John Wick

Discussions about Movies & TV shows not "Super" related.
Post Reply
admin

Check out @AdriannePalicki's Tweet:

Like what you see on #AgentsofSHIELD? Watch me kick ass in #JohnWick, in theaters Friday! http://lions.gt/WickTrailer


phpBB [video]
User avatar
theScribbler
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 1039
Joined: 13 years ago

Yep, she was badass tonight on Agents of SHIELD, and John Wick looks to be fun too.

:tv:

Edit: I just took a look at rotten tomatoes, and the 14 critics that have chimed in so far give John Wick a tomatometer rating of 100% fresh.
the Scribbler

:christmastree:
If U C Xmas tree on TV show
it's Xmas Activism! :christmas:

:lynda1:
If U C attractive brunette in a movie

it's Dark Haired Women Activism!

Be very careful!
Don't B indoctrinated!
Cover your eyes! & ears!
:tv:
Lurkndog
Elder Member
Elder Member
Posts: 376
Joined: 13 years ago

John Wick is one of the best action/revenge flicks in years. Great action, a likeable hero, and a bunch of interesting pulp fiction touches in the setting and backstory.
User avatar
TIEnTEEZ
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 1246
Joined: 10 years ago

Meh. I didn't think it was all that great.

Maybe it's because I'm heavily into the martial arts but for me, the action scenes were terrible.

Wick is supposed to be this invincible killing machine, and in every scene he walks up to the bad guys and tears them apart, but it was so phony. There was nothing special or clever about his tactics. He demonstrated no special abilities or skills. He didn't outsmart anyone. His big move was to simply walk up to the bad guys while they empty their guns at him and missed every shot for some inexplicable reason and then beat the crap out of them 5 at a time.

It was like an old episode of the A-Team. Every show they fired more ammunition than the U.S. Military uses in a year and no one ever got shot.

The bad guys in John Wick must be the same guys who played the storm troopers in Star Wars. :-P
ttb51m
Sargeant 1st Class
Sargeant 1st Class
Posts: 237
Joined: 13 years ago

Well thats one way to look at it, of couse when u are constantly moving, and close the distance on your target with speed and aggression 9 times out of 10 the target will panic and freeze up which you can then shoot him in the face at a range that is impossible to miss, judo, kali muah tai boxing and a steady hand to pull the trigger are very difficult skill sets to master and doing all of them at once is pretty special , i understand its just acting and keanu would last 1.3 Sec witha trained operator but he still sold it well and i enjoyed the movie very much, i hope its a new franchise for him

that being said adriane paliki seems absolutley dreadful in everything i have seen her in, everything, she ruined several movies for me and didnt do the wonder woman movie any favors either, i just dont get how she keeps getting roles in things
User avatar
theScribbler
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 1039
Joined: 13 years ago

ttb51m wrote:that being said adriane paliki seems absolutley dreadful in everything i have seen her in, everything, she ruined several movies for me and didnt do the wonder woman movie any favors either, i just dont get how she keeps getting roles in things
And I think exactly the opposite, so might be why she keeps getting roles in things. That well-known phenomenon of people, including casting directors, having various views and sometimes different opinions, likes, dislikes, tastes, etc. :cap:
the Scribbler

:christmastree:
If U C Xmas tree on TV show
it's Xmas Activism! :christmas:

:lynda1:
If U C attractive brunette in a movie

it's Dark Haired Women Activism!

Be very careful!
Don't B indoctrinated!
Cover your eyes! & ears!
:tv:
ttb51m
Sargeant 1st Class
Sargeant 1st Class
Posts: 237
Joined: 13 years ago

theScribbler wrote:
ttb51m wrote:that being said adriane paliki seems absolutley dreadful in everything i have seen her in, everything, she ruined several movies for me and didnt do the wonder woman movie any favors either, i just dont get how she keeps getting roles in things
And I think exactly the opposite, so might be why she keeps getting roles in things. That well-known phenomenon of people, including casting directors, having various views and sometimes different opinions, likes, dislikes, tastes, etc. :cap:
it is nice of them to keep trying with her and she hasn't lost motivation, no one is being a quitter at the showbiz game that's for sure, keep plugging along no matter what the returns at the box office say or the critics or when the going rate for their service exponentially declines with each passing role or the roles themselves become more sporadic and shift from studio to studio down the hierarchy, but on the plus side no one gets typecast when they cant get cast as the same thing twice, but as you said everyone has an opinion and no ones opinion matters more than your own, opinions will always vary unless you are some how stuck in some sort of weird reality vortex where you can reorder everything to fit your version, then opinions only vary when you allow it.

