Keanu Reeves The Issue
Revisiting ‘The Matrix’: Who’s Afraid of AI?
Nick
Williams
Hoya Staff Writer
Do we live in a simulation? Philosopher Nick Bostrom proposed the “Simulation Hypothesis” in 2001, arguing that humanity could live in a constructed universe run by a computer simulation that replicates emotions and experiences. In 2018, Elon Musk echoed Bostrom, declaring, “We’re most likely in a simulation.” But before all of that, an iconic piece of U.S. cinema posed this question as its central plot device.
“The Matrix” celebrated its 25th anniversary earlier this year. Directed by sisters Lilly and Lana Wachowski, the science fiction action film takes place in an alternate universe where sentient artificial intelligence has usurped power from humans. These robots keep human bodies in womb-like pods, hooked up to wires that harvest their bioenergy for fuel. The machines run a simulated version of reality known as the Matrix that tricks the human consciousness into thinking it’s the truth. Protagonist Neo (Keanu Reeves), with the help of Morpheus (Lau-
rence Fishburne) and Trinity (Carrie-Anne Moss), wakes up from the dream world and joins a resistance group that seeks to regain control from the robots.
What makes “The Matrix” such a compelling film? To begin, its fast-paced, high-stakes plot never fails to entertain. The characters shift in and out of the Matrix as they are relentlessly pursued by a hoard of “agents” (Hugo Weaving), secret-service-type men directly controlled by a seemingly all-powerful A.I. from the “real” world. However, there’s hope. An oracle (Gloria Foster) prophesizes that Neo will destroy the Matrix and become “The One” to save humanity. There’s fighting and action galore: handto-hand combat, jumping between rooftops and even hanging from helicopters. The film is complete with a double-crossing resistance agent and a presumed-dead, beloved character turns out to have evaded the reaper. Over its two-hour, 16-minute runtime, there’s never a dull moment.
Moreover, the film’s cutting-edge special effects add to the spectacle of the simulation. The use of slow motion is masterful, culminating in the iconic scene where Neo leans
backward to dodge bullets suspended in the air, with multiple arms seeming to emerge from his back. The characters also run up walls, levitate during fight sequences and hook themselves up to wires. The film effectively employs CGI to create the post-apocalyptic world that Neo enters. The editing and camera work are not to be outdone — from early on, the directors use aerial shots and rain to set the dark mood and add suspense to the narrative. They also frequently film Neo through reflective surfaces, including a broken mirror, Morpheus’s sunglasses, window panes and even a doorknob. This choice hints at the film’s reflective nature and the distorted versions of reality in which Neo sees himself. The Wachowskis also utilize jump cuts during action scenes to heighten the tension. There’s an undeniably compelling style to “The Matrix.” The film works in the aesthetic tradition of “cyberpunk,” from its costume design (black trench coats, leather, iconic aviator sunglasses) to its set design (the grimy mechanics of the Nebuchadnezzar, the shadowy hallways of Neo’s apartment building). The Wachowskis juxtapose that darkness with
@FUTURE/INSTAGRAM
Ever seen your reflection and wondered if we are truly living in a simulation? Nick Williams (CAS ‘25) brings this motif to light in his review of Keanu Reeves’ “The Matrix.”
the saccharine brightness of Neo’s city in the Matrix, hinting at its false interior.
Beyond the dystopia of a hyperrealistic simulation, “The Matrix” seeks to answer another philosophical quandary: What does it mean to be human? The Wachowski sisters masterfully imbue this question into their directing style. “The Matrix” invites us to reflect on our own humanity, both literally through the lens of the camera and metaphorically throughout the narrative. The film continually rejects the premise that living in the Matrix is preferable to living in reality; no matter how idyllic the simulation appears or how depraved the actual world becomes. The question of destiny is central as well. Neo takes the red pill (another iconic cultural reference) because of his desire to control his life, and the Oracle lies to Neo about him being destined to become humanity’s savior so that he has the confidence to get there anyway.
The movie isn’t without its faults, though. Trinity, the only female character of substance, reveals at the end that the Oracle predicted she would fall in love with humanity’s savior, and her kiss resurrects Neo. It’s an unflattering narrative in a modern context; one that reminds the audience that despite Trinity being a savvy resistance fighter, she is, more importantly, a woman longing for love. The dialogue can feel clunky at certain moments, and some action scenes are protracted beyond necessity (the kung fu sparring between Neo and Morpheus comes to mind).
