John Wick 1 and 2. Help me out here.
by Bluntschli (2017-03-18 21:57:15)
[ cannot delete ]   [ Edit ]   [ Return to Back Room ]   [ Show All Thread ]   [ Ignore Poster ]   [ Report Post ]   [ Highlight Poster ]   [ Reply ]

 


My memory is horrible. I thought John Wick was actually a good movie. I thought other BR posters said the same.

Am I misremembering, or did they take a pretty decent concept and production and completely tank it?

Because John Wick 2 might be the worst movie I've ever seen.


Escapism, but uncomfortable at times
by knutesteen  (2017-03-19 16:34:12)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I thought I was watching a first person shooter video game, as he stalked and double-tapped every victim.


Spoilers.
by Bluntschli  (2017-03-19 18:26:44)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

The video game aspect is one criticism. Another is that many action shots felt really contrived. I was taken out of the movie by sudden images of the director saying "wow this shot would be really cool - I want you to do this special flip with this gun." Obviously every action movie is chock full of scenes like that, but something about the editing made each one really stand out. Like there was a beat before and after the action, instead of being edited seamlessly in quick succession. It kind of felt like Keanu's physical limitations played into that somehow, too. Like the continuous flipping, rolling and fighting just couldn't be filmed seamlessly. Speaking of which, it really ended up feeling like the same five fights over and over. Obviously a consequence of the desired death toll - at some point it has to get monotonous. But after 20 minutes in - we get it, guys, Keanu knows BJJ.

My biggest complaint, though, was Wick's stupidity. At this point, though, I'm beginning to wonder if he is supposed to be some kind of idiot savant. He kept asking Winston and the other guy questions that as a member of that culture, he really should have known the answers to (sorry grammar). And then seemed really surprised when the obvious was pointed out to him.

So for example, in the opening scene - why ruin your car trying to "steal" it if you're capable of walking in and killing everyone, then drive it away?

Why do something you don't want to do (taking a job) because of the dire consequences, kill someone you don't want to kill, when you're still facing equally dire consequences because she has a seat at the table - and then end up facing the direst of all consequences - just to kill the same guy you wanted to kill in the first place?

And it wasn't just Wick. I really felt like I spent the entire film asking myself why this character was doing this dumbass thing.

Also, the scene at the end where every person in that entire park is revealed to be a part of this society? Meh.

Sorry, this post is probably pretty incoherent, just knocking it out on my phone pretty quick. I'm sure when it's streaming I'll do a double feature and reassess.


I felt like Dr. Evil's son at the dinner table.
by mkovac  (2017-03-21 12:10:01)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

"So, why don't all the assassins have, like, ten hand grenades, so they can, like, just toss a few and BANG! the movie's over and we can all go have pizza?"


I loved both films...
by irishrock  (2017-03-19 02:00:18)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I think John Wick has taken over where Jason Bourne left. I liked the Bourne series at the beginning but felt like they slipped, especially with Jeremy Renner doing a stint.

I've got to disagree with you on Wick 2. I can't remember the time I was so eager for a movie to start (saw it last week). The producer/directors/screenwriters have done a nice job with it. We'll see how Wick 3 turns out.


The biggest problem for Wick 3: Do they have enough
by drmurray  (2017-03-19 14:40:48)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

people in Hollywood left for Wick to kill?


You should ignore my movie advice. *
by Mark_It_Zero  (2017-03-19 01:41:04)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


BoardOps, fire this guy! *
by Porpoiseboy  (2017-03-18 23:27:23)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


You keep missing prime opportunities for tazings, bro *
by Stonebreaker9  (2017-03-19 07:55:11)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


My 2 cents.
by The Holtz Room  (2017-03-18 23:23:11)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

John Wick 1 was awesome. Finally we saw a movie when some flunky doesn't pop off a shot after being hit b/c Mr. Wick double-taps everybody. We are taken through a solid story with a high body count. My only complaint was gramps faring a little too well at the end. Since that was at the end of a hell of a day for Wick, I can let that go.

John Wick 2 is a bit of a victim of the original. With everything that made 1 great, how do you top that? 1) a fun "resolution" to 1's story. 2) higher body count. 3) THAT'S how the pencil works hung works! After that, you are left with a movie you've seen before. So many movie goers are looking for something "new". Those that aren't, well that's why the 8th "Fast and the Furious" installment is hitting theaters.

Perhaps the movie was too familiar and that's why you didn't like it.

I liked 2. I gave it a B. I probably would watch it if it was on HBO. It's nothing I'd add to my library (I do own the first).

If you are looking for recent, truly horrible films, I suggest "The Lobster" and "After the Wizard".


"The Lobster" was a truly terrible film.
by rkellyatrecess  (2017-03-19 01:54:28)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

They marketed it like it was the new "In Bruges" and it was anything but.


I loved The Lobster.
by Porpoiseboy  (2017-03-19 10:39:17)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I never saw it marketed in any way related to In Bruges.


Given the whole animal transformation, I'm not surprised. *
by The Holtz Room  (2017-03-19 13:40:29)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


POTD! *
by Porpoiseboy  (2017-03-20 08:42:49)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Those are worlds apart. "In Bruges" had a story & a point.
by The Holtz Room  (2017-03-19 08:24:36)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

"The Lobster" had neither.


oh man. think you'll have some strong disagreement there
by ndlarryj  (2017-03-18 22:57:44)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

i thought both were awesome.


The contents of this post represent the views of the author. NDNation.com is not responsible for its contents.