@v3
we understand.   

@JK
Na so we see am sha.

More reviews for "John Q". The reviews are looking good.

v3
my bad bruv. .
no vex. . .lol

John Q. Needs only one adjective: Moving.
Where a heart rending everyday script collides with a brilliant actor who portrays the role so seamlessly.

justkunmi:

And I so loved the end where his son did the macho pose. Telling the world his dad is a hero. Going to prison or not. Hero all the way.

My favorite scene too. Also loved the scenes with him in the ER with the hostages, as they slowly warm up to him. So human. So beautiful. And where his wife tells him over the phone with that strong face lol "John, do something". Overall, a very good movie.

I rate John Q - 97%.

JOHN Q

Plot/Script (13)
There's a thin line between far-fetched and innovative, without the display of love between father and son at the beginning of the movie, it would have crossed the line over to far-fetched ages ago. A good application of the butterfly/earthquake concept with the accident helped to put a little more mystery into the story.
That said, major flaws include the fact that a sniper with a clear view missed just because Denzel became Neo Q. Let's jst say he was a little too lucky for an everyday factory worker who's had a streak of bad luck before that.

Directing (9)

Every Inside Man needs a Spike Lee. Too many cases where the actors go into unnecessary streaks of explaining what they're going to do. Stating the obvious and over-stretching political arguments. Where was the director to yell 'CUT'??
This leaves the viewer with the hindtaste of an agenda movie, perfect for activists, but boring for ardent movie fans.

This is probably the main difference between Inside and John Q. I hope to see a re-make in the nearest future, with a Soderbergh/Spike Lee collabo or sumn.

Cinematography (10)

This wasn't that great either. It is a widely accepted fact that a good story sells DVDs, while technology brings opening grosses.
John Q was a perfect opportunity for the producer to push the boundaries of cinematography. This was a no-show. The accident scene was on the same level with Nollywood, the least they could have done was to capture the lead character's interesting displays of emotion from equally interesting angles, they failed at this too. A movie like this without special effects is bland.

It may seem unfair to rate the cinematography against the genius levels of today, but a quick look at the other movies that hit big in 2002 will tell you that it was a failure, even in its day. (See Bourne Identity, Catch Me If You Can, Chicago, City of God).

Acting(24)

Denzel took this role like his life depended on it. The role of a fugitive with hostages can prove difficult sometimes, especially with the ever-changing range of emotions the actor has to display.

Denzel does this perfectly moving smoothly through the five stages of grief (Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, Acceptance) and then portraying hope to cap it all up. Only in a few movies will you see an actor almost every possible human emotion and being peach at each and every one. Mrs Archibald was also a beauty to watch, and the character of the son was as realistic as the word goes.

This movie should be renamed Dummies' Guide to acting out ordinary human emotions.

Overall: 56/100

Gbam!!!!

@JK
wetin be GBAM?

@eldee
Why the poor rating?  
Speaking of giving movies alternative titles, "The Back-Up Plan" should have been called "Pregnancy for Dummies" and "Shrek Forever After" should be called "Shrek - Thank God it has ended".

obinna5000:

@JK
wetin be GBAM?

@eldee
Why the poor rating?  
Speaking of giving movies alternative titles, "The Back-Up Plan" should have been called "Pregnancy for Dummies" and "Shrek Forever After" should be called "Shrek - Thank God it has ended".

The only thing that was exceptional about this movie was the acting and the cause it was fighting for . . . while the acting was peach, the rest of the movie was not befitting of such an interesting concept.
And no . . . we cannot give points for moral lessons of movies, if we did . . . Nollywood will be on Ebert & Roeper every week.

I can't believe how messed up the cinematography was . . . I was disappointed.

Gbam!!!!

GBAM ko! WHAM ni!

I saw  John Q and Inside Man yesterday, what other movies are we going to review??
Let me watch them on get my review ready.

More reviews for "John Q" so that we can do "Inside Man" or "Glory" next.

I haven't seen the movie, but I doubt cinematography would be on the priority list considering the plot.
If I were producing, I would probably demand that it be simply adequate. Nothing flashy but not trashy either.

I am guessing it had to have been very very bad for Eldee to emphasise it this much.

doyin13:

I haven't seen the movie, but I doubt cinematography would be on the priority list considering the plot.
If I were producing, I would probably demand that it be simply adequate. Nothing flashy but not trashy either.

I am guessing it had to have been very very bad for Eldee to emphasise it this much.

It's not that bad, it's just the fact that the general rule is 'if it's a one major scene movie, get the cameras right'.
That's what most hostage-situation movies are based on.
They wasted so many good scenes . . . even a sniper situation was made to look shite.

What was even more annoying was the fact that they kept going into long debates every other scene . . . I almost checked to see if I was watching Question Time.

eldee:

I saw  John Q and Inside Man yesterday, what other movies are we going to review??
Let me watch them on get my review ready.

When are we going to review PUBLIC ENEMIES. . . . .
I think it's one of the best movies of LAST YEAR. . . .Johnny Depp gave a sterling performance.
This movie is air-tight!!!

I don't recall the movie too well. I'll rate it based on what I vaguely remember: 40%. I recall Denzel's acting was good. Seemed like a propaganda movie where they're not too subtle about their intent or manipulation of the audience. Not in the same way as that incredibly trashy waste of camera film, LAW ABIDING CITIZEN, but propaganda. 40%

Any other Denzel movie for review
Say 'Man on Fire'?

Lets review either:
- Inside Man
- Glory
- Man on Fire

Yes Boss!

Inside man next?

~Sauron~:

When are we going to review PUBLIC ENEMIES. . . . .
I think it's one of the best movies of LAST YEAR. . . .Johnny Depp gave a sterling performance.
This movie is air-tight!!!

I'm going to try to see how good this movie is.
I'm not Johnny Depp's biggest fan though.

anyone seen ''Book of Eli'?
Denzel's most recent movie,
i av it on queue on my laptop. .
shld see it very soon. .

Book of Eli is ayte na, why do you guys hate it

wheres errybody?

Here

next movie to review. . .

@justkunmi
Oga!! I thought we are on World Cup break.

v3:

Book of Eli is ayte na, why do you guys hate it

Don't mind them, na bad belle.

We can review Man on Fire or Inside Man or his oscar award-winner in Training Day.

JK,

Let's review Man on Fire or Book of Eli, what say you?

I haven't seen "Book of Eli" yet.

I pick "Man on Fire" or "Inside Man" for next review.

Man on Fire for review

Directed by Tony Scott

Starring
Denzel Washington
Dakota Fanning
Christopher Walken
Giancarlo Giannini
Radha Mitchell
Marc Anthony
Rachel Ticotin
and Mickey Rourke

Dakota Fanning
Be right back

Where's everybody oooooo!