John Q. (Infinifilm Edition)

Rating:
Summary: Great Actors, Average Plot
Review: Firstly, the plot is weak in places. It is predictable, it is clished, it is a Hollywood blockbuster. Without the cast it would be 3 stars, or less.

But, with the acting ability of the whole cast, the film is saved. Denzel Washington plays John Q. Archibald, who's son needs a heart transplant, but of course, its gonna cost ya. James Woods plays the evil dude once again, and tells John he needs to pay 250k, but unfortunately John is not insured and cannot pay it, and his son will die. So, the rational explanation is obviously to hijack the ER and hold everyone hostage until they put his son on the transplant list. Robert Duvall plays the police negotiator, who you snense feels almost sorry for John, but Ray Liotta comes in and plays mr. steelballs ordering someone to snipe John. The plot unravels (predictably) but ends well, leaving you feeling all nice and warm inside.

Very good cast, acting, ok plot, 4 stars.

Rating:
Summary: Funny; I think I'm going to be ill
Review: Is there anything more cynical and hypocritical than a big-budget, major-studio movie that tries to make a buck off people's unfounded guilt over living in a capitalist country? I thought "The Other Sister" set the standard for manipulative cinema, but "John Q" really has to take the cake. Preachy, simplistic, filled with cliches and "moving" oratory about the
failings of a health-care system that covers about 85% of the population, this movie is eerily similar to the "Socialist realism" that passed for art in the Soviet Union before it collapsed. Even worse, after the ridiculous melodrama has passed, the movie subjects viewers to a a parade of (empty)
talking heads like Hillary Clinton and Gloria Allred bleating about how we need universal (in other words, socialist) health care in this country. Apparently since Marxist ideas have worked so well in Poland, China, and Cuba, it's high time we tried them here. I think these peoples' attitudes were best exemplified by the quote from Bill Maher, who said something to
the effect of "We could have national health care, but we don't want our taxes raised." Gee, if people don't want national health care, is the government supposed to force it on them at gunpoint? (Probably). Maybe people figure they're already paying enough in taxes, and don't really feel like paying even more so the government can give to some people what most of
us have to earn. How greedy of them. What's next, a movie about how we should all pay higher taxes so the poor can afford high-definition TV's? Sheesh.

Rating:
Summary: Not really a review.
Review: I gave this 3 stars because I am required to give it something and Denzel is always worth at least that. But I have not seen the movie, and though I probably will (on the strength of Denzel), I just could not let the "AMAZON Review" pass without comment: "The pathetic state of health care in the U.S. ..." Oh, puh-LEASE. Troubled, in some aspects? Yes. Sometimes unfair? Sure. But PATHETIC? I beg you, people, return to the real world....