In just the last five years, the advent of generative artificial intelligence has ushered in what some call the “Artificial Intelligence Revolution.” The dystopia of “The Matrix” looks more and more plausible each day, as AI creeps into everyday life. Will robots usurp human intelligence? I don’t think we’re anywhere close to that — ChatGPT can’t even write a decent essay. Nevertheless, the lessons of the Wachowski sisters are a crucial reminder that human creativity and authenticity are irreplaceable.
From Cult Classics to Philanthrophic Pursuits, Keanu Reeves Has Persevered Through Tragedy, Established Acting Legacy
Emily Griffith Hoya Staff Writer
In an industry defined by big egos, Keanu Reeves stands out as a beacon of authenticity, combining his legendary cinematic career with his humble character for over 60 years. The Canadian actor, once referred to as one of the “nicest actors in Hollywood,” has solidified his role as one of the most renowned stars of his generation through his roles in legendary action movies and his philanthropic work.
After finding his footing in acting through several early projects, Reeves had his breakthrough in 1989 as Ted in “Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure.” Reeves and Alex Winter, who plays Bill, pose as slackers in a band who travel through time to meet historical figures for their school project and spread their love of music. The lighthearted film grossed over $40 million worldwide, in part due to Reeves’ hilariously charming persona. “Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure” has since seen two sequels.
FILM
Reeves’ first step into the sphere of action occurred in the 1994 film “Speed” with Sandra Bullock, where he plays Jack Traven, a police officer on a bus full of hostages set to explode if it goes below a certain speed. The thriller became an iconic film; the stars reunited for the film’s 30th anniversary Oct. 8.
My personal favorite of his films is “The Matrix” from 1999, the job where Reeves officially became an icon in the world of action movies. Reeves played the lead, Neo, a computer hacker who uncovers reality to be an illusion in this dystopian world and joins the fight to free humanity. Reeves himself has remarked in interview appearances that this movie changed his life, becoming a box office hit and bringing well-deserved recognition to his acting. The success of the original film resulted in three sequels, two of which set Reeves as the highest-paid actor in a single production.
As for his other roles, Reeves also starred as John Wick in the eponymous action franchise — my dad’s favorite of Reeves’ movies. “John Wick” from
2014 was the first installment of a four-part series that features Reeves as a retired hitman who seeks revenge on a crime lord for breaking into his home and killing his dog. The franchise has grossed over $1 billion and allowed Reeves to remain a beloved actor, with the most recent installment of the John Wick series coming out in 2023.
While Reeves may have the successful career that many could only dream of, his life has nevertheless been marked with tragedy — the BBC credits difficulty with making him into the complex and incredibly compelling actor that he is today. Reeves suffered a painful childhood, with his father leaving his family when he was just three years old, forcing his mother to raise his family alone. He lived in several different countries and attended four high schools before dropping out when he was just 17. In 1999, Reeves’ girlfriend Jennifer Syme was killed in a car crash shortly after giving birth to their stillborn daughter. Reeves also took care of his sister Kim Reeves during her tenyear battle with leukemia.
With so much misfortune in his life, Reeves has channeled his stardom to showcase compassion and selflessness. He has given monetary support to countless charities, such as Camp Rainbow Gold, an Idaho nonprofit serving children battling cancer and their families. Reeves has also been a major advocate for cancer research following his sister’s diagnosis, giving 70% of his profits from “The Matrix” to charity for the cause. And Reeves has also become known for kindness to crews on his movies, giving $20,000 bonuses to his crew and buying Harley-Davidson motorcycles for his stunt team on “The Matrix Reloaded.” In 1997, paparazzi cameras famously captured Reeves sharing drinks and snacks with a homeless man in Los Angeles.
Throughout his career, Reeves has retained a sense of humility and generosity that makes him more than just a movie star. Along with his legendary work in films, his resilience is an inspiration for generations to come and his story reminds us of the importance of kindness.
In ‘Bram Stoker’s Dracula,’ Francis Ford Coppola Crafts His Own Carnal Creature, While Reeves Misses Mark
Isabelle Cialone Hoya Staff Writer
As Halloween approaches, Count Dracula will inevitably resurface as one of the most iconic and enduring monsters in popular culture. Since Bram Stoker published his original novel in 1897, countless creators have published reiterations and adaptations of his famous story.
Francis Ford Coppola’s 1992 “Bram Stoker’s Dracula” is widely regarded as one of the best film adaptations of the novel to exist. However, there are several significant differences between the novel and the film, one of which appears as early as the pre-title sequence.
