Hacker Cinema
Alex Cross
2012 · Film · 101 min
Directed by Rob Cohen
Alex Cross, a genius homicide detective/psychologist is trying to clean up the mean streets of Detroit while keeping his family out of the line of fire. As he mulls over accepting a job with the FBI, he is told that a friend has been murdered and he vows to track down the killer. Soon, he and his team are forced to match wits with a psychotic contract killer, who displays a disturbing commitment towards seeing his job through.
2 negative1 neutralfrom 3 commenters
Where to watch
No streaming data for this title.
3 comments on Hacker News
Kiss the Girls? Along came a spider? Both were pretty successful movies? (There was also Alex Cross, which was a flop)
But Patterson is formulaic. If it's not your formula, you won't notice. Other cultural tributaries are the book aisles in your local Walgreens/CVS, which are overflowing with Patterson. But, again, if you're not in that audience, you won't see it.
And if your attitude is "I blank out on these kinds of books", your friends will know, and they won't bother to inform you. (Or they have told you once or twice, and you blanked, and they stopped).
There is so much media content out there that unless you happen to be interested in a particular niche, you can miss pretty large events.
"Because they couldn't cover their children's eyes during a few minutes of a PG-13 movie?"
I'm sorry, this part of your statement is stupid. It is ridiculous and degrading to expect a parent to physically cover their childrens' eyes during the violent parts of _Alex Cross_. These people didn't sign up for a PG13 movie viewing experience, they signed up for a flight.
Rob Cohen, the director, corroborates:
"When I read your piece this morning, I felt extremely sympathetic to the family involved and, in some ways, quite apologetic. I never made the film to cause anyone this kind of discomfort. It seems to me they (the family) were well within their rights to request some control as to what their two young children were exposed. As a father of five year old triplets, I, too, would not want them to absorb some of the images we created for my film.... PG-13 should mean what it does at the box office, at the very least meaning no one under 13 should be exposed to it. If the airlines cannot accommodate a more flexible presentation giving seats the option of viewing or not, they shouldn't show the film unless it meets what we could call "general cabin" suitability."
Directly from the article:
"In one incident (scroll down to find it) a family traveling from Denver to Baltimore with two sons, aged 4 and 8, asked if a monitor showing “Alex Cross,” which features some violent scenes, could be turned off or retracted, and was told no. They asked if the captain might be consulted. To do that, they were told, they’d have to wait until the plane landed. Then:"
[Added in response to comments below] Critical reading lesson here, if you look at the quote from the article you will notice that it says "they were told, they’d have to wait until the plane landed." That is how you know they were asking to see the captain without it explicitly saying, "They demanded to see the captain."
I think it is pretty obvious that the article is sensational and is lacking the information to fill in the gap on why they diverted and had this guy taken off the plane. His request over the movie is ridiculous but his request to see the captain or have the flight attendant talk to the captain about it is completely ridiculous.
At the very least, he asked the flight attendant to have a conversation with the guy flying the plane about a movie being shown in the back of the plane. On what planet is that a reasonable request???
[also added] I shouldn't have made the critical reading quip, that was rude of me. That being said, we must assume that the author who wrote the article had the facts when he wrote it. If not, we can't rely on any piece of the article at all. At the very least, everyone can agree that the article does not have the full story. I hope we can also agree that it is likely sensationalized. We may not be able to agree that he asked to speak with the captain, but we should be able to agree that he did ask the flight attendant to speak with a pilot at the very least.
Additionally, I hope we can all agree that asking the flight attendant to speak with the captain about a movie playing is an unreasonable request. Even more so, we can agree that diverting the plane for a person not getting up from their seat and not yelling or making threats is probably the wrong decision.
One thing we don't know though, is whether he was up from his seat. If he was standing in the flight bridge asking to speak to the captain, that would make this situation much different than if he were sitting in his seat.