wouldn't that be boring?

either way, even with its problem, john wick was a pretty good movie and I hope it was considered a big enough success to bring back the characters that survived the story line and make some sequels.

Tally-Ho (wink)
User avatar
theScribbler
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 1039
Joined: 13 years ago

ttb51m wrote:
theScribbler wrote:
ttb51m wrote:that being said adriane paliki seems absolutley dreadful in everything i have seen her in, everything, she ruined several movies for me and didnt do the wonder woman movie any favors either, i just dont get how she keeps getting roles in things
And I think exactly the opposite, so might be why she keeps getting roles in things. That well-known phenomenon of people, including casting directors, having various views and sometimes different opinions, likes, dislikes, tastes, etc. :cap:
it is nice of them to keep trying with her and she hasn't lost motivation, no one is being a quitter at the showbiz game that's for sure, keep plugging along no matter what the returns at the box office say or the critics or when the going rate for their service exponentially declines with each passing role or the roles themselves become more sporadic and shift from studio to studio down the hierarchy, but on the plus side no one gets typecast when they cant get cast as the same thing twice, but as you said everyone has an opinion and no ones opinion matters more than your own, opinions will always vary unless you are some how stuck in some sort of weird reality vortex where you can reorder everything to fit your version, then opinions only vary when you allow it.

wouldn't that be boring?

either way, even with its problem, john wick was a pretty good movie and I hope it was considered a big enough success to bring back the characters that survived the story line and make some sequels.

Tally-Ho (wink)
It's one thing to have opinions, it's another thing to make stuff up.

If by "them" you mean casting directors, it's not them being "nice:" it's them showing they know what they're doing. They select from a number of actors and choose who they think it best for the part.

Why would she, or any actor, lose "motivation" when they keep getting role after role, aka they keep getting hired/cast and it's their chosen profession.

"keep plugging along no matter what the returns at the box office say or the critics" : Not sure what returns at the box office and critics you're talking about. John Wick did well at box office, and most critics liked it (as did audiences).

"...when the going rate for their service exponentially declines..." You don't know her rate, and neither do I, but based on the roles she's getting, clearly it's not declining.

"the roles themselves become more sporadic" : What does that mean? I see no evidence of it. She's had some major feature film roles, and now is working for Disney/Marvel as Mockingbird on Agents of SHIELD.

"shift from studio to studio down the hierarchy" : Which isn't true, and has no real meaning in an industry where an actor can work on blockbuster films for a major studio, as well as work on smaller films like indie projects for smaller studios which is something actors like doing. And no one looks down on them for that. Unless I'm just not following you. What "down the hierarchy" are you talking about? Working for Disney/Marvel is definitely not "shift from studio to studio down the hierarchy."

"when they cant get cast as the same thing twice" : Who can't get cast in the same thing twice? If you mean same role twice, Adrianne's had a number of recurring roles.

It's fine if you don't like her, that's your opinion. But your statements that aren't opinion, but are just flat-out wrong statements, well, are wrong!
the Scribbler

:christmastree:
If U C Xmas tree on TV show
it's Xmas Activism! :christmas:

:lynda1:
If U C attractive brunette in a movie

it's Dark Haired Women Activism!

