MovieChat Forums > The Negotiator (1998) Discussion > Not Realistic, Not Smart

Not Realistic, Not Smart


He wants to prove he didn't break the law so, he breaks the law to prove he didn't break the law? If he beats the rap of not killing his partner, now he faces hostage taking, assault with a deadly weapon, and reckless endangerment.


reply

He saw how stacked the deck was against him and recognized that the kind of guys who framed him wouldn't just roll over and turn over the evidence in court. Regardless, if you expect every movie character to be totally rational, then you must be frequently disappointed.

Also, I doubt that he would even face significant charges. In the real world, prosecutors have to consider whether or not they can actually get a jury to unanimously agree that a defendant is guilty. Although he technically broke the laws you mentioned, with the circumstances as they are, there's a very good chance you get at least one juror who believes that the means justified the ends. After all, remember that the prosecutor said the public hate crooked cops, and this guy exposed a whole rat's nest full of them.

reply

He saw how stacked the deck was against him and recognized that the kind of guys who framed him wouldn't just roll over and turn over the evidence in court. Regardless, if you expect every movie character to be totally rational, then you must be frequently disappointed.

You are correct. I am frequently disappointed by most movies. Good movies are realistic and smart. This movie (and most movies) are not.

Also, I doubt that he would even face significant charges. In the real world, prosecutors have to consider whether or not they can actually get a jury to unanimously agree that a defendant is guilty. Although he technically broke the laws you mentioned, with the circumstances as they are, there's a very good chance you get at least one juror who believes that the means justified the ends. After all, remember that the prosecutor said the public hate crooked cops, and this guy exposed a whole rat's nest full of them.

That is incorrect. In the real world, a policeman would never be excused for doing what the Samuel L. Jackson character did. There are ways to deal with a crooked police force. And going bat-sh/t rogue is no way to do it. Two wrongs don't make a right. Report to the FBI. Contact anti-corruption lawyers. But never go "postal" lunatic.

In the real world he would have been killed. And if by some unlikely scenario he survives and uncovers corruption, the corrupt cops would have to deal with their own investigation, arrest, prosecution and conviction. But he would still have to pay the price for taking hostages, assaulting police with a deadly weapon and, attempted murder of police officers. That is the way the real world works.

Only in movies do police going on a rampage get excused for their crimes. Never in the real world. Especially in a big city like Chicago.


reply

Wait a minute. Are you saying this isn't real?

reply

Is it better to just accept whats happening to you without the chance of proving your innocence or is it worth taking the risk of proving your innocence but having to deal with some lesser charges once it's all said and done and figured out? I'd take the lesser charges even if I had to spend some time in jail as long as it wasn't life in jail for something I didn't do. It sure seemed realistic to me for it's happened before and he was smart to outwit them with Sabian's help.

reply

There are ways to prove your innocence without breaking the law. If you do break the law, especially the serious amount and severity that the Samuel Jackson character did, you will have to pay the price for those broken laws. And being a violent advocate of mayhem only makes him seem more guilty of the initial crime he was suspected of.

reply