I don't mean to play the prig, but the kid was withholding evidence. Are we really meant to be on his side? Surely it's more rational to hope that the forces of law and order get the information out of that little pipsqueak in the end.
Of course, it's perfectly possible to sympathise with someone who's thwarting the police - under circumstances other than these. Were the police evil, or incompetent? No. Was the child at all likeable? No. Did the child have a rational reason for keeping silent? No. (By the way, his justification for all of his questionable beliefs about the wider world was, `I seen it on TV' - presumably we were meant to sigh and say, `How cute.') Did anything at all interesting or exciting happen at any point during the movie to distract us from the annoying premise? Not that I noticed.
After two hours' of static stand-off there is a contrived ending - the child and his lawyer don't say, `Well, I suppose we'd better do SOMETHING to resolve the plot, such as it is,' but what they do say is almost as lame. I don't think anyone was even trying.
Of course, it's perfectly possible to sympathise with someone who's thwarting the police - under circumstances other than these. Were the police evil, or incompetent? No. Was the child at all likeable? No. Did the child have a rational reason for keeping silent? No. (By the way, his justification for all of his questionable beliefs about the wider world was, `I seen it on TV' - presumably we were meant to sigh and say, `How cute.') Did anything at all interesting or exciting happen at any point during the movie to distract us from the annoying premise? Not that I noticed.
After two hours' of static stand-off there is a contrived ending - the child and his lawyer don't say, `Well, I suppose we'd better do SOMETHING to resolve the plot, such as it is,' but what they do say is almost as lame. I don't think anyone was even trying.