I have worked in libraries for 22 years. They are my happy place, and I really hoped that this would be a movie I could recommend to people. Based on the trailer, I expected to enjoy it a lot myself. Neither turned out to be true.
What bugged me the most was the nearly complete non-use of the internet by the folks barricaded in the library, and by the media. The librarian made a video to show what was going on, great. But did he post it to YouTube? Facebook? Instagram? Did he tweet it or email it to local news media? No, he emailed it to his friend, who handed her phone to a local newscaster, who barely watched it.
Also, the way the librarian allowed himself to be cast as the leader of this thing that was *not* his idea. It makes sense within the story, given how tightly the negotiator and the prosecutor were controlling the narrative (but why did they have that control? Why wasn't the librarian communicating with the outside world?), but he didn't make much effort to push back. OK, the actual instigator didn't want to talk to the police. Fair enough, and plausible. They were there from 6pm until 2am. Where's the manifesto a small group could have written in the first three hours, and (ahem) posted online? Where are the hashtags they could have all invented? It's like this took place in 1992. The internet is used only to get a cheap laugh about a homeless man using a dating site.
In a movie that centers a notoriously pink-collar profession, only one library staff member with a significant role is a woman. F that.
Why the heck did Christian Slater take off his coat and jacket before lying on the street? Also, why was everyone dressed like it was 35 degrees when it was supposedly more like 10? Some Californian's idea of what "bundled up" looks like. Phhhht.
Finally, are we really supposed to believe that riot police who were otherwise all ready to rush in, guns blazing, were stopped by the sight of a bunch of naked men? That ridiculous ending might as well have said straight out, "If you don't resist, you're safe!" when recent events show us that that is not true.
Emilio Estevez was not convincing. The dialogue was cliched and random. Jena Malone's character was disappointing.
The only reason I hope my library friends see this movie is so that we can complain about it together.
What bugged me the most was the nearly complete non-use of the internet by the folks barricaded in the library, and by the media. The librarian made a video to show what was going on, great. But did he post it to YouTube? Facebook? Instagram? Did he tweet it or email it to local news media? No, he emailed it to his friend, who handed her phone to a local newscaster, who barely watched it.
Also, the way the librarian allowed himself to be cast as the leader of this thing that was *not* his idea. It makes sense within the story, given how tightly the negotiator and the prosecutor were controlling the narrative (but why did they have that control? Why wasn't the librarian communicating with the outside world?), but he didn't make much effort to push back. OK, the actual instigator didn't want to talk to the police. Fair enough, and plausible. They were there from 6pm until 2am. Where's the manifesto a small group could have written in the first three hours, and (ahem) posted online? Where are the hashtags they could have all invented? It's like this took place in 1992. The internet is used only to get a cheap laugh about a homeless man using a dating site.
In a movie that centers a notoriously pink-collar profession, only one library staff member with a significant role is a woman. F that.
Why the heck did Christian Slater take off his coat and jacket before lying on the street? Also, why was everyone dressed like it was 35 degrees when it was supposedly more like 10? Some Californian's idea of what "bundled up" looks like. Phhhht.
Finally, are we really supposed to believe that riot police who were otherwise all ready to rush in, guns blazing, were stopped by the sight of a bunch of naked men? That ridiculous ending might as well have said straight out, "If you don't resist, you're safe!" when recent events show us that that is not true.
Emilio Estevez was not convincing. The dialogue was cliched and random. Jena Malone's character was disappointing.
The only reason I hope my library friends see this movie is so that we can complain about it together.