User reviews

What's more surprising about this movie, the fact that it was so awful, or that so many great actors got roped into this Hollywood babble?

The movie is about a father, John Archibald (Denzel Washington) who goes to extreme measures after his young son has a heart failure. After being rejected by their insurance company and the hospital, Archibald decides to hold the hospital hostage so that his son can be saved.

I felt like I was being preached to and being force-fed immature stereotypes, that doctors are soulless puppets for insurance companies, that insurance companies are evils, that health care should be universal, that cops are incapable and stupid, blah blah blah. The problem is that instead of showing us the moral of the story through a mature combination of cinematography, acting, set design and dialog, screenwriter James Kearns forces the garbage down our throats as the characters in the room babble their views for two hours. Not even the tremendous acting of Denzel Washington could save this movie.

The most thrilling aspect was that so many great actors (Washington, Liotta, Woods, Duvall) were in this movie. The film desperately tries to show the duality of life and tries to answer the question how one life is worth compared to another, but its done so immaturely that it's baffling. The movie proves that even with an all-star cast, a poor script and poor directing can ruin the whole thing.

Waste of time.

2 out of 10

This must surely rank as one of Denzel Washington's weakest movies ever. Pretty much everything else he's done I have enjoyed immensely and so I rented this expecting something of high calibre. What I got instead was a silly movie with silly performances and a silly storyline that didn't really make much sense.

Washington is John Q. Archibald, a down on his luck factory worker whose son desperately needs a heart transplant that the hospital refuses to give him because of insufficient medical coverage. Frantic to get his son the attention he needs, Archibald takes the emergency room hostage, demanding that his son be "put on the list."

Let me say first that I agree with the political viewpoint of the movie. Having said that, if I wanted a debate on the merits of public vs. private health care I'd listen to politicians debate the issue. I don't watch a movie to hear a campaign speech, and yet this movie sounds like one long campaign speech (Sen. Hilary Clinton even appears speaking to the issue.) It really did get to be too much. At one point the hostages in the emergency room start to debate the issue! One would think that they might have had other things on their minds - like whether they'd ever see their families again! Performances ranged from barely acceptable (Washington) to silly (Paul Johansson as a truly irritating TV news reporter, Robert Duvall as the police negotiator who seems to be having a great time during this whole thing and Ray Liotta as the basically weak and incompetent police chief) to just downright bad casting (Ann Heche as the tough as nails heartless hospital administrator?!) And the story? Well, one of the police officers explained the basic problem best. John Q is holding the hostages until his son is "put on the list." Well - why not just tell him his son is on the list? Seems to me it would have solved a lot of the problems. I guess that's why I'm not a screen writer. I think scripts should make at least some sense.

Honestly - it's just a bad movie. The first bad movie I think I've ever seen Denzel Washington in. Well, even Joe DiMaggio's hitting streak came to an end.

2/10

If like me you have enjoyed some pretty acceptable films with Denzel Washington, I suggest you skip this one. Why Mr. Washington accepted such a role in such a pathetic film beats me. He cannot be that hard up, can he? Or is the taxman over-greedy again. I only put this one on because Denzel Washington is in it, otherwise I would not have bothered. Such films as "Cry Freedom", "The Pelican Brief", "Philadelphia", "The Bone Collector", have made sure that he is rightly one of the most popular actors on screen today. So why serve up this rubbish for us? Right, the film has things to say against the iniquity of the social services in the health sector in the U.S.A., but they - the director, for example, - could have dished up something more acceptable than a plate of watered bread.

Ugh. The whole movie is just a bunch of propaganda about free, universal health care. The story is moving and the acting not bad. In the end it actually tells you that we should have universal health care. Just liberal Hollywood propaganda. Maybe one of the most liberal films ever made. Conservatives and non-socialists don't watch it will hurt you nerves.(speaking from personal experience). Of course, the kid should not be left to die; private charity is way better than government welfare, something that the film deliberately hides. It is so one-sided and wants to present all people opposing socialist health care as evil. I know this is a film of 2002 but if it was made today it would be a good propaganda weapon for Obama's socialist policies.

The movie makes an important point about the inadequacies of the American health care system and its impact on the average person like John Q who needs to hire a lawyer before the ambulance is called. The US media prefers to hide the problem and the Bush administration uses the inadequate health care system for political capital abroad, treating foreigners on the cuff and ignoring the needs of Americans like John Q and his family.

I would have rated the movie a 9 or a 10 right up to the ending.

On the other hand the feel-good ending muddies the point not only in a touch of unrealism that an untrained person could hold off a swat team but also that the police negotiators might ferret him out with lies and deceit.

Thus I came to an over-all rating of 2 despite good performances from the cast.

As the recipient of a kidney transplant, I was not really surprised to see that almost nothing about this film was accurate. The whole phony plot line that a hospital wouldn't perform a heart transplant on Washington's son until he raised thousands of dollars should tip most people off. If a patient can't afford an organ transplant, Medicare will pay for it. Likewise the idea that a perfect donor match would become available within 24 hours is almost too laughable to contemplate. Most transplant patients wait a minimum of two to three years for their donor organ. You don't receive an organ because your dad is holding the ER hostage; you receive it after you've been on the UNOS list long enough to accumulate a certain amount of points. You also have to wait until a suitable tissue match is available. Organ transplantation is an extremely complicated process and this film could have done a lot to educate people as to the lack of donor organs in this country. Instead, it was a ridiculous play for a national health care program. If you like the Postal Service, you'll love nationalized health care.

