[quote=@SleepingSilence] It takes him quite a long time to kill three people on horseback within pistol range, when he can kill a dozen or more people in a moving car in the same amount of time. But logic aside, the rest of the beginning has a lot of build up and scenes of characters talking. (That ultimately doesn't do much for the plot. Unless you count the after-credits scene.)[/quote] It is harder to kill someone on horseback that is running away from you than it is to kill someone who is coming towards you in a car. For one thing you're not having to deal with the entire "riding on a horse" thing. Those scenes of characters talking absolutely does much for the plot. It literally establishes the plot! The Marquis shows Winston the consequences of his actions which gives Winston his motivation for his actions later! It introduces Caine and that directly leads to the bad guys finding where John is at because of Caine's history with John! It introduces and explains the backstory of Koji! These things are all related to the plot! [quote]So I admittedly don’t remember how bloody the movies were or weren’t off hand. But fortunately, I have Youtube to back me up. Watch this and tell me there’s not plenty of blood spray when he shoots people/more blood on John Wick as he carries through the movie. [youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyHjvZltClU[/youtube][/quote] The most blood in John Wick 2 is in the suicide part and nothing in the 10 minutes I watched was any more or less bloody than these movies typically get. [quote]And the little bit that gets on the drum, is some of the only blood in that action set piece, and it only makes its absence all the more confusing to me.[/quote] It is because the bad guys in that action set piece are wearing armor. You're not going to see a lot of blood when there's dudes walking around with tactical armor. Which was introduced as a concept in the third movie. Which also didn't have bloodspray when he was killing armored dudes. [quote]I don’t mind that he’s usually over the top invulnerable. But he also has several “i’m an old guy” moments, like how comically he fell down those stairs (several times). So it feels a bit tonally off as well. Mixed in with how he never has any blood, dirt or tears on his clothes.[/quote] He didn't fall down the stairs, he was pushed down them. By the bad guys trying to stop him. It wasn't several times either. He had blood and dirt on his shirt. He didn't on his suit jacket. Because it's bulletproof. It's a full Kevlar suit jacket. [quote]And he certainly took the most punishment in this one, and it seemed the least realistic in terms of how “tired/worn out” he looked after the fact. (Non-spoilers aside.)[/quote] He spends damn near the entire last act of the movie running on pure adrenaline. The movie doesn't spend its time showing you the downtime between story beats because that's how people get to like "when do they poop?" levels. But considering he travels to more than one location multiple times, it's fair to assume that he was tired and worn out between those parts. [quote](IMO) The bounty felt a lot less impactful this time around. Because it was sort of “dropped” into the story, and all the set up for it was in the third movie. [i]Unless I’m mistaken.[/i] So “oh, uh, we raised the price to a [b]gazillion[/b] dollars”. Doesn’t hold much narrative weight. When “everyone is after you” has already been established.[/quote] This movie picks up pretty much right after the third, give or take some days, and the bounty was still in play as evidenced by a character in the movie checking his active bounty multiple times. It wasn't dropped into the story, it was just finally used again when the villain decided to use it to his advantage. The difference between the third and this is it's not "everyone is after him" but rather "the people who are in charge of the world he is part of are after him." [quote]And for how often they set up how he’s “going in alone, with no allies, and with everyone else against him”. The amount of times that he gets helped in this one, is a bit contradictory.[/quote] How is it contradictory? One of his 'allies' straight up says that his bounty isn't high enough for him to consider being his enemy and another of them has his own agenda. He has two main allies that have been around since the first and second movie respectively and he is pretty much on his own for the duration. [quote]The omniscient radio announcer, and how all these assassins kept finding him/attacking him while going to multiple locations in less than 24 hours feels a tad farfetched. (The third movie at least gave them several days to hunt him down. [i]Unless I’m mistaken.[/i]) But nitpicking what makes sense or doesn’t, really isn’t my point/goal.[/quote] The omniscient radio announcer likely has someone reporting to her so she can relay it. It was more than 24 hours and when the radio announcer stuff happened there was a limited time frame. Also, it's not difficult for people to track him down in that instance when someone was saying where he was spotted and he's in an area of a famous city near very known locations and while knowing his ultimate destination. [quote]Expensive-looking doesn’t *have* to be a purely negative critique. In fact, I’d argue that this might be “the best looking” John Wick movie, in terms of how elaborate the set design was at times. (That top-down perspective scene alone probably cost them plenty.) But the proof is in the pudding. John Wick 4’s budget is 100 million. The third was 75. 2nd was 40. Etc. I’ll agree that money alone doesn’t make a “well shot”/“well remembered” movie. I can’t even recall much of anything that happened in the third movie compared to the first two.[/quote] The increase of budget is more a sign of the studio realizing these movies are worth the investment. But yes it is the best looking and best shot movie in the franchise. I remember a lot of the third movie. He killed a guy with a book in that movie! It was so sick! [quote]Honestly, one of the weaker points of all of the John Wick movies, is how their endings are usually pretty lackluster. At least in comparison to some of its other scenes and spectacle moments. (2 probably having the best conclusion of the bunch?) Maybe because “great villains” were never the movies’ strong suit. Otherwise, I agree that most action movies pale in comparison.[/quote] I think the endings of 2 and 3 were weaker pretty much because they were designed to be cliffhangers which never feel as satisfying as more definitive endings regardless of how good the movie preceding it was. [quote]See video clip of Two again, and I see a crowd of reasonably panicked people. First one has a similar party crowd/reaction.[/quote] And most of the people are just standing around and looking. And there are people panicking and hiding in the similar scene in 4. There are people literally running away in the middle of it. But the distinct difference in the two is that in one scene John is shooting very loud guns and in the other he is using no guns and the music is much louder. Also in the second movie he shoots someone on stage and people cheer! [quote]I won’t spoil more than I have to. But there’s so many “homages” that I’m surprised no one gave the movie any flak for it. Not even its few critics, far as I saw...[/quote] Because they're good homages. They had an homage to Lawrence of Arabia, even! It's really good! [quote]Bland might be more accurate. No good lines. No personality. And I never saw them as a threat. And he was never in control, or shown to be intimidating to any other character. Sure, he’s not actually General Hux bad. (Aside from his final scene, when he has a “I believe he’s pranking you sir” moment.) He’s more of a “that one smarmy kid who killed his dog” vibe. But we’re supposed to believe that this kid has some high level of power. (And the other side-villains were pretty bad too.) Guess that's just my two cents. [/quote] Not shown to be intimidating? His introduction had him intimidating the unflappable Winston and then there's the part with the Tracker. We're supposed to believe he has a high level of power because we are told that he is acting with the authority of the governing body of the entire underworld that the movie takes place in. He literally shows his power from moment one. He literally threatens people to get him to do what he wants because those people are well aware he is more than capable and willing to carry out those threats without a moment's hesitation. That he is arrogant is a character flaw, which all good characters have.