Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics.
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
A lot of critique I saw for it was squarely aimed at Keanu Reeves. Early 00s popular opinion was he doesn't act and plays the same character in every movie, with monotone voice and muted expressions. Quality cast with lots of talent, special effects for the time that were at least on par with what was popular for the years prior to it, and a story that keeps twisting and turning it felt like the lore was being made up as it went, which was confusing to more casual audiences who maybe were hoping for a Matrix spin off given Keuna was starring. And of course it being attacked by the religious conservative crowd for using Christian themes and twisting them to be satanic, completely missing the point of the movie.
On the other hand, fans of the comics and character of Constantine were equally upset that Keanu was starring, and while he managed to be mouthy and snarky, it wasn't to the level they were hoping for (this shouldn't have been a surprise given that Spider-Man in the comics is also known for his mouth while the live adaption at the time had him being fairly quiet.) So they blasted the movie for just being a rip off or Hollywood water downed imitation for what was otherwise a very adult and out there character who has more tricks up his sleeve than batman.
Personally, thought the movie was great and loved it, I can understand the critisms but the fact that the movie got made at all was a small miracle and that it turned out as well as it did with the climax being a rather memorable scene with John giving Lucifer the finger.
That's fair criticism towards Keanu I suppose but I thought it fit his character. Plus the supporting cast was great, as you noted, so I didn't notice as much personally.
I never read the comics so I didn't have that context. I can appreciate that viewpoint though. I would probably prefer a character that's more similar to the comics if I had read them.
Ultimately I agree with you. All the twists and turns with a great ending made for a very enjoyable movie.