Home > Drama >

Liberty Stands Still

Liberty Stands Still (2002)

January. 18,2002
| Drama Action Thriller

As the heir and current marketing director for one of the nation's biggest gun manufacturers, Liberty Wallace is indifferent to the atrocities made possible through her business and her CEO husband, Victor. On her way to see her actor lover, Liberty ends up chained to a food cart full of explosives -- all at the insistence of "Joe", a sniper whose young daughter was a victim of gun violence, and who now has Liberty in his sights.


Watch Trailer


Similar titles


Nadine Salakov

I reviewed "Phone Booth" a while back, and only heard of "Liberty Stands Still" a few months ago, it was released at the same time as "Phone Booth" and has a similar story line.When i watched "Liberty Stands Still" for the very first time, i was glued to my sofa, this movie is so riveting that i didn't even get up the whole time and get any snacks which is what i was planning to do."Liberty Stands Still" is better than "Phone Booth" simply due to the fact that there is not as much swearing as there is in "Phone Booth", also the plot for "Liberty Stands Still" is more mature, the bad guy is not over the top and the techno film score is even better than the score from "Phone Booth"."Liberty Stands Still" does have a few disturbing pieces of dialogue, as a Christian i did not like what was said about God at the beginning, and as an animal lover the dialogue about the Deer and the Deer cub is upsetting.It is clear "Phone Booth" got more hype than this film, it is highly likely that everyone has heard of "Phone Booth" and not many have heard of "Liberty Stands Still".The performances, scenarios, directing in this film is fantastic, and it is more gritty than "Phone Booth".

Robert J. Maxwell

This film was shot in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, but a TV newsman identifies it as Los Angeles. Why would the writers lie so openly? The city square in which Linda Fiorentino is handcuffed to a bomb-laden hot dog stand and frets simultaneously in the cross hairs of a sniper rifle, looks nothing like Los Angeles. The location here is wet, cold, full of naked deciduous trees, and at mid-day the sun is lower than it ever is in Los Angeles. The police patrol cars are labeled "Metropolitan Police." I'm not deeply in love with Southern California and its rampant anomi, but if you're shooting a movie in Vancouver or Toronto, why not label the city? Show its landmarks, use real street names, introduce some local color? Be PROUD, Oh Canada! Because otherwise, what you get is what you see here -- a faceless urban setting full of generic urbanites.Well, I'm glad I was able to get that off my chest. I'd like to thank you all for reading that uncrafted expression of exasperation so carefully. Thank you. And I'd like to thank my parents, who made it all possible.Speaking of rants, the movie has a slight anti-National-Rifle-Association slant, or so it seemed, because so many of life's evils, from school house slaughters to back-room BJs in the White House, are attributed to a misinterpretation of the second amendment.That's where Linda Fiorentino comes in. She's being held hostage in a public square because she's married to an international gun dealer who has corrupted half of the legislature, and she's been wheeling and dealing in illegal gun trades too. She's a self-indulgent, arrogant woman. I was glad when her captive told her to undress in the public square. It was GOOD to see her humiliated like that, but I wish she had turned around and faced the camera.The guy at the other end of the bullet trajectory is Wesley Snipes, whose daughter was killed during one of those school room massacres. He's out not just for revenge on the gun dealers. He wants a confession on national television about the corrupt relations between gun manufacturers, politicians, and the CIA.The plot could lead to an exceedingly static and boring situation -- a woman shackled to a hot dog stand, a man covering her with a rifle, and a lot of talk. But it holds up because, however murky all the machinations and motives are, the screenplay has enough jolts of adrenalin built into it that the viewer is kept alert.We grow to feel some pity for Snipes because of the manner of his daughter's death. That's a serious matter, although not as serious as my son's never having shown any interest in a medical career. Yet Snipes is no angel. He kills people in cold blood. First he nails a cop. "He was addicted and on the take." (So he deserve to be shot to death? Be sure to lock your door at night.) Then he shoots and kills a cheerful and innocent TV reporter for the sin of being born to a father who is corrupt. Wow.Much depends on the acting of the two principals and, a bit surprisingly, they're both pretty much up to the job. Abject resignation has never been Snipes' forte. He's a fine physical actor. Here, though, he manages to make the character believable. Linda Fiorentino is certainly a piquant woman. Sex aside, she's usually the one in command, like Snipes usually is. And that's how her character begins -- brusquely delivering orders over a cell phone. The real test comes towards the end, when she must project fear and guilt. She makes it, although a viewer can feel the tendons stretching, the ligaments popping, as she does so.Another movie with an almost identical theme came out in the same year, "Phone Booth." It's either a case of what anthropologists call "independent invention" or what the rest of us call "cheating." If it's the latter, everyone involved in both productions should be shot to death.

Michael O'Keefe

Liberty Wallace(Linda Fiorentino)and her husband(Oliver Platt)are partners in the business of weapons manufacturing. A mysterious gunman calling himself Joe(Wesley Snipes)calls Liberty on her cell phone luring her to a hot dog stand to which she is coerced into chaining herself. Joe tells her that if she hangs up her cell phone or it runs out of power a bomb strapped to the hot dog stand will go off. Joe is trying to make a point telling her that his daughter was killed in a school shooting with the same model high power rifle that is being targeted on her. Liberty is given the chance to actually die a hero if she is willing to make public dirty dealings her husband has made with political implications. When Mr. Wallace is informed of his wife's hostage situation; he must decide to protect himself, save his company or keep his wife from being killed. Also in the cast: Martin Cummins, Steve Pascal and Jonathan Scarfe.

Morfeus Ivanovich

God, I wish, I could get back those two hours I've spent watching this ridiculous piece of...cinematography. Almost every aspect of this movie is remarkably bad. First of all, it's the plot. I mean, c'mon, watching this movie is like watching 2 hours long politically correct (which in fact allows discrimination of white gun-owners) anti-gun commercial. So, let's see, what do we have here. Oh, it's the black guy, whose daughter was shot in school by some fun freak (bet he was from Alabama, right?). So the only way a father can retaliate is by kidnapping a businesswoman, who's in gun business (guess he didn't have the stomach to deal with a man) and playing some sick twisted psychological games with her. Anyway, afterwards he shoots a major gun manufactures and commits suicide. What can be more of a self-advertising for anti-gun groups? Acting is average. Fiorentino is not bad, but this part is just not her type, IMHO, she should stick with femme fatale parts. And Wesley Snipes as crazy-yet-honest-gunman-blinded-by-rage-but-still-politically-correct ? Give me a break! He is good as Blade, but this character is too complicated for him. Anyway, the movie as as whole is awful. And this being an awful movie, the question is - do you feel lucky, that you came across my review and decided not to watch this garbage, punk? :)