Follow TV Tropes

Following

History Film / TheNegotiator

Go To

OR

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** The three pieces of evidence that seems to "blatantly" point to his guilt are: 1. He was caught by the police at the scene of Nate's murder. 2. The gun that was found in the lake was in his name. 3. The offshore money statements found in his house. In reality, not only could these three pieces of "major" evidence be easily explained by Danny's insistence that he is being set up, but it is all circumstantial at best (He could have been in the wrong place at the wrong time, the gun could have been stolen, the money statements could have been planted). In the end, it would look very suspicious at best, but most certainly shouldn't be enough to at least convict him unless there is other evidence that is much more explicit. Yet, the movie acts as if there is no hope for him at all.

to:

** The three pieces of evidence that seems to "blatantly" point to his guilt are: 1. He was caught by the police at the scene of Nate's murder. 2. The gun that was found in the lake was in his name.one of three guns that went missing when Roman recovered them from being stolen by someone. 3. The offshore money statements found in his house. In reality, not only could these three pieces of "major" evidence be easily explained by Danny's insistence that he is being set up, but it is all circumstantial at best (He could have been in the wrong place at the wrong time, the gun could have been stolen, stolen by the villains during the incident, the money statements could have been planted). In the end, it would look very suspicious at best, but most certainly shouldn't be enough to at least convict him unless there is other evidence that is much more explicit. Yet, the movie acts as if there is no hope for him at all.

Added: 790

Changed: 787

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* HollywoodLaw: Per the standard with most miscarriage of justice films, the idea of Danny being framed and surely convicted for the evidence in this film is complete nonsense. The three pieces of evidence that seems to "blatantly" point to his guilt are: 1. He was caught by the police at the scene of Nate's murder. 2. The gun that was found in the lake was in his name. 3. The offshore money statements found in his house. In reality, not only could these three pieces of "major" evidence be easily explained by Danny's insistence that he is being set up, but it is all circumstantial at best (He could have been in the wrong place at the wrong time, the gun could have been stolen, the money statements could have been planted). In the end, it would look very suspicious at best, but most certainly shouldn't be enough to at least convict him unless there is other evidence that is much more explicit. Yet, the movie acts as if there is no hope for him at all.

to:

* HollywoodLaw: Per the standard with most miscarriage of justice films, the idea of Danny being framed and surely convicted for the evidence in this film is complete nonsense.
**
The three pieces of evidence that seems to "blatantly" point to his guilt are: 1. He was caught by the police at the scene of Nate's murder. 2. The gun that was found in the lake was in his name. 3. The offshore money statements found in his house. In reality, not only could these three pieces of "major" evidence be easily explained by Danny's insistence that he is being set up, but it is all circumstantial at best (He could have been in the wrong place at the wrong time, the gun could have been stolen, the money statements could have been planted). In the end, it would look very suspicious at best, but most certainly shouldn't be enough to at least convict him unless there is other evidence that is much more explicit. Yet, the movie acts as if there is no hope for him at all.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* HollywoodLaw: Per the standard with most miscarriage of justice films, the idea of Danny being framed and surely convicted for the evidence in this film is complete nonsense. The three pieces of evidence that seems to "blatantly" point to his guilt are: 1. He was caught by the police at the scene of Nate's murder. 2. The gun that was found in the lake was in his name. 3. The offshore money statements found in his house. In reality, not only could these three pieces of "major" evidence be easily explained by Danny's insistence that he is being set up, but it is all circumstantial at best (He could have been in the wrong place at the wrong time, the gun could have been stolen, the money statements could have been planted). In the end, it would look very suspicious at best, but most certainly shouldn't be enough to at least convict him unless there is other evidence that is much more explicit. Yet, the movie acts as if there is no hope for him at all.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* LaserSight: Used by Palermo, the HRT sniper, when lining up a shot on Danny. It both tells the audience he has a shot, and helps justify [[spoiler:the SWAT team putting down their guns and surrendering - they think he's about to be shot]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Disambiguated.


* StockholmSyndrome: Justified; the hostages come over to his side once they realize he's being set up, and he's apologetic about having to put them through it all to clear his name. Not completely, though; as much as [[spoiler:Maggie]] might have come sympathize with Danny, a reminder of the likely consequences of silence gets them to spill what they know.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* RightUnderTheirNoses: A rare accidental example. [[spoiler:Danny spends the entire movie looking for the mastermind behind the embezzlement scheme and Roenick's murder. The mastermind in question was Frost, one of Danny's hostages the entire time.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* OnlySaneMan: Between the JurisdictionFriction between the LAPD and FBI agents, the overaggressive attempts by the Chicago PD to resolve the hostage situation that results in two SWAT officers being captured [[spoiler:and the actual dirty cops trying to find any excuse to kill Danny]] Sabian emerges as this. He gives out multiple WhatTheHellHero speeches to the cops in particular, reminding them that their top priority should be saving the lives of the hostages.

to:

