If you took this movie back in time 30 years, it would still be a bad movie. There are two story lines here; my review of the movie and how this movie got a 7.9 IMDb rating.

First the movie. There was a early moment in the theater when I thought maybe this is all a gag, a clever gag. Kinda like those mini feature spots reminding you to turn off your cell phone. They do a nice job on some of those in theater messages. Perhaps this will evolve into a Djangoesque tongue in cheek graphic novel. All this critical analysis language doesn't belong any where near John Wick. On location the actors must have looked at each other and said...really? Or maybe, my agent said we are supposed to shoot a movie today. Any movie fan with an eye for action movies will notice the poor fight scenes. I counted 6 identical fight moves straight out of the 70s cop shows on TV where somebody is flipped over using one arm and a throw. Every fight scene was the same fight. Movie audiences have evolved quite a bit since the 70s. John Wick is predictable, it's heartless, it's painfully slow with no shortage of terribly awkward dialog. I am done throwing fancy words at this mess.

Now the rating. I have relied on IMDb for solid reviews for many years now. For the most part I have agreed with their rating, I could argue a half point here and there but 4-6 points? My guess is the John Wick studio has found a way to game this system. Crazy idea, right? To me it's more plausible than the plot line of the movie. Somebody at IMDb should look into this because it would be our loss if this gets out of hand.