Len Wiseman: 'John Wick Ballerina isn't intentionally a feminist movie'
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
Len Wiseman, the director of From the World of John Wick: Ballerina, has revealed why this movie isn't deliberately feminist.
It was announced in 2019 that a female-led spin-off of John Wick had been commissioned, with Keanu Reeves set to be an executive producer on the film.
With Ana de Armas at the helm as the lead, Eve Macarro, the movie picks up chronologically during the third John Wick film and further explores the Ruska Roma, the Russian group that trains children to be assassins.
The story follows Eve's training as an assassin and her journey of personal revenge as she seeks out the group who murdered her father in front of her as a child.
In a hotel in London, Metro sits down with Wiseman for a wide-ranging interview about the film, straight off the bat we discuss whether he considers the film 'feminist'.
'It's an action movie with a really powerful and strong lead, and I wouldn't say so much…,' he reflects and tries to find the right way to express his sentiment.
'I've been doing female-driven characters in action really from the beginning of my career,' he says, referencing his action horror series Underworld that starred his ex-wife Kate Beckinsale. 'I really don't put too much of a weight on it, I just think women are strong regardless.
'So I'll sayit's not intentionally, to me it is an action movie with a really kick ass lead that is a female character.'
He emphasises that lines such as 'fight like a girl' – a phrase that recurs in the film and is even the title of the song as the credits roll – are not an attempt to pander to being a movie making a statement.
'To put a flip on [fight like a girl] and make that a very powerful thing, rather than a teasing phrase or what have you, that's absolutely intentional. But, I didn't want it to ever feel pandering to that. Just be real to it.'
The director's undiluted enthusiasm about the film is evident, and he's eager for more female-led action movies, but not ones that are originally written as male characters.
Ana, who played the character Paloma in the James Bond series, previously explained why she felt 007 shouldn't be played by a woman: 'Why don't we have more movies about Paloma? Let James be James and John Wick be John Wick. We'll do our thing,' she told The Independent.
Wiseman nods and says he 'totally agrees,' with her sentiment.
'If they turned into like Jane Bond. I'll just go, 'What are you doing?' No.
'I would love to see more original, female-driven action movies, and I'm always glad when there's one that really works.'
He adds that when it comes to women's roles in these movies, he also doesn't believe women-led action films should only be directed by women.
'It's if you were to ask, if a male-led action movie should only be directed by a man. I don't think that either,' adding that James Cameron and Catherine Bigelow are both fantastic directors who are capable of directing incredible action movies, regardless of gender.
'I think it's the best person for the job, is really what it should be. That's kind of my thought on it.'
He added that he has pet peeves about when these characters are made sometimes indestructible , though.
'Often, I'll see that the female character is like indestructible in a way that is almost overtly kind of sexy and powerful and it just leans in too much into the sexiness of it.'
He added that the really great action characters are not the ones who pose after a fight scene, but the ones who look knackered.
'Keanu will go through this amazing sequence, and after he's done, he's just f*****g tired,' he said,
Comparing Reeves to Harrison Ford, and Mel Gibson's Martin Riggs he adds: 'Instead of landing like a Marvel character, they just eat it on the ground and then get up and keep fighting.'
During the production of the film, there were rumours that John Wick director Chad Stahelski had to 'reshoot' the film. Stahlski rubbished the rumours at the time, and while chatting to Metro, Wiseman cleared up the story.
'Here's the truth of it, which is a personal thing, I ended up having a health crisis, and I had to go to the hospital for a little bit, and it was a really scary time. But everything is good and great.
'And thank God Chad was there. And we were always planning on splitting up the schedule in terms of some of the additional stuff that we were shooting to just try to get everything possible for the audience.' More Trending
He said that at most, the rumours were 'annoying', but he was grateful things worked out the way they did, as they were able to make an incredible film.
'So it's annoying. I guess if anything, like you hear reshoots and you go, 'Oh, that's bad.' There were additional shoots, and then I had to go to the hospital for a little bit. So thank God it worked out the way it did.'
'The important thing is, the movie is incredible. I had a great time, Chad and I worked, you know, in partnership with it. And it is a movie I think people are gonna absolutely love.'
Ballerina is in cinemas on June 6.
Got a story?
If you've got a celebrity story, video or pictures get in touch with the Metro.co.uk entertainment team by emailing us celebtips@metro.co.uk, calling 020 3615 2145 or by visiting our Submit Stuff page – we'd love to hear from you.
