sigh. There are so many things wrong with this movie. Firstly, it's one of those preachy movies that was basically made to get the moviegoers involved by showing the evils of the modern medical/hmo/ppo situation. Much rabble rousing is done, with characters pontificating about What's Wrong With Our Society That Things Like This Happen etc. etc.

Secondly, the characters suck. The actress who played his whiny wife should personally have the writer whipped. What an awful role! Whinging about how he has to do this and that and all the things that are his fault and on and on and on...shut up, bitch, and take some responsibility your own self!

And Denzel. Sigh. Why on earth did he do this? he used to be in good movies...but now he's a no-account flake who also refuses to take responsibility for his actions, and finally uses violence to try to get what he needs. Totally unworthy, see rant below.

Ann Heche did a fine job as the financial person for the hospital, whose job it is to tell the parents that unless they can pay cash for the transplant their son is going to die; she really showed the division between doing her job, not being able to make exceptions, being tough, and yet still caring about people. She was the only good thing about this movie. Robert Duvall is in it too, but just chews scenery.

Reality police: where do I start? a hospital in DOWNTOWN CHICAGO and the only security they have in emergency is one unarmed clueless rentacop? give me a break. One guy can barracade himself into the emergency room by blocking off two doors and there are no other exits? I seriously doubt it. The hand-picked police sharpshooter misses? hah. But the worst: the hospital GIVES IN to this terrorist? you have got to be kidding. All they had to do was lie to him and tell him his kid's name was at the top of the list, and disarm him, end of story.

<rant>
But there is another aspect of this movie that SERIOUSLY pissed me off: terrorism is not an acceptable alternative. It doesn't matter that it's his son who is going to die, that he got screwed by his hmo and his workplace, that he couldn't really have killed anyone because his gun was not loaded, or that he is even willing to kill himself so his son can have his heart (and THAT was seriously silly and melodramatic, you bet!).

Terrorism is terrorism, whatever the reasons or the scale, and it is inexcusable. The biggest flaw in this movie was in presenting John Q as a heroic everyman who is only trying to get a fair deal from a hostile bureaucracy instead of a kissin' cousin to the people who took out the World Trade Center; the only difference is a matter of scale, and of motive...and I'm willing to bet they thought their motives were just as good as the moviegoers are supposed to think John Q's motives are.

Even worse, HE GETS AWAY WITH IT. He took on the system, got what he needed and won. Kidnapped about 8 people, held them hostage for hours, and (the viewer is led to believe) will only serve two years in prison. So hey, everyone, if you get pissed off at the workings of government, it's ok to be a terrorist yourself! as long as you do it for the right reasons, you're still a good person.
</rant>

OK, that's enough. And me a librarian and a supporter of the first amendment and all that. No, I wouldn't ban the movie, but I sure wish they had made the point somewhere in it that what he did in that movie is COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY WRONG. What a sorry excuse for a film. Skip this one and go see Terminator 2 again instead, much better filmmaking and a way better moral viewpoint.