In the film, we see a grief-stricken Elisabeta (Winona Ryder) commit suicide after she is led to believe that her husband Dracula (Gary Oldman) has died in battle against the Ottoman Empire during its seizure of Constantinople. Heartbroken, Dracula renounces the Christian God and condemns himself to surviving off the blood of the living, becoming a vampire.
Four centuries later, he falls for Mina Murray (also played by Ryder), the fiancée of his lawyer Jonathan Harker (Keanu Reeves). Unlike in the novel, where Mina is a married woman drawn to Dracula’s seductive charm, the film portrays her as the reincarnation of his late wife. It is in pursuit of this love that Dracula sought eternal life and began his reign of terror.
Coppola embraces the epistolary style of Stoker’s titular novel, utilizing numerous narrators to switch between concurrent action scenes. The chaos created by the constant cross-cutting is a classic characteristic of Coppola’s style. While this directional style didn’t work well in his most recent film, “Megalopolis”, it is undeniably effective in rendering “Bram Stoker’s Dracula” a captivating and campy extravaganza.
The beauty of the film lies especially in its visually appealing, opulent Gothic style. Over-the-top, eye-catching sets alongside stunning costumes and makeup take the Gothic aesthetic of Stoker’s time and amplify it dramatically. The stark contrast between the bloody reds embellishing the costumes and the bleak blacks and grays of the architecture creates a chilling environment. This sinister ambiance is complemented by a beautifully haunting score that exudes unease. The production design melds perfectly with the impressive practical effects, which succeed in bringing to life the uncanny horror of Dracula’s monstrosity. Not a single scene in the film fails to deliver stunning cinematography. The most compelling scenes are those in the beautiful Westenra family estate, which quickly becomes infested with darkness, in the austere mountains of the Transylvanian countryside.
Beyond its overarching eeriness, the film oozes with carnality, imbuing Dracula’s darkly erotic vampiric lore with further sensuality. The film truly epitomizes the term “bloodlust,” with socially repressed ideals of violence and desire dominating the story. Coppola brings the book’s sexual undertones to the forefront of the film through extremely sensual characters and scenes. Lucy Westenra (Sadie Frost), who is portrayed in the novel as an innocent — albeit insatiable — young woman, embraces her desirability more openly in the film. And this lustfulness is amplified as her possession by the undead progresses. Dracula’s brides even make an appearance as further tools of seduction and fear-mongering for the imprisoned Harker.
Unfortunately, this lasciviousness is taken a step too far and strays from the original novel. The female characters are overly sexualized, which certainly evokes the sinful temptation of evil. However, their characters are consumed by their lustful allure, losing any semblance of depth beyond sexual appeal. Mina’s character in particular deviates from the literary version, as she is also easily seduced by Dracula. Whereas in the original, Mina plays a crucial role in overcoming Dracula and resists his corruption of her. Coppola’s adaptation romanticizes this manipulation and twists the story into a lovers’ tragedy. This not only changes Mina but
also redefines Dracula’s monstrosity. He is no longer Stoker’s heartless and bloodthirsty representation of evil incarnate, but rather a blasphemer in the name of true love. His main motivation being his pursuit of love humanizes him, and despite his terrific abilities, one finds it hard to truly fear him.
Oldman delivers a stellar performance as Count Dracula, creating a character that is simultaneously chilling and sympathetic. Oldman convincingly portrays this tragic version of Dracula, and when paired with the impressive performance by Anthony Hopkins as his nemesis, Dr. Van Helsing, Dracula’s villainous side becomes more compelling and complex. Both Frost and Ryder offer mesmerizing portrayals despite their characters’ somewhat flawed and underdeveloped writing. Reeves’ performance, however, falls short of his usual standard, feeling especially clumsy and out of place compared to the standout deliveries of his counterparts. While the film certainly offers one of the best and most interesting renditions of “Dracula,” its usage of Bram Stoker’s name in the title is frankly egregious, as it is not entirely faithful to the book. It sticks to the source material more than many other adaptations that exist, but the key differences are too significant for it to truly be considered the original author’s. It is much more Coppola’s Dracula than it is Stoker’s.
‘Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure’ Uses Whimsy, Humor to Stay ‘Most Excellent’ 35 Years On
Mauro Mazzariello
Hoya Staff Writer
Have you ever wondered what Napoleon would think about waterparks? How Joan of Arc would feel about aerobic classes and classic U.S. malls? What epic ballads Beethoven would create if he had a Moog synthesizer instead of a boring old Steinway? If the answer to any of these questions is yes, then I have the most excellent movie for you.
“Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure” (1989) starts off not-so-excellent for our heroes. Rufus (George Carlin) must go back in time to help Bill S. Preston, Esquire (Alex Winter) and Ted “Theodore” Logan (the one and only Keanu Reeves) preserve a future in which they are revered as gods. From this premise, you may be thinking that Bill and Ted are destined to turn into supersoldiers or brainiacs who help stop the end of the world from an asteroid or alien invasion.
But instead, the fate of the world hinges on
the success of the pair’s ’80s glam rock band, Wyld Stallyns, whose audience is currently the walls of Bill’s garage. In addition to not knowing how to play the guitar or showing any musical acumen, Bill and Ted are totally bogus at history, so much so that if they don’t pass the history presentation due the following day they will flunk out of high school.
After making several fruitless attempts to study historical figures, calling Napoleon “the short dead guy” and pronouncing Socrates as “so-crates,” Bill and Ted meet Rufus, his time-traveling phone booth and the future version of themselves. After accidentally kidnapping Napoleon in 1805 and bringing him to the present, Bill and Ted make the righteous decision to kidnap more historical figures to help them pass their history presentation.
After managing to survive a bar fight in the Wild West with the help of Billy the Kid, they travel to ancient Greece, where Ted proves that glam rock is a form of modern
philosophy — Socrates would have loved Kansas’ “Dust in the Wind.” The movie then moves into a montage in which Bill and Ted snatch figures like Abraham Lincoln, Sigmund “Siggy” Freud, and Ludwig van Beethoven, all accompanied by a totally rad ’80s pop-rock soundtrack.
After Bill and Ted rescue their archival pals from jail, where they’ve been detained for terrorizing the local mall, it’s time for the history presentation. The duo rock out on stage, recruiting “the most bodacious philosophizer” Socrates to describe his newly adopted philosophy and Siggy Freud to psychoanalyze Ted’s rocky relationship with his father, who is determined to send his son to military school in Alaska (Yikes!). In the end, Rufus reveals how important Wyld Stallyns is to the future before shredding a sick solo and leaving them to finally learn how to play the guitar.
Throughout the movie, Bill and Ted consistently look like they just stumbled out of a
OLIVIA HOLMBERG/THE HOYA “Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure” stays funny 35 years on for its wide array of jokes, unique time travel concepts and whimsical buddy comedy chemistry.
Reagan-era “this is your brain on drugs” PSA: two zoned out space cadets who share the same clocked-out brain cell. Despite their hilarious stupidity, they are good-natured dudes who never mean harm and only want to explore things they find cool, which consists mainly of sick air guitar solos. Reeves and Winter do a phenomenal job of acting endearingly stupid, which is not as easy as it seems. Part of what makes this movie work is the chemistry Bill and Ted share. Sure, they may be airheads who can’t pronounce Beethoven or Socrates, but when the occasion calls for it they are able to band together to get the job done.
Bill and Ted also share a number of iconic phrases, which could become tiresome if they weren’t so absurdly funny. Instead, the gags and mind-numbingly stupid jokes will have you quoting the movie long after you see it. “Most excellent” is a phrase I have permanently added to my vocabulary since watching, in addition to my increased propensity for random air guitar solos. The visuals and special effects may make it evident that this movie is from 1989, but even this adds to the whimsical attitude of the movie. With a wide array of jokes, unique timetravel concepts, great chemistry between Reeves and Winter and even a waterslide-loving Napoleon, “Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure” is a masterclass in dumb fun and a must-watch for any Reeves fan. As the legendary Wyld Stallyns would say, “Be excellent to each other and party on, dude!”
‘Point Break’ Ponders Thrill, Surfing, Meaning
Caitlin McBride
Hoya Staff Writer
“Point Break” is the perfect movie to watch with people who like to ask questions, especially questions like: “What would a surfing movie look like with Keanu Reeves and Patrick Swayze?” It would — and does — look beautiful.