Be very careful!
Don't B indoctrinated!
Cover your eyes! & ears!
:tv:
ttb51m
Sargeant 1st Class
Sargeant 1st Class
Posts: 237
Joined: 13 years ago

theScribbler wrote:
ttb51m wrote:
theScribbler wrote:
ttb51m wrote:that being said adriane paliki seems absolutley dreadful in everything i have seen her in, everything, she ruined several movies for me and didnt do the wonder woman movie any favors either, i just dont get how she keeps getting roles in things
And I think exactly the opposite, so might be why she keeps getting roles in things. That well-known phenomenon of people, including casting directors, having various views and sometimes different opinions, likes, dislikes, tastes, etc. :cap:
it is nice of them to keep trying with her and she hasn't lost motivation, no one is being a quitter at the showbiz game that's for sure, keep plugging along no matter what the returns at the box office say or the critics or when the going rate for their service exponentially declines with each passing role or the roles themselves become more sporadic and shift from studio to studio down the hierarchy, but on the plus side no one gets typecast when they cant get cast as the same thing twice, but as you said everyone has an opinion and no ones opinion matters more than your own, opinions will always vary unless you are some how stuck in some sort of weird reality vortex where you can reorder everything to fit your version, then opinions only vary when you allow it.

wouldn't that be boring?

either way, even with its problem, john wick was a pretty good movie and I hope it was considered a big enough success to bring back the characters that survived the story line and make some sequels.

Tally-Ho (wink)
It's one thing to have opinions, it's another thing to make stuff up. (hmm ok,making stuff up? )

If by "them" you mean casting directors, it's not them being "nice:" it's them showing they know what they're doing. They select from a number of actors and choose who they think it best for the part.

(knowing what they are doing when it comes to budget and who they can get for the price they need to pay, didn't see Sandra bullock in the credits, maybe she just wasn't available, or dina myer, malin akerman, gina carano, plug in any one you want there, and you aren't seriously suggesting that AP is THE reason wick did well are you?) I am assuming you mean she is A reason it did well.

willem Dafoe was her supporting actor right?

Why would she, or any actor, lose "motivation" when they keep getting role after role, aka they keep getting hired/cast and it's their chosen profession.
(like cuba gooding jr is a huge box office draw these days with all the straight to dvd movies he is in, I would say stone cold steve austin isnt really gonna turn down a pay check but do you call that "getting cast" he gets lots of work, not sure its considered getting role after role.

"keep plugging along no matter what the returns at the box office say or the critics" : Not sure what returns at the box office and critics you're talking about. John Wick did well at box office, and most critics liked it (as did audiences).

see above, also I have googled AP and John wick, no one talks about her other than to mention she is in the film and the fight scene, well that I can find anyway, not that I did anything other than google it, plenty about Keanu and his come back some about willem, mcshane Leguizamo the kid from game of thrones the even the guy from the insurance commercials gets a little press, just because he is the guy from the commercials and this is his first film, not much more than a mention she is in the film as the "other assassin" and some quotes from her about her, so yes I concur john wick did do well

"...when the going rate for their service exponentially declines..." You don't know her rate, and neither do I, but based on the roles she's getting, clearly it's not declining.

ok so you go from quite a bit of screen time in gi joe to approx. 15 min all together on JW, you shoot a full pilot that never see the light of day outside bootlegs, I am sure the less you do on screen the more you get paid, that's just simple economics.

"the roles themselves become more sporadic" : What does that mean? I see no evidence of it. She's had some major feature film roles, and now is working for Disney/Marvel as Mockingbird on Agents of SHIELD.

2003 Getting Rachel Back Rachel Short
2003 Rewrite The Pretty Girl Short
2005 Popstar Whitney Addison
2006 Seven Mummies Isabelle
2009 Women in Trouble Holly Rocket
2010 Legion Charlie
2010 Elektra Luxx Holly Rocket
2011 Waves Girlfriend Short
2012 Red Dawn Toni Walsh
2013 G.I. Joe: Retaliation Lady Jaye
2013 Coffee Town Becca
2014 Dr. Cabbie Natalie Wilman
2014 John Wick Ms. Perkins

and which ones can you recall,,not you obviously but someone who has a simple passing fancy for movies? you know the plot of the movie and you knew she was in it. I came up with 4.

id say she is about 50/50 on tv, half go for a season or two (yes I know Friday night lights, 3 seasons) but then the other half fail epic like a pilot that doesn't get picked up or cancelled after two episodes X2)
(*wikipedia) two things on tv went for more than 5 episodes, most went for 2 episodes or less, several didn't even make it on tv, now, is that solely her fault? I cant imagine that, she was just supporting in every single one, except WW so where is the distinction? JW was successful because she supported as you have suggested, but the other movies and TV shows failed because of all the other leads and supporting actors, she was the only bright spot and if she had been the only one on screen they would have been 10 years worth of seasons or epic blockbusters, right?

