John wick - A step to far

ChroniC · 31 Jan 2016 at 00:45

I saw this film when it was first released but at the time thought nothing of it. However on re-watching it from sky movies, it dawned on me how extremely graphic and violent this film is compared to normal action films. The brutality of his actions are made exponentially worse by leaving no innocent (security) man alive, compared to your usual revenge film. Coupled with his single shot assassinations , which is far more realistic than your average many clip action heroes.
It made me wonder how it was so easily allowed by the film review board and how unemotional I felt when watching it. Almost as if death meant nothing to watch and that I have been purposely desensitized by Hollywood.

I almost agree with the crazy left wing that certain things are a step to far.

Thoughts on my musings? (sorry if you thought this was a sequel) lol

Raymond Lin · 31 Jan 2016 at 01:02

I thought it was great because of those points.

How the action is allowed to breath by the shot being wide and you see what's going on and the guns actually runs out of bullets and he actually need to reload.

hyperseven · 31 Jan 2016 at 01:07

but they killed his dog and knicked his car, what do you expect.

pecnarf · 31 Jan 2016 at 01:27

well it did good enough to warrant a greenlight been given for a sequel.

Uncle Petey · 31 Jan 2016 at 01:40

hyperseven said:
but they killed his dog and knicked his car, what do you expect.

This.

I just wished that Theon had received a more graphic demise...

I don't really think it was that much worse than anything in it's genre tbh, but I do agree with the whole desensitization thing.

Wizzfizz · 31 Jan 2016 at 02:53

I really enjoyed it and it had some fantastic set pieces

Hotwired · 31 Jan 2016 at 02:54

What is this, murderous rampage after a guy has his dog stolen.

Keanu Reeves?

DL as I type.

George Hincapie · 31 Jan 2016 at 03:00

It is one of the few movies KR doesn't suck in. Loved it.

Malevolence · 31 Jan 2016 at 04:49

ChroniC said:
The brutality of his actions are made exponentially worse by leaving no innocent (security) man alive,

I suggest you rewatch it then, and this time concentrate more on watching the film than on thinking up your critique. Because just off the top of my head I can remember him telling a huge bearded Russian bouncer to "take the night off" after he appeared from the shadows behind him with his gun drawn and pointed at the back of his head. To which the bouncer simply replied, "thank you, sir"!

Si. · 31 Jan 2016 at 06:13

+1

sort of watched it a while ago because there was nothing else.. great move and one of the best of it's type.. the single shot to the head kills is what you would expect from a professional killer rather than the usual bullet spraying killers.

snapdragon · 31 Jan 2016 at 07:13

*Barring news coverage / documentaries etc

Things that happen on a screen be it cinema, tv, pc / console - things I don't need to worry about.

Things that happen outside of my window - things I ought to worry about.

physichull · 31 Jan 2016 at 07:58

It wasn't the best film I've ever seen, but because it was so different to your usual action flick, I really enjoyed it. And as Raymond said, probably for the reasons in the OP.

Somnambulist · 31 Jan 2016 at 09:02

There are very few action films that don't trivialise killing and death to some degree, excluding (for the most part) the hero(es) and people immediately around them. Same with games. It's a bit messed up if you think about it, but then most of the time it's not the sort of content that demands or encourages much thinking - physical conflict or obstacles are much easier to portray on screen than internal ones and adversaries are dehumanised to the point where you think nothing of it when they're popped off.

Same sort of thing as how we don't blink when kids are playing soldiers etc.

Vonhelmet · 31 Jan 2016 at 09:06

Go read the bbfc website if you want to know why it made it through as a 15.

Sirrel Squirrel · 31 Jan 2016 at 09:09

What about Taken, he didn't mess about either.

I think given the situations he was in he didn't have much choice other then to shoot to kill albeit he did kill a hell of a lot of people.

I really enjoyed the film, the action scenes were brilliant and I like the way they flowed without loads of fast cuts.

Midlife Crisis · 31 Jan 2016 at 09:11

I cannot see a problem after all you do not XXXX with a mans wheels let alone snuff out his dog.

Edrof · 31 Jan 2016 at 11:46

The 'main' action scene where Reeves storms that club and takes down a series of bad guys is not at all realistic.

Vonhelmet · 31 Jan 2016 at 14:04

Edrof said:
The 'main' action scene where Reeves storms that club and takes down a series of bad guys is not at all realistic.

That's a big part of these things. Highly unrealistic stylised violence is more readily tolerated than graphic realistic violence.

ChroniC · 31 Jan 2016 at 14:06

What gets me is the "revenge" on one man, I must murder 50 people who are just doing a job, over a dog none the less (dead wife present or not) but it's the headshots that make it worse. It's sadistically chilling in comparison to easily ignored stupid spray and pray action heroes, whose skill comes mostly from Hollywood fake reality. John Wick to me is almost like watching a snuff film.

Vonhelmet · 31 Jan 2016 at 14:15

I think you're seriously overthinking this.

Besides, they're not "innocent". They're gangsters. They're fair game. Again, this is much more tolerated with defined villains, rather than torture of innocents or whatever.