User Reviews

Well, maybe I am a romantic American patriot. I did enjoy the movie in spite of all its historical inaccuracies, outdated presentation and production values. However, it did remind me of the courage of the rebels and the risks they took to win our freedoms. I had forgotten much about our early history that too many of us now take for granted. As some other reviewers have mentioned, maybe it should be remade in a completely historically accurate manner. Also, the introduction shows Walt Disney as the consummate salesman. No wonder he accomplished so much in his lifetime - and contributed so much to American culture and values.

I remember seeing this film at the age of 8. At the time, I enjoyed it very much, and I felt like I learned a decent amount about American history. However, there are some things I've noticed as I've aged. Although there are several elements in this story that give a wide range of entertainment, there are other things that simply make no sense whatsoever.

Don't get me wrong: this movie still remains to be one of my favorite Disney titles. However, when it comes to especially the fighting and violence, Disney sure tried hard to make this movie accessible to everybody. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it helps to lack historical accuracy throughout the movie. First of all, the violence within Lexington was much more rigid and barbaric. Sure, the formations by the British soldiers still seemed to reflect some historical accuracy, but the whole strategy Disney used in order to avoid elements such as blood and just pure struggle came to provide a very odd, overextended 10 minute scene.

Although the historical accuracy is a slight problem within Johnny Tremain, it shouldn't be forgotten that this movie still succeeds in providing multiple cases of true information. The perspective of the "rebels" seems to offer a great story for the average child to immerse themselves into, hopefully absorbing some information in the process.

In conclusion, Johnny Tremain is a movie that has yet failed to entertain me. Whether this be the well-constructed story or the hilarious bad acting when dying, I'm not so sure. Nevertheless, if you are looking for a film to entertain you, or you have quite simply never heard of the Revolutionary War, (First of all, you should know about the war. Second, this really only details the Boston Tea Party and the Battle of Lexington and Concord) then Johnny Tremain is the movie for you.

So I started this movie expecting to be an outdated and not entertaining film. Surprisingly and thankfully, I was wrong. Johnny Tremain is a decent film. If you have a basic understanding of United States history it is even better than if you don't. Johnny Tremain states at the beginning of the film he doesn't want to be a troublemaker like the New England rebels but after many trials fights the British even without a gun. Walt Disney said that even the heroes that don't make it into the history books need to be respected and remembered. I wholeheartedly agree. The main song was catchy and the Disney feel shone through. The movie was not historically accurate in some places and the action seemed rushed and exaggerated. All in all, Johnny Tremain was a decent movie.

Johnny Tremain wasn't a bad movie considering the time period that it was made. I enjoyed it mostly because of the time period the movie takes place. Definitely more accurate than some of the other movies I've seen about similar time periods. If I was watching this movie in 1957, when it came out, I would probably feel pretty good about America. The movie starts out with Johnny working for some guy that's a silversmith. Then this Lyte guy comes wanting the silversmith to remake a pot thing that a maid "broke" but the pot doesn't even look broken. Johnny tells the old guy that he would like to make the pot and breaks the sabbath doing so. His punishment for breaking the sabbath? He burns his hand and can no longer be a silversmith. Then he wanders around looking for a new job. He can't work anywhere because now he's a cripple. He joins the revolution and fights the red coats without a musket 'cause he's a boss. And they all live happily ever after. The end.

I am fully aware that no film adaptation of a novel can remain completely faithful to its source. It is just not possible to do- most novels are too nuanced and large to be comfortably fitted into a two hour movie. However, it is possible for a film to capture the message and tone of a novel by keeping true to its narrative. Yet Disney's film adaption of Esther Forbes 1943 novel for young and old, "Johnny Tremain," failed to stay true to the narrative of the book and the result is a thoroughly mediocre and bland movie.

Set in Revolutionary era Boston, Forbes' novel is the story of a bright, talented, and cocky fourteen year old silversmith apprentice, Johnny Tremain, who because of an accident which cripples his hand finds himself without a profession. Without a future as a silversmith, Johnny must find a new life and career. Along the way he finds himself swept up in the events around Boston in the mid 1770's that culminated in the American Revolution. Johnny becomes involved in the clandestine activities of the Sons of Liberty. He participates in the Boston Tea Party, spies on the British, and mingles with such patriots as John Hancock, Sam Adams, and Paul Revere. The strength of the novel is how Forbes so effortlessly weaved the fictional story of Johnny in with actual historical events and persons. It is just a brilliant work of historical fiction.