"shift from studio to studio down the hierarchy" : Which isn't true, and has no real meaning in an industry where an actor can work on blockbuster films for a major studio, as well as work on smaller films like indie projects for smaller studios which is something actors like doing. And no one looks down on them for that. Unless I'm just not following you. What "down the hierarchy" are you talking about? Working for Disney/Marvel is definitely not "shift from studio to studio down the hierarchy."

I wont speak for actors I am not in the know, but you never hear them speak highly of TV when it isn't their show they are hocking,working for Disney on tv, and warner bros at the box office I would imagine can be considered a step down, how many tv shows have you seen glen close do, how many sitcoms do you remember Angelina Jolie cast as the lead in

"when they cant get cast as the same thing twice" : Who can't get cast in the same thing twice? If you mean same role twice, Adrianne's had a number of recurring roles. (on TV)

gi joe, she is credited as lead female role, JW she supporting, both action roles but clearly different in scope and I completely forgot she was in red dawn, but then again I tried to forget the remake all together

It's fine if you don't like her, that's your opinion. But your statements that aren't opinion, but are just flat-out wrong statements, well, are wrong!
anything I say is my opinion, anything you say is yours, agreed?
my opinion on work, my opinion on abilities and talent my opinion on what's more important between one thing or another one studio or another one role or another who actually makes a film better in a supporting role and adds to the story and who is just fodder and filler and in all fairness if my opinion was fine, it cant be wrong, its just my opinion and if we agree its my opinion and doesn't really matter to anyone but me where does that require a rebuttal and if my opinion was fine yours wouldn't matter, but to you, my opinion isn't fine because I didn't keep it to myself and I don't have the same opinion as you so therefore a response is necessary for you.

it is clearly obvious that you have a positive opinion of her and no opinion or fact will waiver that just like I stand by my original statement which didn't require any response at all, that she has ruined things for me by simply being on screen and I have actively considered avoiding things just because she is in them, as it happens my like of the trailer and Keanu outweighed my dislike for her, and I actually didn't realize she was in it till i heard her speak in the trailer but by then I already wanted to see the gun-fu.

this is all just your opinion of my opinion of an opinion.

and BTW apparently this was expected and I was warned, you don't disappoint, according to several people who gave me a heads up that you were going to respond (and you did) you apparently you have an AP fetish or something and don't show this kind of furor over any other subject, which is a little strange considering the format and location of this dialog and your last tirade in regards to this subject, maybe your needs would be satisfied a little more on IMDB or the AP fan club site, if there is one.

just a suggestion
User avatar
theScribbler
Millenium Member
Millenium Member
Posts: 1039
Joined: 13 years ago

Well, the above post layout is a bit messed up and not that easy to follow. There's a bit too much to respond to, but I'll try to hit some major themes. I salute your effort to try and answer some of my questions and comments, even though I don't quite follow some of it.

I suppose the main dispute is I like Adrianne and you really, really don't. I'm pretty sure fetish doesn't apply to a straight male who likes women, or specific woman, but pretending it does apply, then I suppose I must also have a fetish for Jessica Alba, Jessica Biel, Chloe Bennet, Scarlett Johansson, Lynda Carter, Lucy Lawless, Rebecca Romijn, Yvonne Craig, Julie Newmar, Raquel Welch, Michelle Pfeiffer, Stacy Keibler, Yvonne Strahovski, Gal Gadot, Jennifer Lawrence, Morena Baccarin, Sofia Vergara, and numerous others. So to your comment starting "that being said adriane paliki seems absolutley dreadful in everything..." if you substituted one of the above names instead, you can be confident that my reply would be the same as what I wrote: "And I think exactly the opposite..." So it's not only an AP fetish!

A lot of the facetious stuff doesn't merit much reply...but here's some (I don't write any of this with any harshness just in case it sounds that way)...

" you aren't seriously suggesting that AP is THE reason wick did well are you?"
I don't know where you got that, don't see where I suggested anything like that.

