PonchoMysticism
PonchoMysticism t1_j2c9nd9 wrote
Reply to comment by blackrabbitsrun in Was Bruce Willis in Die Hard the ushering in of the modern everyman action star? by SquatOnAPitbull
He doesn't do either thing without "a problem" -- you have zero reason to believe they are well trained as there isn't any indication of their training. The club body guards are dummies and demonstrate that in the movie. That said I don't think something can be "more impossible" than something else. I'm pretty sure impossible is "binary."
PonchoMysticism t1_j2bpzt0 wrote
Reply to comment by blackrabbitsrun in Was Bruce Willis in Die Hard the ushering in of the modern everyman action star? by SquatOnAPitbull
John wick isn't more impossible than John McClaine. There are extensive videos about the dozens of times the homie should have died in that movie.
PonchoMysticism t1_j2bnuio wrote
Reply to comment by blackrabbitsrun in Was Bruce Willis in Die Hard the ushering in of the modern everyman action star? by SquatOnAPitbull
John Wick takes a very visible beating.
PonchoMysticism t1_j2cpx6s wrote
Reply to comment by blackrabbitsrun in Was Bruce Willis in Die Hard the ushering in of the modern everyman action star? by SquatOnAPitbull
You have zero reason to believe that rando muscle within a Russia mob family has "elite training."
This is the less important aspect of my argument. John Wick is in some ways more realistic and some ways less realistic than Die Hard however they are both entirely impossible or at the very least incredibly unlikely. Arguing that a movie is "more impossible" is like arguing that a sandwich is "more perfect." It's an on/off switch its either true or untrue. A scale of impossibility is silly.