The film follows the action-packed adventure of Johnny Utah (Keanu Reeves), former Ohio State University quarterback and newly minted FBI agent tasked with investigating a tightly-knit group of bank robbers and suspected surfers. It is a story of risk, thrill and how mentorship builds complex relationships. Utah, paired with the experienced Agent Angelo Pappas (Gary Busey), must act on Pappas’ hunch that the “Ex-Presidents,” bank robbers who conceal their identities with rubber masks of former commanders in chief, are actually surfers. To further the investigation, Utah goes undercover in the Los Angeles surfer community, where he meets Tyler (Lori Petty). Through Tyler’s surfing lessons, Utah also gets to know
Bodhi (Patrick Swayze), who is searching for “the ultimate ride.” After learning how to surf (and growing to love the sport and the people who do it), Utah gets closer to Bodhi’s squad — eventually realizing that his new mentor is one of the Ex-Presidents himself. The Ex-Presidents go after another bank and are confronted by Utah and Pappas: Car chases, foot chases and shootouts ensue. Utah’s relationship with the surfers grows in legal and moral complexity as he and Bodhi try to abide by the latter’s unsaid no-killing policy in increasingly fraught standoffs. Nonetheless, this policy and their relationship ultimately fails, resulting in desperation and disillusionment.
“Point Break” touches on several more thoughtful questions, not least of which is what it means to live well. Bodhi and his crew subscribe to the philosophy of thrill-seeking to both lose and find one’s self, regardless of the cost. Bodhi sees life as a game, in stark contrast to Utah’s concentrated missions and targets. However, as Bodhi’s game breaks down and he stops following his own rules, his moral standards
crumple, culminating in a scene where he leaves his partner’s cold body but returns for the backpack of money the man wore while going down with him. Bodhi’s laidback charm runs dry once he cannot stop his friends’ deaths, a note that “fighting against the system” is a romantic notion that does not dispel reality, only postponing the inevitability of man losing against the law of man or the law of nature.
The movie is filled with humorous exchanges, including quips that instructors delight in sharing. By-the-book analysts claim to be “crunching data,” surfers promise that the sport will “change your life” and cheeky skydiving instructors rhetorically ask, “You’re about to jump out of a perfectly good airplane — how do you feel about that?” While these scenes unfold, the lyrics in the background cheerily and ominously chant, “I will not fall, I will not fall.” Inevitably, Utah, like any good protagonist, falls. His data-lacking “hunch” about a disagreeable bunch of surfers leads to the first deaths in the movie, surfing envelops his life as he joins the Ex-Presidents’ group and he nar-
LAUREN BECK/THE HOYA
According to Caitlin McBride (CAS ’25), perfomances by Keanu Reeves and Patrick Swayze means “Point Break” continues to stun audiences more than 30 years later.
rowly avoids a sky jump gone wrong, reaggravating his old football knee injury. Of course, the camera work is exquisite. The powerful surf rolls in, stretching the wide screen even further as viewers take in the coast. Skydiving scenes are shot with a wingsuit pilot from the same Twin Otter plane from which the actors jump, allowing the audience to soar along with the ex-presidents and their newest coerced FBI recruit. Emotions flood in with the colors as the vibrant blues and yellows of the California coast contrast with the killjoy corporate grays of interiors and buildings. The surf only darkens at the end, as Bodhi faces his demise in the shape of hell and high water. Takeaways after watching are grim, considering the recent high adventure experienced the thrills of controlled falling through sea and sky. And yet, interpersonal trust, an effort against perpetuating death through violence and incredible rides on waves and parachutes ring clearly in the viewer’s recall. One of the ex-presidents quotes “The Life You Save May Be Your Own” as they exchange parachute packs in the plane, alluding to the corruption, lost innocence and complicity in our own errors: Thrill-seeking “is the closest you’ll ever get to God”.
If so, how does it compare to our value of money, social paradigms of justice and human life? For, even after Utah spends months chasing down Bodhi once more, when the latter asks the former if he still surfs, Utah only has one thing to say: “Every day.”
‘Speed’ Will
Make Your Heart Race Despite Keanu Reeves’ Sluggish Performance
Mauro Mazzariello
Hoya Staff Writer
Traffic in Los Angeles has a pretty bad reputation. You could get on Interstate 405 and be greeted by four open lanes of highway where every guy in a sports car is easily pushing 90 mph, or you could be crawling along at 5 mph in the worst bumper-tobumper traffic you’ve ever seen. “Speed” made me feel like I was in the latter, stuck between two student drivers in way-too-expensive cars during rush hour.
