John Wick 2

mcgsxr · « **on:** 31 May 2017, 12:39 pm »

I am a fan of the first John Wick movie. I found Keanu believable as that character, in fact I thought it really maximized his natural acting which can fail miserably in the wrong roles.

This 2nd movie is similar but different. Sure it continues on with great action (some very well shot martial arts scenes as expected, and TONS of gun play) and it carries the character in the world he lives in well, BUT for me it was less engaging.

The first movie pulled you in with a combination of "the old I want to retire BUT YOU JUST WON'T LET ME" theme with the revenge type motives well. The second (for me for sure) fails to make the same parallels in the same way.

If you like REALLY action driven movies that to my eye mimic first person shooting video games as much as action movies, this one will really turn your crank. It is nearly constant action, with a few Bond/Arnold quips tossed in along the way.

6/10 for me. Good plane movie for sure.

branislav · « **Reply #1 on:** 31 May 2017, 01:30 pm »

My friend and I watched the first one and we both thought it was one of the worst movies ever, and we've seen hundreds...just thought I'd throw it out there.

Bob in St. Louis · « **Reply #2 on:** 31 May 2017, 02:50 pm »

Acting aside, Keanu is "the real deal" when it comes to handing a gun, he's not faking it.
Check this out:
https://youtu.be/rCIgpUTvfsA

EDIT: WARNING, this forum has rules against guns, so don't click on that if you don't want to see a man practicing weapons training.

Hugh · « **Reply #3 on:** 31 May 2017, 03:41 pm »

Quote from: mcgsxr on 31 May 2017, 12:39 pm

I am a fan of the first John Wick movie. I found Keanu believable as that character, in fact I thought it really maximized his natural acting which can fail miserably in the wrong roles.

This 2nd movie is similar but different. Sure it continues on with great action (some very well shot martial arts scenes as expected, and TONS of gun play) and it carries the character in the world he lives in well, BUT for me it was less engaging.

The first movie pulled you in with a combination of "the old I want to retire BUT YOU JUST WON'T LET ME" theme with the revenge type motives well. The second (for me for sure) fails to make the same parallels in the same way.

If you like REALLY action driven movies that to my eye mimic first person shooting video games as much as action movies, this one will really turn your crank. It is nearly constant action, with a few Bond/Arnold quips tossed in along the way.

6/10 for me. Good plane movie for sure.

I feel the same way.

mcgsxr · « **Reply #4 on:** 31 May 2017, 10:04 pm »

Quote from: branislav on 31 May 2017, 01:30 pm

My friend and I watched the first one and we both thought it was one of the worst movies ever, and we've seen hundreds...just thought I'd throw it out there.

I can understand that. It is not for everyone for sure. There are a lot of movies I did not like either, that folks seem to love!

I have followed Keanu's career for a long time (Bill and Ted's timeframe) and he can be well cast if the director considers his abilities - I feel anyway. Naturally the corollary is true!

nhatduongchi · « **Reply #5 on:** 1 Jun 2017, 04:47 am »

I thought the second movie is ok, same blue print as the first one.

S Clark · « **Reply #6 on:** 3 Jul 2017, 04:30 am »

Just watched this a couple of days ago, and watched it with my wife this evening- stayed entertained counting the take downs. In a movie of 122 minutes, including credits, there were 113 killed/maimed/incapacitated.
What a bizarre form of entertainment we have developed. Not too sure about what it says about the violent nature of the American culture.

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #7 on:** 3 Jul 2017, 04:36 am »

I liked the second as well, looking forward to the third. IMO the stylized hyper-violence fits into the graphic novel feel that the films were aiming for (according to the director). I'm not sure it really says much about a violent nature of the culture. Lots of films are violent, lots are sexual, lots are both. It's art, not a portrayal of real life.

S Clark · « **Reply #8 on:** 3 Jul 2017, 05:07 am »

Good call comparing Wick 2 to a video game. Nearly one kill per minute is hard to work into a plot. Also agree that none but the severely damaged would confuse these type flicks with real life. But how do they affect us, and what does it say that we find them entertaining. I'm not exactly on my high horse preaching... I like my sex and violence as well as the next red blooded American. But is it not disturbing that we don't find the portrayal of such violence disturbing? I have always found something disquieting about that level of portrayed violence, and would not allow those types of video games in the house.
A couple of decades ago, my wife, myself, and my 9 year old daughter were in Spain for several weeks. On broadcast TV there was practically no violence, no guns, no killings, but lots of buttocks and boobs. Little doubt Americans view acceptable entertainment differently from the rest of the world.