Does this movie justify terrorism? I think so and I have to ask myself, Who would make such a film after the 9/11 attacks? The main character is frustrated by the healthcare system and thus, resorts to holding hostages at gunpoint. Sounds like a terrorist to me. Venting your frustrations by threatening the lives of others is not what I would call a hero. If this movie want's to send a message, fine. However, I hope that the message is not that the action John Q. takes is justified. Think about it. Is the message that sometimes terrorism is ok? Is it ok to take hostages and threaten people with death if you can't get things your way? Are abortion clinic bombers then justified for their deadly deeds? I see the character, John Q, as another bin Laden and thus, an enemy of civilization. Terrorists in my world are part of the problem not a viable option to solve problems. Once again, terrorism in the name of universal health coverage is not justified, heroic or right. Perhaps a better title of movie might be, `John Q. Flies A Plane Into The World Heath Care System'.

slapdash moralizing and a cast of cardboard cutouts made this a truly wretched experience. do yourself a favor and go see dog day afternoon instead. the whole medical/ethics baggage around this film, although supposedly central to the plot was never dealt with in any meaningful way. some manufactured emotion in the beginning scenes (on the way to school) were watchable and funny, too bad the script couldn't keep it up. do not waste your time here.

Dont be fooled. Denzel is fighting his way through a forced and phoney screenplay and juvenile direction. Duvall and Liota are great actors and here they are just paying the bills. And thank god it had Denzel, otherwise I would have left -- which I regret not doing. I laughed AT the scenes and circumstances that were so cliched and phoney. A lot of technical improbabilities makes it a HARD PILL TA SWALLOW.....

This movie was awful. The plot was extremely dull, predictable and full of cliches. Denzel Washington, Robert DuVall and Ray Liota, all of whom are normally terrific, gave stale performances. And what gets me the most, is that the only major character that is a veteran doctor is made an antagonist. It is not, by any means, doctors' fault when HMO's screw there clients. I have nothing good to say about JOHN Q.

From the introductory scene of a pretty young female motorist weaving capriciously in and about menacing semis accompanied by a strange, lush score, one smells trouble early on. But, you say, a movie with Denzel Washington at the acting helm will automatically right itself and avoid the obvious curves and potholes that could lead to disaster, right? Nope. Both the lady and the film are D.O.A.

Direction, writing and performances are so wretched, I found myself unintentionally laughing at its most serious of intentions.

Washington plays a struggling, low-to-middle class income factory worker with a working wife (supermarket checker) and son. At the beginning of the movie we see one of the family cars getting repossessed and dad scouting out a second job due to cut-backs at work. Things get so bad the cute youngster even offers dad his $46 dollar allowance savings. I guess the family that pays together, stays together.

Anyway, all seens endurable until the young Little League whippersnapper suffers thumper problems while running from first to second base (or was it second to third?) after hitting a line drive. Rushed to the hospital, the parents find out their son has an enlarged heart and needs a transplant very soon in order to survive. Trouble is, Denzel's insurance (remember, he's part time now) won't cover the $200,000 plus, and he and the Mrs. are destitute.

And the treacly dramatics that were tolerable up to this point now go haywire. What we really end up with is a movie that pushes for health insurance reform. To HMO or not to HMO: that is the question. Well, gosh, if that's all, why not just a "20/20" featurette?

After the big bad hospital tells Denzel his son has to to be released due to it's strict "no-money, no-heart" policy, our hero goes ballistic and holds the entire emergency room at gunpoint until his son is put on a donor's list. In a series of bad moves, the movie dissolves into a massive, gooey mess that strains reality with every heart beat. Hostages rooting for Denzel, the swarming public rooting for Denzel, the wife rooting for Denzel, the bad, bad administration now rooting for Denzel. Everyone's rooting for Denzel...except the script.

The always charismatic Washington looks so focused here, he doesn't realize he's in such a stinker. But Robert Duvall, as a hostage negotiator, sure does, and he looks mighty uncomfortable. And for good reason. His at-odds scenes with an over-the-top Ray Liotta, as a press-hungry Chief of Police, are ridiculous and superficial. Kimberly Elise as Denzel's wife may have a couple of true moments as Denzel's emotive wife but hardly enough. Anne Heche too is given short shrift as a "heartless" hospital administrator. Amazingly, this is a top-notch roster of stars and each and everyone comes off like a rank amateur.

The most laughable moments are saved for the hospital emergency room where Denzel holds hostage a motley crew of staff, security, patients, and (apparently) bad actors, including the usually terrific James Woods -- not-so-terrific as the hospital cardiologist. These are among the worst group crisis scenes I have encountered since "The Poseidon Adventure" thirty years ago.

A major crash and burn for the usually reliable Denzel. He offers his heart (literally!) to this picture and the tears seem real enough, but the deck is stacked. A poor choice of roles right after his award-winning "Training Day." And director Nick Cassavetes shows none of the genius expected as the son of legendary director John.

"John Q" should not be foisted on the public.

Denzel Washington takes on the MEAN medical system & EVIL doctors and SATANIC HMO's.Horribly slanted propaganda, does NOT a good movie make. And to add insult to injury, towards the end they even have the sheer audacity to have a clip of Hillary Clinton!! If the medical bill she sponsered back then HAD come to past, it could very might well have made America, land of the free into America, socialist country. The invention of HMO's was caused by the government, and the makers of this film want to give MORE control to said government?? I'm sorry this movie is total crap.

Where i saw it: HBO

My Grade: F

Cliche characters, implausible story, over the top message about the health care system in this country make this one a real bomb. Although some good issue's were touched upon, the plot is so predictable and the characters so stereo typically weak that the whole thing is just laughable. Has a trite, simplified, made for TV feel to it. Kind of amusing watching fine actors like Duvall, Liotta and Woods look ridiculous trying to salvage their roles with this third rate material. Great movie to make fun of.