The movie starts with a tense hostage situation: A bomber has rigged an elevator full of civilians to plummet several stories to their deaths if he doesn’t receive $3 million from the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD). After a rather humorous scene in which Jack Traven (Keanu Reeves) displays the worst hostage negotiation skills known to man, Jack and his partner, Harry Temple (Jeff Daniels) save the civilians and chase down the bomber, who is later revealed to
LINSEY BROOKFIELD/THE HOYA
This bomb-threat bus action movie will have your heart racing even if, according to Mauro Mazzariello (CAS ’26), Keanu Reeves’ performance is sub-par.
be Howard Payne (Dennis Hopper). Reeves’ stiff dialogue in this opening sequence becomes a benchmark for the rest of the movie, as he flatly delivers line after line.
A short while later, Jack is enjoying his morning coffee and muffin when a Los Angeles city bus explodes. Howard taunts Jack through a payphone, demanding $3.7 million and telling him that another bus has been rigged to explode if it goes below 50 mph. The rules are simple: No passengers are allowed off the bus or Howard blows it up. Jack manages to get on the bus and ensure that the driver does not go below 50 mph. One of the passengers, Annie Porter (Sandra Bullock), takes the wheel as Jack tries to figure out how to disarm the bomb. After several unbelievable — but highly amusing — stunts (involving drifting the bus and jumping a 50-foot gap Evel Knievel-style), the bus ends up at Los Angeles International Airport, the last place on Earth you’d want to be regardless of the explosives and impending threat of death.
The LAPD manages to identify Howard due to his unique bomb-making style, but Howard proves to be two steps ahead of them at all times. Jack unsuccessfully tries to defuse the bomb before realizing Howard’s game and saving the passengers. After what seems like the most fun and explosive shot for the stunt team to film, Jack and the LAPD bait Howard with the money, which goes about how you would expect given Howard’s success so far. In the final act, Jack boards an out-of-control train to save Annie from Howard and stop his bombings. Reeves gets a lot of grief for his poor acting, and this movie is all you would need to show someone to prove this point. His one-liners are so bizarre they make you laugh, such as when someone asks if there’s anything in the way to stop the elevator from dropping and killing everyone inside, to which Reeves simply and flatly responds: “The basement.” The friendly partner banter between Reeves and Daniels shows signs of promise in the beginning, but unfortunate-
ly for the audience, Daniels’ character is largely relegated to a few quick appearances in the precinct and an anti-climactic conclusion. Jack is consistently described as a man who doesn’t take the time to stop and think, and it becomes hard to tell whether Reeves is method acting or just that bad at delivering lines.
Even Reeves’ budding romance with Bullock’s character feels odd and slightly forced. Bullock does an admirable job of playing the civilian who steps up when they’re needed, even drifting a bus at one point. Just like her character, Bullock becomes a saving grace for this movie by providing a breath of fresh air and well-delivered lines. Hopper plays the role of a menacing terrorist solidly, but it is by no means a stellar performance. His character easily outmaneuvers the police at every turn, casually observing the mayhem from several TVs. While Howard’s motives are not the most original, he is menacing enough to be an interesting villain. Despite the high-octane premise (Who doesn’t love an out-of-control bus?), the dialogue kills any buzz you might get and the stunts are simply too absurd at times. Just like Annie driving the bus, you have to steer into the skid and embrace the comically bad aspects of this movie to enjoy it.
Wick-edly Good: Ranking Every John Wick Movie Throughout the Franchise’s Ten Years
Ethan Hill Deputy Guide Editor
“John Wick” has become one of the best and most popular action movie franchises of all time. What was originally meant to be a one-off film about a man, his dog and his car became such an immense overnight sensation that it spawned three sequels, with at least one more on the way. At the center of it all is everyone’s favorite action star, Keanu Reeves. Reeves brings his stoic, cold line deliveries and his convincing self-performed stunts to create a grounded, immersive and surprisingly realistic action series that still packs in an immense amount of spectacle. While the “John Wick” series certainly has its highlights, it also has its low points. In the spirit of our beloved Reeves, I take a look at all four of the films about the so-called “Baba Yaga” to determine which ones sink to the bottom, and which are the cream of the crop.
“John Wick”
2014, the year that started it all. The original film masterfully balances emotion and action, drawing viewers into the grief and vengeance driving Wick. It builds tension and mystery around the character with ex-
pert pacing, making Wick feel larger than life while keeping his motivations deeply personal. The action sequences are choreographed with precision and style, rivaled only by films like “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon.” Each fight scene feels fresh, pushing back against the action film formula to set a new standard for the genre. This film does not just introduce a character; it redefines modern action cinema.
