as Chapman's behavior starts shifting.
"Chapter 27" is not a perfect movie, but it is interesting, factual and engaging. Although it doesn't really provide any answers, it left me thinking about fandom, destiny and irony. What is the difference between a fan and a stalker? Can mental illness justify a crime? And finally, where do the Central Park ducks go?

Let's get this straight. This is NOT a BIO-PIC. It is a PORTRAYAL of a three day John Lennon autograph hunting expedition of the psychologically deranged Mark David Chapman. With that in mind, the film does not give the background information others are longing for, a history so to speak of Chapman's life. If you want that, this is NOT that film. let's stop focusing on what this film is NOT and start praising what it IS.

It is a monumental acting effort by Jared Leto. He is not 'acting' as Chapman. He IS Chapman. I truly believe he is in this film. That is a hard achievement to pull off for any actor ,. To totally encompass a role beyond what is called for to the point you cannot tell the difference between the actor and the person he is portraying. The only difference being that Chapman could never be as facially appealing.

Some have said Lindsay Lohan helps the film as Jude. I diagree. Her role is shallow, without any background or substance. Her acting is perfunctory, nothing more. Any actress could have played this role better. When you compare Leto's dedication and Lohan's non chalant attitude you see who paid their dues and who just showed up for a check.

On the other hand Paul Freilander is the balance in this story and his performance is great. He is neither hindered nor fooled by Chapman yet he somehow is drawn to share the same sidewalk. One wants a photo for a sale, the other an autograph, then to kill. The autograph seeker has never been played or seen in such sensitive light and with such insight into pyschosis. The long wait outside the dakota in a cold December is shown through Chapman's ramblings. Somehow you are DRAWN into his psychosis.
It all blends into one homogenous mind numbing delusion. You almost seem HAPPY he gets that autograph. The fact Lennon even asks him "Is that all you want" adds to the horror of the inevitable. I guarantee you by 1980 none of the other Beatles would have been this cordial in person. (Harrison was a well known recluse and was always weary of fans (for good reason), Ringo rarely took photos with fans to this day and Mccartney sightings on public streets are very well guarded).

The films 84 munute running time DOES leave you asking questions. The title of the film is not clearly explained. Chapman's total motivation whether by the Devil or the BOOK (Catcher) is not totally identified and apparantely there are a number of historical inaccuracies such as Sean's care taker being a polite English woman is a misnomer. Unimportant to the total scope of the film.

What you are witnessing is an ACTING TOUR DEFORCE by LETO and an equally fine supporting acting peformance by Freilander. I would have nominated BOTH for Golden Globes at the least.
This film is only boring if you cannot sit still for 30 seconds and do not like to listen and get inside the head of characters. Indeed I find it riveting. The film score is sensitive and well done. The direction is interesting and terse. I think this is a very well done film. A little more enhancement of script would have helped. No one mentioned if the DVD has any DELETED scenes which migh help explain some things. Are there deleted scenes?

I wanted to watch Chapter 27 because I am a fan of music and love music and wanted to get some sense of how a fan of John Lennon could murder him in cold blood after gaining his autograph just hours before. I didn't see this film as a vehicle for praising or being sympathetic to Mark David Chapman, although after watching it, I did find that he was portrayed in a sympathetic light in some scenes even if it was unintentional. I don't understand Mark David Chapman or his motives for killing John Lennon and he doesn't deserve my understanding in my opinion. But seeing this film gave me a persepctive on how something so chilling and unfathomable could've happened to someone so famous.

Jared Leto did a believable portrayal of the insanity and psychoticness of Mark David Chapman. It reinforced my feelings of how unsympathetic, calculated and cold Mark David Chapman's motives were for killing John Lennon despite the fact that John Lennon so graciously gave an autograph to the sick, twisted individual who would so soon take his life. I found it so strange how unguarded John Lennon lived his life and how he would be swarmed by paparazzi in this day and age and would probably not live in a building without a private, gated entrance. It was amazing to watch the scene where he walks out of the Dakota and there is just one photographer and a handful of fans. That would never happen today with society's obsession with celebrity.