* OnlySaneMan: Between the JurisdictionFriction between the LAPD Chicago PD and FBI agents, the overaggressive attempts by the Chicago PD cops to resolve the hostage situation that results in two SWAT officers being captured [[spoiler:and the actual dirty cops trying to find any excuse to kill Danny]] Sabian emerges as this. He gives out multiple WhatTheHellHero speeches to the cops in particular, reminding them that their top priority should be saving the lives of the hostages.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* OnlySaneMan: Between the JurisdictionFriction between the LAPD and FBI agents, the overaggressive attempts by the LAPD to resolve the hostage situation that results in two SWAT officers being captured [[spoiler:and the actual dirty cops trying to find any excuse to kill Danny]] Sabian emerges as this. He gives out multiple WhatTheHellHero speeches to the LAPD cops in particular, reminding them that their top priority should be saving the lives of the hostages.

to:

* OnlySaneMan: Between the JurisdictionFriction between the LAPD and FBI agents, the overaggressive attempts by the LAPD Chicago PD to resolve the hostage situation that results in two SWAT officers being captured [[spoiler:and the actual dirty cops trying to find any excuse to kill Danny]] Sabian emerges as this. He gives out multiple WhatTheHellHero speeches to the LAPD cops in particular, reminding them that their top priority should be saving the lives of the hostages.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* TheAce: Both Danny and Sabian are top hostage negotiators. This leads to an interesting dynamic where both of them are constantly reading each other and generally doing a good job anticipating what the other does, such as Chris not initially bothering to talk Danny down due to how he normally would have expected it and Danny calling Chris out for pretending to be on his side during their first meeting.

Added: 586

Changed: 284

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* FakeKillScare: [[spoiler: Roman insinuates over the phone that he killed a hostage to prove that he was serious after a failed SWAT breach. This charade is kept up as a ploy by Roman for some time to gain leverage, before Danny reveals to Chris as he prepares his escape that it was only this trope.]]

to:

* FakeKillScare: Twice.
** When Farley is trying to talk Danny down, Danny threatens to kill someone if Farley says the word "no." When Farley accidentally say no, Danny fires a gunshot into the air. Rudy confirms moments later that they're all fine and Danny was probably just screwing with [[ButtMonkey Farley]] anyway.
**
[[spoiler: Roman insinuates over the phone that he killed a hostage to prove that he was serious after a failed SWAT breach. This charade is kept up as a ploy by Roman for some time to gain leverage, before Danny reveals to Chris as he prepares his escape that it was only this trope.]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
This is never implied in the movie


* InternalAffairs: Internal Affairs cop Niebaum is a sinister {{Jerkass}} who is quick to accuse the main character of embezzling from the police disability fund and murdering his partner, even though Danny's DeadPartner questioned Niebaum's trustworthiness before dying. Danny ends up taking Niebaum hostage to try and get some answers, with Niebaum remaining oddly silent throughout most of the ordeal. [[spoiler:Eventually, it's confirmed that after being given the evidence needed to arrest the embezzlers, they bribed him to cover up their misdeeds. He told them who had ratted them out, and inadvertently got Roenick killed as he refused to take their dirty money. It's also implied that if Niebaum refused in the first place, he would've been killed earlier instead of after revealing their identities to Danny]].

to:

* InternalAffairs: Internal Affairs cop Niebaum is a sinister {{Jerkass}} who is quick to accuse the main character of embezzling from the police disability fund and murdering his partner, even though Danny's DeadPartner questioned Niebaum's trustworthiness before dying. Danny ends up taking Niebaum hostage to try and get some answers, with Niebaum remaining oddly silent throughout most of the ordeal. [[spoiler:Eventually, it's confirmed that after being given the evidence needed to arrest the embezzlers, they bribed him to cover up their misdeeds. He told them who had ratted them out, and inadvertently got Roenick killed as he refused to take their dirty money. It's also implied that if Niebaum refused in the first place, he would've been killed earlier instead of after revealing their identities to Danny]].misdeeds]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added: 533

Changed: 239

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* BribeBackfire: [[spoiler:Roenick rejects the same bribe that Niebaum took, forcing Frost and the co-conspirators to have him killed and set Danny up, kicking off the events of the film. It's especially ironic since Frost admits to Sabian that they spent most of their embezzled money setting Danny up in the first place.]]



* ScrewTheRulesImDoingWhatsRight: Palermo has a clear shot at Danny during a breach and is ordered to shoot, but Palermo believes Danny's innocence and refuses to fire, and is relieved from duty as a result.

to:

* ScrewTheRulesImDoingWhatsRight: ScrewTheMoneyIHaveRules: [[spoiler:Roenick rejecting a bribe offer to keep him quiet about the disability fund embezzlement fund. It's what gets him killed.]]
* ScrewTheRulesImDoingWhatsRight:
**
Palermo has a clear shot at Danny during a breach and is ordered to shoot, but Palermo believes Danny's innocence and refuses to fire, and is relieved from duty as a result.

Top