“John Wick: Chapter 2”
The 2017 sequel seamlessly follows the first. It opens up the world of Wick, expanding its storylines and possibilities. The sequel builds on Wick’s character by adding to his backstory and continues to improve the action sequences while still feeling grounded and authentic. It ends the movie on a thrilling cliffhanger, perfectly setting up the third film. “Chapter 2” stands out among the rest for one simple reason: It has the best villain in the franchise, mob boss Santino D’Antonio (brilliantly played by Riccardo Scamarcio). Not only is it one of the greatest sequels of all time, it’s one of the greatest action movies of all time and my favorite in the franchise.
“John
Wick: Chapter 3—Parabellum”
While the third movie in the franchise isn’t what I would call a bad film, it is the weakest of the four, narratively speaking. Despite containing some of the best action sequences of the entire saga — my personal favorite being the knife fight — the story fails to pack the same punch. Wick’s motivation continuously shifts throughout the movie, making it hard to understand what outcome we’re supposed to be cheering for. Do we want Wick to talk to the head of the High Table to convince him to let him go free or do we want Wick to keep fighting to the death against armies of assassins to stay true to himself? At times, I do not think the movie even knows the answer to that question. The series was running out of ideas. The film attempts to expand upon the lore of the universe but at times it feels forced. Regardless, it is a decent follow up to the first two films and gives fans a lot to enjoy in its action sequences.
“John Wick: Chapter 4”
The fourth in the franchise, released in 2023, is a fantastic rebound from the third film. It doesn’t try to do too much nor over-expand the already vast “John Wick”
KATIE CHUNG/THE HOYA Ethan Hill (SCS ’25) highlights the best and worst of Keanu Reeves’ “John Wick” series.
universe. Instead, it stays within the boundaries of what we know while delivering on the stakes set up by the previous movies. In a franchise that seemed to have already done it all, the film still manages to introduce fresh ideas. Visually, it’s stunning — easily the best-looking of the four films. The sharp and striking color grading enhances every scene, making the action sequences even more captivating. As an ending to Wick’s story — assuming future films don’t undo this conclusion— it works incredibly well, tying up loose ends while still leaving room for the franchise to evolve.
The “John Wick” franchise has undeniably left a lasting impact on action cinema, blending high-octane choreography with emotional depth and striking visuals. Each film brings something unique to the table, from the grounded, character-driven story of the first movie to the visually stunning, universe-expanding entries that followed. While the series has its weaker moments, it continuously pushes the boundaries of action filmmaking. Whether it’s the breathtaking stunts or Keanu Reeves’ stoic portrayal, “John Wick” has earned its place in the pantheon of great action films, and fans will no doubt be eager to see where the franchise goes next.
Van Sant’s ‘My Own Private Idaho’ Is a Heartbreaking Modern Shakespearean Tragedy of Despairing, Unrequited Love
Grace Ko Hoya Staff Writer
It’s not dramatic, it’s Shakespearean! A ’90s cult classic, “My Own Private Idaho”, directed and written by Gus Van Sant, depicts the lives of street hustlers in a grand vision of brash surreality. Van Sant manages to create a unique atmosphere that revels in the chaotic but is grounded by its central tragic hero and his relationship with a fellow hustler.
Loosely inspired by William Shakespeare’s “Henry IV,” “My Own Private Idaho” details Mike Waters’ (River Phoenix) life as a street hustler, living from job to job and moving through life in an endless daze. Because of his narcolepsy, Mike falls into fits of sleep in great moments of stress — including, sometimes, appointments with his clients. However, his closest friend, Scott Favor (Keanu Reeves), a rich boy who turned to hustling in an effort to rebel against his father, takes care of Mike during these moments of unrest.
Constantly haunted by the memories of his mother, Sharon (Vana O’Brien), who left him, Mike decides to finally go on a quest with Scott to search for her in Idaho. As the journey progresses, Mike’s life begins to slowly unravel as his grasp on both Scott and his mother gradually loosens and he faces the possibility that they will become merely phantoms of his past. VanSant’sdistinctdirectioncolorsnearlyeveryinchof the movie. From the first scene, in which Mike wanders
alonganemptystretchofhighway,shotsofthechanging cloudsandthecolorsandpeacefulplainsofIdahocreate a wistful atmosphere. A layer of nostalgia rests upon the moment as Mike’s memories of his mother soon flash in a broken montage of remembrance.