One would think that a film studio could not make a complete hash of such terrific source material. Yet Disney did. Disney did what is usually expected of film versions of novels- it jettisoned "minor" characters and subplots to streamline the story. That's understandable. What is not forgivable is completely changing the message and tone of the novel in order to have lots of action scenes and a happy ending. In the book, Johnny only hears of about the fighting at Lexington and Concord- in the movie Johnny is shown in the thick of the fighting. That's understandable (film's need action), but what is not forgivable is the ridiculous joyousness of the battle scenes- Johnny and his friend, Rab, hide behind trees, shoot at redcoats, and seem to be having a grand time! They also occasionally break out into song- "Oh, we are the Sons, oh, we are the Sons, the Sons of Liberty!" (It's just as bad as one could imagine.) Disney selling war as a boys' adventure is exactly the opposite of what Forbes intended in her novel.

Forbes was not cynical about the ideal of American Revolution- the war was fought so that "a man could stand up." However, Forbes let the reader know that that simple hope came at a terrible price. The character of Rab, Johnny's best friend, is a remarkable seventeen year old boy. He's smart, handsome, fearless, and oozes charisma. He's a boy destined to be a great man. Yet it's not be. At Lexington Green, as Rab stands among the Minutemen confronting the might of the British Empire, he is mortally wounded in the first volley. He never even got a chance to fire his own musket. He dies the next day, propped up in a chair with blood pouring from his mouth. Forbes wanted young readers to know that war is not a boy's adventure- it robs the world of its best and brightest at a very young age. By having Rab walking around, alive and well, and singing that awful song at film's end, Disney succeeded in completely botching its film adaption of "Johnny Tremain." This is one book that is crying for a remake!

It is Boston, in the year 1773, and Johnny Tremain is a young apprentice working for a silversmith. Unjustly accused of a crime, he is rescued by several influential men of the city, including Paul Revere. Johnny joins the "Sons of Liberty," a grass roots political organization, and takes part in the Boston Tea Party and in the famous skirmish at Concord.

The legendary events you read about as a school child come to life in a rousing, patriotic tale. While Johnny is a fictional character, most of the others in the movie are real people such as Revere (with his famous ride), Samuel Adams, and Dr. Warren. Hal Stalmaster is a very likable young Johnny, all innocence and idealism. Walter Sande (Revere) and Rusty Lane (Adams) look like their namesakes and give powerful performances.

This wholesome Disney family movie may be more appreciated by parents than their children (who no doubt have to read the source novel by Esther Forbes in school). It really brings all the names and facts to life and is quite inspiring. Highly recommended.

The movie was actually pretty good and it kept me interested. It wasn't slow and it actually had script compared to the first movie of the new world. The reason why we watched this movie was for our history through film class. The filmmaker was telling the story of Johnny who wants to fight but can't because of his hand injury. The movie is really staticky and you can tell it's old school. When they had war it looks like a golf field they had it on. Some of the stuff in the movie wasn't as gory just because it was made by Disney and so it doesn't really explain the brutal part of the war. I liked how it actually had script instead of just playing along it kept me instrested and not bored. I didn't like how old it was because it isn't as thrilling as new movies now .

I watched this movie to see the progress movies had made throughout history. The was about a young boy who helped distribute knowledge about the British. He had a burned hand and couldn't do much else so he took the job. He was tasked with remembering the names of important people in history and deliver messages to them. The acting was pretty bad and so were the special effects used. The video was grainy and you can tell the set isn't as good as they are today. How Johnny was trained to ride the horse seems inaccurate to me. Along with the the tea party. The stand off with the Brits and how they picked them off so easily seems unlikely. I like how after the court case Johnny showed his dad he didn't need him or the cup. How Johnny knew his grandpa couldn't make a new handle so he tried to. Also how Johnny's impairment didn't stop him from trying to help. I didn't like how much of the og story was taken out. overall it was an ok movie. It did have historical accuracy. But it should not be looked at as something that'll teach you a lot. It was interesting to see how they made preformed everything in such an old film. It wouldn't be the end of the world if i never saw anything with the same people ever again.

I watched this movie to learn about the little guys of that time. The filmmaker is telling the story of a young teenager and his life during the fight for human rights. The entertainments value was pretty good and was often upbeat. I liked how the music kicked in depending on the mood. The quality of the movie was a little less than good, but that's because of the time it was made. I didn't like how the movie was all happy. There were no really sad parts so it didn't make the movie more realistic and it didn't have an emotional effect on me. The historical accuracy was pretty good, but it wasn't very bloody or scary as it was in real life. A person in 1957 would view this like we would any other new movie. They probably think it is very cool and entertaining. Overall, the movie was worth watching for any age, but not worth watching over and over again as most Disney movies are.

Johnny Tremain is a patriotic move made in the height of the cold war. It is a short live action movie, That take place near the american revolution. The movie follows the actions and live of a teen that who name is Johnny Tremain as he is a apprentice of a silversmith before he burns his hand on molten silver and how he becomes a patriotic over the revolution as he become a scout for the sons of liberty and how he become a major part of the revolution when having a small part in the revolution as the story is about how the people who assist in the revolution are nobody fighting for the right for our country,