I don't think of this film as a validation or recognition of Mark David Chapman as some kind of victim to mental illness. I see this film as a testament to why this man should be kept in prison for his entire life with no parole. I was astounded to even think he was up for parole just because he is a born again Christian? He killed a man in cold blood and it was calculated when you shoot someone in the back 5 times. I don't know the historical facts surrounding John Lennon's death but I do know this film reinforces my feeling that someone like Mark David Chapman needs to stay in prison to pay for his crime and not to forget the sheer evil that can evolve in a person's heart to commit such an atrocious act of violence against another human being.

My family's satellite provider gave us a free preview of a movie channel in hopes that we would subscribe. We watched Chapter 27 one afternoon when we had nothing else to do. Chapter 27 is not bad, but it is not a "must-see" film by any means.

The best thing about the film, by far, is Jared Leto's performance as Mark David Chapman. Leto's physical resemblance to Chapman is uncanny. Leto is often the sole character on screen and he does a good job of "carrying" the film. He is particularly strong in the scene in which Chapman hires a prostitute; in a few short minutes Leto subtly conveys Chapman's awkwardness, alienation, and madness. There are several other scenes that overtly establish Chapman's character, but none has the punch of that scene.

The sole slip in Leto's performance is his attempt at a Southern accent. To a Southerner's ear, he just does not pull it off very well. (In fact, Leto mutters and sounds as though he took too much Xanax; too often, he "talks... like... this...")

The rest of the cast is largely wasted. Lindsay Lohan is not bad as Jude, but she is given absolutely nothing worthwhile to do. The only standout in the supporting cast is Judah Friedlander. Friedlander plays Paul, an aspiring paparazzi, who frequents the Dakota (Lennon's apartment building) in order to get photos that he can sell. Paul is memorable, even though he is on screen for just a few minutes.

I also think that the filmmakers deserve credit for some excellent visuals and music. There are some great, colorful exteriors of Manhattan. The interiors tend, on the other hand, to be stark. I suppose the interiors are supposed to suggest Chapman's bleak mental state, but some of them are so dark that the film is difficult to see. Today's cinematographers all seem to think that a film has more artistic merit if the screen is so dark that the viewer has trouble understanding what is happening.

At best, Chapter 27 is a guilty pleasure. The film is about Chapman, period; it does not examine the effects of Chapman's violence and that is inexcusable. I think, moreover, that Chapman isn't interesting enough to sustain interest over the film's 90 minutes. Chapter 27 inadvertently provides a "nobody" killer (Chapman) with the notoriety that he sought by murdering a celebrity. At worst, Chapter 27 is yet another entry in a long line of movies that celebrate mental illness and graphic violence.

Chapter 27 is not a bad film to watch if you are bored and have nothing else to do. I would not, however, recommend that anyone seek it out.

If you're a fan of good acting and character studies, this films for you. I'm a true crime fan and read "Let me take you down" Let Me Take You Down: Inside the Mind of Mark David Chapman,the Man Who Killed John Lennonsome 10 years ago. Reading it then made me feel that this book could make a very good film. Thankfully, the film turned very good. Jared Leto IS Chapman. He is creepy, menacing, disturbed, lost, eveything that you might expect someone like Chapman to be, Jared Leto captures that essence of a man ready to come crumbling down. For me, this is a powerful film that I believe should be watch.

In early December 1980 Mark David Chapman killed John Lennon. John Lennon was not a mere celebrity at the time. He had moved beyond the Beatles and formed a solo career where he was spreading a message that was clicking with society as the message of love and unity in a time when the country was in deep turmoil.

This independant film is handled with a lot of care and great detail. Jared Leto provides an amazing performance as he fully becomes Mark David Chapman. He even put on 60 pounds for the role and the similarities in appearance are uncanny. The film does limit itself for it merely takes place over the 3 day period Mark is in New York and ends with the killing. The film is told throughout by the thought process of Mark and all the facts are correct. The problem is it leaves a lot of unanswered questions and if a viewer does not know all the facts they won't get everything.