The dialogue of the film switches between early modern and modern English, indicating the Shakespearean influence on Van Sant’s vision. Dialogues in early modern English prominently occur within the crew of street hooligans and hustlers that Mike and Scott belong to in Portland, Ore., demonstrating a sort of slang within the community.
The near whimsical and dramatic personality of the crew’s leader, Bob Pigeon (William Richert), makes him the character with the clearest Shakespearean influence. This leads to rather playful scenes, like the attempted robbery of an unsuspecting rock band by Bob and the crew, who are dressed up in pink robes and pretending to be on a religious outing — before Bob whips out his gun and they become a cackling mess. The subsequent scene is equally full of such whimsy as Scott questions Bob, who is clueless that the robbery was set up by Scott and Mike to make a fool of him about the failed robbery, leading to a long back-and-forth in which Bob details his dramatic lie to the laughter of the crowd. This clear difference in language helps demonstrate the interesting shift to tragedy in the second half of the narrative, which almost entirely focuses on Mike’s journey to find his mother. The use
CROSSWORD
By Tanvi Gorripati
of modern English pulls you back to reality from prior fantastical moments, establishing a deeper understanding of the characters. The straightforward nature of modern language pushes away the extraneous details to show a clearer image of their personalities and natures. It’s in these moments that the central characters shine as Scott’s conflicting nature and Mike’s loneliness enter into full view.
Furthermore, it’s Phoenix’s and Reeves’ performances that fully take advantage of the chaotic, yet tragic, story that Van Sant has built. Phoenix is a tour de force as Mike, creating a lost, lovestruck boy with the frenzied, tired nature of someone who has grown up far too fast. It’s Phoenix’s awkward swagger and wild eyes that make Mike’s love for Scott all the more heartbreaking and vulnerable when Scott cannot reciprocate his feelings.
Next to Phoenix, Reeves delivers a surprisingly complex Scott whose initial kindness and charming playfulness soon dissolve into selfishness, as he plans to leave his life as a hustler behind when he receives his inheritance. What seems at first a special love for Mike becomes a facade, as Reeves’ disarming persona and declarations take on a hollow cruelty when Scott leaves Mike behind in the blink of an eye after falling in love with Carmela (Chiara Caselli), a young Italian farmgirl. However, it’s the transfixing nature of Mike and Scott that acts as a double-edged sword. Scott and Mike are a fascinating pair, and the wonderful
performances by Phoenix and Reeves personally left me wanting a deeper exploration and focus on these two characters. The playful moments — done with the colorful cast of side characters — while still compelling in their own right, were dull in comparison to Mike and his relationship with Scott. With the limitation of the runtime, it felt as if there was so much more to explore with the central characters.
Nevertheless, even the negatives occur because of how truly fascinating this movie is. Each moment feels alive and unique to the narrative. The scene at the campfire between Mike and Scott is arguably the most memorable of the film. It shows how bold and sincere this story is. Amid the surreal circumstances, these two hustlers — having bounced from one place to another, unsure of where to go next — huddle next to a campfire in the middle of Idaho. The grandness transforms into intimacy as Phoenix delivers Mike’s timid but genuine confession, gently whispering “I love you and you don’t pay me,” while Reeves’ eyes display a level of pity as Scott will never be able to love Mike in the same way. It’s a delicate balance, but it’s done so well that it all comes together to create a gorgeously gritty and heartfelt tragedy.
Van Sant’s “My Own Private Idaho” is in all ways enchanting and beautiful in both the grand whimsy and its intimate, devastating romance. It’s a film that stays with you long after its end, leaving a part of its strange and spellbinding storytelling behind.
This Week’s Theme: In the Skies
ACROSS
1. Theme of this issue
6. “Chapter Four” was the most ____sive of the “John Wick” films to make
7. Site of a notable showdown in “The Matrix”
8. Reeve’s titular character in a time-travel adventure movie
9. Reeves’ movie with Sandra Bullock and a bomb threat on a bus
DOWN
1. “Ode on a Grecian Urn” author John
2. Reeves, for Kellogg’s cornflakes
3. Without legs, in French
4. Coder in “The Matrix”
5. Not provided with sustenance
ACROSS
1. Mysterious sky visitor
6. A Hawaiian island shaped like an apostrophe
7. Between, in French
8. A shaky plane landing may cause ____
9. Good mates
DOWN
1. A skydiver’s exit
2. A pilot may ___ ___ plane at their destination
3. Secretive information
4. Brings in money
5. A Russian refusal