"knowing what they are doing when it comes to budget and who they can get for the price they need to pay.."
It's more than budget that goes into casting, like knowing the part being cast and picking the best actor for the part.

"ok so you go from quite a bit of screen time in gi joe to approx. 15 min all together on JW, you shoot a full pilot that never see the light of day outside bootlegs, I am sure the less you do on screen the more you get paid, that's just simple economics."
I'm guessing you meant this facetiously, but actually screen time does not determine pay. It's not simple economics, it's involved negotiations.

"you never hear them speak highly of TV,,,"
I do. Especially in recent years, with shows like Game of Thrones, Mad Men, Breaking Bad, etc. TV is much more highly thought of than it used to be. Not crap TV like reality TV, but bigger budget shows with great writing and production values. And it doesn't hurt the impression of TV these days when many homes have large screen LCD/LED HD TVs.

"how many tv shows have you seen glen close do, how many sitcoms do you remember Angelina Jolie cast as the lead in"
Glenn Close has done a lot of TV. Just cause Angelina, probably the biggest movie actress there is, isn't likely to do TV currently, doesn't mean TV isn't highly regarded.

"anything I say is my opinion, anything you say is yours, agreed?"
As far as opinions go, sure, but not everything we say is opinion.

If you say Adrianne "can't get cast as the same thing twice" and I say she's had a number of recurring roles, what I'm saying is a verifiable statement, not an opinion. I don't think it's all that important though, just using as an example.

"in all fairness if my opinion was fine, it cant be wrong"
I have to disagree. I don't know if you meant 'fine' or 'mine' but either way, I've seen many times when opinions can be wrong. Like guessing that Palicki was only cast for JW cause she met their payment criteria, and not cause she was their first choice as an actress for the role.

I can agree that opinions that are 100% based on personal taste can't be objectively considered wrong, but if someone, based on their personal taste, said Meryl Streep is a bad actress, I can say subjectively and in my opinion: they're wrong.

"and BTW apparently this was expected and I was warned, you don't disappoint, according to several people who gave me a heads up that you were going to respond (and you did)"
People warned you! Like they saw how you quoted me and replied to what I said, and they guessed correctly that I would probably reply. What geniuses! I'm impressed. Though I would've thought you might already guess I'd probably reply. Well, I guess a little help from others doesn't hurt any.

"don't show this kind of furor over any other subject"
I'm not seeing any furor. I thought we were both being somewhat pleasant, albeit in disagreement.

While I don't see it, I should probably stop then. Consider me a lurker for the most part from now on. When I see something I like, I might chime in then with a thumbs up. If I render some art worth posting, I'll probably do that. But standing up for actresses I like is a bit of a timewaster anyway. This is my last longish post! (Unless I write a SH fiction story.)

:cap:
the Scribbler

:christmastree:
If U C Xmas tree on TV show
it's Xmas Activism! :christmas:

:lynda1:
If U C attractive brunette in a movie

it's Dark Haired Women Activism!

Be very careful!
Don't B indoctrinated!
Cover your eyes! & ears!
:tv:
ttb51m
Sargeant 1st Class
Sargeant 1st Class
Posts: 237
Joined: 13 years ago

the original post about AP brought warnings with it, and low and behold there you were which I have to say in all the posts I have put up and all the responses I have submitted, not one came with a warning from forum members. until right then.
as far as furor,I just meant passionate when I said furor, that's all.
pleasant disagreement is a valid description, this time.
we agree to disagree, no harm no foul, yes?

btw, kudos, my mind drew a blank on female action heroes, great list, Jessica Alba, Jessica Biel, Chloe Bennet, Scarlett Johansson, Lynda Carter, Lucy Lawless, Rebecca Romijn, Yvonne Craig, Julie Newmar, Raquel Welch, Michelle Pfeiffer, Stacy Keibler, Yvonne Strahovski, Gal Gadot, Jennifer Lawrence, Morena Baccarin, Sofia Vergara,,,,wait WTF? keibler, isn't she just famous for wrestling in lingerie and F-ing Clooney, whatever, the rest of your list is spot on.
Post Reply