The film does excellently portray that without question he is not of sound mind. He hears voices, continuosly talks within his head and flitters from thought to thought. He appears manic, psychotic and out of touch. John Lennon is merely a sad part of his psychosis. The facts - Mark David Chapman thought J.D. Salinger's THE CATCHER IN THE RYE was the bible and took on the persona of the main character Holden Caulfield who believed most of society was phony and despised the elite. Mark David Chapman had loved the Beatles and wasn't as fond of John Lennon as a solo artist which is shown here. He is very angered over Lennon's comment when a Beatle "We are bigger than Jesus" and was very angry that John spread a message of love yet had millions due to his success that started with the Beatles which he wanted to separate himself from.

The movie MONSTER with Charlize Theron was an excellent portrayal of serial killer Aileen Wuornos and the film provided background material that may answer questions as to why she developed the way she did. This film leaves Mark's very important background alone - escape into music, many attempts at suicide, heavy drug use and abusive family. Definite strong signs of mental illness/depression. He also had done a lot of great charity work around the world.

Some try to point this towards being a stalker situatuion that turned to murder. I believe it was a lot more than that. They say Mark did it to become famous himself. He remained at the scene after shooting John Lennon. But when knowing all the facts this does not make sense. Also, he pleaded guilty by reason of insanity and then took that back and just pled guilty. he has had 4 parole hearings - all denied - the last in 2008. He admits what he did was wrong and even apologizes to Yoko Ono for the effect on her. For once the judicial system seems to be doing its job and are keeping him in, saying he is still a danger to himself and others.

The important thing here for me is mental illness and how its effect on many crimes is often overlooked. It is not an excuse by any means but should be studied closely. This film for what it does show over those 3 days is impeccable. Jared Leto illustrates the complexities in the mind of Mark David Chapman that the script was vague on. Lindsay Lohan is also very good as a fellow fan who befriends Mark and you see through her reactions towards him over time how he is different and creepy. He has outbursts and to me appears bipolar.

A tragedy of the highest poroportion occured when John Lennon was killed but I think this is obviously not a mere celebruity stalking. John Lennon became the target due to his message and being human. Mental illness is a huge part and must be given its due. The punishment should be the same but we should learn from these cases.

I really like this movie. Granted it drags for a 3 day period but its understandable that they had to get every detail in there. I've never heard of this movie until 2 years ago. I was going through the movie channels at my work and noticed that this had Jared Leto and Lindsey Lohan. So I gave it a try. Talk about coffee going up my nose when I realized a fat Jared playing Mark. I had no idea. But if your a Beatles fan, especially Johns, you will hate but like this movie.

This movie is a look into the complex mind of a mentally ill killer. Jared Leto delivers a superb acting preformance and draws you into the story.
The DVD came in the mail in perfect working order.
So theres the review

The section where Chapman debates whether to stay or leave- I think the movie starts to penetrate some of the most important issues of our time- as few others dare to do.

If we follow Chapman's logic- yes- John is a phony (becuz he has a lot of money) - and yet
John was NOT a phony- he, of all the Beatles- stood for something!

I sense there is much untold here- that there are issues yet to be probed. I will have to research further- what has Chapman sd- what do the other books say? America does not really want to look at the causes of violence. WHY??

I would like to pin a lot of things on Chapman- anti peace movement- anti gun control- U S imperialism, which would explain John's murder so easily- let's say Chapman was hired by the FBI?!?!?!

and yet- schizophrenia is a so far little understood disease.

By the way- another grreat rock and roll artist- Nilson- became a hard worker for handgun after John's death- and- thank you Nilson!

More controversial subjects than this should be raised- but I praise this film- it is unsettling because it raises some (let's just say) things.

Mark Chapman should never be granted parole (and I believe in second chances).

Jared Leto did an excellent job of portraying Mark David Chapman, and the director did an excellent job of incorporating the killer's obsession with Cather in the Rye. Many scenes of the novel were touched on in the movie. This is an excellent film for teachers to show students who read Cathcer in the Rye. There are a few scenes which can be easily censored.