Bob in St. Louis · « **Reply #9 on:** 3 Jul 2017, 02:55 pm »

Wasn't it Scarface that dropped the F-bomb like 120+ times?

srb · « **Reply #10 on:** 3 Jul 2017, 03:26 pm »

Quote from: Bob in St. Louis on 3 Jul 2017, 02:55 pm

Wasn't it Scarface that dropped the F-bomb like 120+ times?

Actually, I'm pretty sure the record goes to The Big Lebowski!

Bob in St. Louis · « **Reply #11 on:** 3 Jul 2017, 03:35 pm »

Well I did some checking....

The Wolf of Wall Street 506 times!

Summer of Sam 435 times

There's more here; http://www.imdb.com/list/ls006569744/

srb · « **Reply #12 on:** 3 Jul 2017, 03:42 pm »

An even more comprehensive list on Wikipedia ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_that_most_frequently_use_the_word_%22fuck%22

Well now it seems like the Big Lebowski wasn't even trying!

Bob in St. Louis · « **Reply #13 on:** 3 Jul 2017, 03:46 pm »

Wow!

Yea, Scarface at 207 seems like Sesame Street compared to some of those.

Phil A · « **Reply #14 on:** 3 Jul 2017, 06:06 pm »

Thought it was entertaining. The Dolby Atmos soundtrack was outstanding on the Blu-Ray.

cujobob · « **Reply #15 on:** 3 Jul 2017, 11:53 pm »

Quote from: branislav on 31 May 2017, 01:30 pm

My friend and I watched the first one and we both thought it was one of the worst movies ever, and we've seen hundreds...just thought I'd throw it out there.

Everyone has their own tastes in film and watches one with different intentions. John Wick, to me, was an interesting take on an action film that had enough backstory to make you root for the character and didn't try to pretend the plot was anything deeper than what it was. Denzel Washington was in a film that was similar to John Wick around the same time but had much more backstory (yet was missing quite a bit), but was also very enjoyable IMO. The sequel to John Wick was fun though I thought it was a bit annoying how they made everyone in the city a hitman. Keanu Reeves very much works as an action star IMHO, but don't expect them to be deeper films than those Arnold used to star in.

brother love · « **Reply #16 on:** 4 Jul 2017, 01:10 pm »

Quote from: srb on 3 Jul 2017, 03:42 pm

An even more comprehensive list on Wikipedia ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_that_most_frequently_use_the_word_%22fuck%22

Well now it seems like the Big Lebowski wasn't even trying!

Interesting lists Bob In St. Louis & srb. Who new...

The video game/ graphic novel/ comic book aspects of many movies certainly desensitizes one from violence (Kill Bill comes to mind). For me though, most war movies esp. a movie like Schindler's List is far more gut-wrenching, because it is reality-based.

Relating to the high body count in John Wick 2 as noted by S Clark, it got me curious. Here is a list of most deadliest films (quite surprising): https://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/oct/04/guardians-of-the-galaxy-deadliest-film-83871-deaths-jrr-tolkien

S Clark · « **Reply #17 on:** 4 Jul 2017, 02:23 pm »

But unlike warfare scenes, of the 113 killed/maimed in John Wick2, 111 were disposed of by the hero- up close and personal.

ss397 · « **Reply #18 on:** 4 Jul 2017, 04:21 pm »

While I enjoyed this film, I only rate it as slightly above average. Not as enjoyable as the original, a sad aspect of most sequels. In the first film the bad guy characters were more well developed, so you could see that they needed killing. In the sequel it was just an endless number of undeveloped henchmen and hitmen, and just overkill. More effort needed to be put into the plot in my opinion. But movies are sold to teenagers and they probably eat this up.

Bob in St. Louis · « **Reply #19 on:** 4 Jul 2017, 06:13 pm »

Quote from: ss397 on 4 Jul 2017, 04:21 pm

While I enjoyed this film, I only rate it as slightly above average. Not as enjoyable as the original, a sad aspect of most sequels. In the first film the bad guy characters were more well developed, so you could see that they needed killing. In the sequel it was just an endless number of undeveloped henchmen and hitmen, and just overkill. More effort needed to be put into the plot in my opinion. But movies are sold to teenagers and they probably eat this up.

I'd agree with that. I'll be the first guy to claim loving these "shallow, action packed explosion filled movies", but this one was just an excuse....
The first one made you root for the good guy. This one, I didn't care much, there was no passion. I enjoyed it, but see no reason to watch it twice unlike the first one.

On the other hand, I thought the sound effects for the gunshots were amazing. You could actually hear the gun cycle, not just a simple "pop pop".
The rear channel effects were above average as well, much more "ear candy" from the back speakers.
I was disappointed that in the beginning scene with the Mustang, they could have turned the (stupid) music off and given some of that fine exhaust note it's few minutes of glory. Such awesome potential lost to horrible music.