MORE: Robert De Niro, 81, has 'possibly' realised how good he is at acting
MORE: Arnold Schwarzenegger tried to rewrite one of the most famous lines in movie history
MORE: Blake Lively makes unexpected move and drops major claims against Justin Baldoni
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
33 minutes ago
- Reuters
Russia faces struggle to replace bombers lost in Ukrainian drone strikes
LONDON, June 6 (Reuters) - Russia will take years to replace nuclear-capable bomber planes that were hit in Ukrainian drone strikes last weekend, according to Western military aviation experts, straining a modernisation programme that is already delayed. Satellite photos of airfields in Siberia and Russia's far north show extensive damage from the attacks, with several aircraft completely burnt out, although there are conflicting versions of the total number destroyed or damaged. The United States assesses that up to 20 warplanes were hit - around half the number estimated by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy - and around 10 were destroyed, two U.S. officials told Reuters. The Russian government on Thursday denied that any planes were destroyed and said the damage would be repaired, but Russian military bloggers have spoken of loss or serious damage to about a dozen planes, accusing commanders of negligence. The strikes - prepared over 18 months in a Ukrainian intelligence operation dubbed "Spider's Web", and conducted by drones that were smuggled close to the bases in trucks - dealt a powerful symbolic blow to a country that, throughout the Ukraine war, has frequently reminded the world of its nuclear might. In practice, experts said, they will not seriously affect Russia's nuclear strike capability which is largely comprised of ground- and submarine-based missiles. However, the Tu-95MS Bear-H and Tu-22M3 Backfire bombers that were hit were part of a long-range aviation fleet that Russia has used throughout the war to fire conventional missiles at Ukrainian cities, defence plants, military bases, power infrastructure and other targets, said Justin Bronk, an aviation expert at the RUSI think tank in London. The same fleet had also been carrying out periodic patrol flights into the Arctic, North Atlantic and northern Pacific as a show of strength to deter Russia's Western adversaries. Bronk said that at the outset of its 2022 invasion of Ukraine, Russia was operating a fleet of 50-60 Bear-Hs and around 60 Backfires, alongside around 20 Tu-160M nuclear-capable Blackjack heavy bombers. He estimated that Russia has now lost more than 10% of the combined Bear-H and Backfire fleet, taking into account last weekend's attacks and the loss of several planes earlier in the war - one shot down and the others struck while on the ground. These losses "will put major pressure on a key Russian force that was already operating at maximum capacity," Bronk told Reuters. Russia's defence ministry did not immediately reply to a request for comment. Replacing the planes will be challenging. Both the Bear H and the Backfire are aircraft that were designed in the Soviet era and have been out of production for decades, said Douglas Barrie, aerospace expert at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, although existing planes have been upgraded over the years. Barrie said that building new ones like-for-like was therefore very unlikely, and it was unclear whether Russia had any useable spare airframes of either type. Western sanctions against Russia have aimed to restrict the import of components such as microprocessors that are vital to avionics systems, although Moscow has so far been comparatively successful at finding alternative sources, Barrie added. Russia has been modernising its Blackjack bomber fleet, and Putin sent a pointed signal to the West last year by taking a 30-minute flight in one such aircraft and pronouncing it ready for service. But production of new Blackjacks is slow - one Russian military blogger this week put it at four per year - and Western experts say progress in developing Russia's next-generation PAK DA bomber has also been moving at a crawl. The Federation of American Scientists (FAS) said in a report, opens new tab last month that Russia had signed a contract with manufacturer Tupolev in 2013 to build the PAK DA, but cited Russian media reports as saying state test flights are not scheduled until next year, with initial production to begin in 2027. While it would be logical for Russia to try to speed up its PAK DA plans, it may not have the capacity, said Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the FAS. He said in a telephone interview that Russia is facing delays with a range of other big defence projects including its new Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile. RUSI's Bronk was also sceptical of Moscow's chances of accelerating the timeline for the next-generation bomber. "Russia will struggle to deliver the PAK DA programme at all in the coming five years, let alone accelerate it, due to budgetary shortfalls and materials and technology constraints on industry due to sanctions," he said.
New Statesman
35 minutes ago
- New Statesman
Britain's gift to Putin
Photo byOn Wednesday, Volodymyr Zelensky announced that Russia has now used more than 27,000 aerial bombs, more than 11,000 armed drones and thousands more guided munitions to attack Ukraine. Among the victims of this week's attacks were an emergency worker, his wife and their one-year-old grandson, the 632nd child killed in Ukraine since Russia's invasion. And yet British businesses continue to enable the Russian state to secure its main source of income: revenue from oil and gas. New research shared exclusively with the New Statesman has found that since Russia's invasion of Ukraine, more than £200bn in Russian fossil fuel exports have been shipped using UK-based maritime services. A single UK-based firm has carried almost a quarter of Russia's exports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) since the war began. While our government seeks to increase its defence budget, Britain's active role in the Russian fossil fuel trade helps to maintain the military spending of a nuclear power currently at war with a close European ally. The study, which has been conducted by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA), finds that the value of Russian crude oil, oil products and LNG shipped under British ownership or insurance since the war began has now reached £205.8bn. Three quarters of Russian LNG carriers were covered by UK insurance. Britain officially stopped importing Russian oil and oil products nine months after the invasion (it became illegal to do so on 5 December 2022). But a sanctions loophole means Britain keeps buying Putin's products: Russian crude is shipped to refineries in Turkey and India and then returns as oil products. CREA estimates that the UK has indirectly bought £1.4bn in Russian oil through this loophole, providing more than half a billion pounds' worth of revenue to the Kremlin. Much of the jet fuel taking British holidaymakers to sunnier climes this summer will have entered the supply chain in the oilfields of Siberia. Europe continues to buy Russian LNG directly, and in 2024 imported more LNG from Russia than ever before. Much of this is shipped, entirely legally, by a single British company: Seapeak, which is headquartered in Glasgow and which owns seven specialist LNG carriers, which can power through ice two metres thick. This is not subject to a ban and there is no suggestion that Seapeak has broken any laws. Seapeak was mentioned in an Early Day Motion on Russian LNG, which was signed by 34 cross-party MPs in January. CREA says that Seapeak alone has carried Russian LNG worth £13bn since the war began. Elsewhere, Russian fossil fuels are also shipped by a 'dark fleet' of uninsured vessels, whose ownership is obscured. As previously reported, these ships pass in sight of our shores on an almost daily basis as they sail through the English Channel. Since Labour came to power, the UK government has taken a more determined stance towards sanctioning these ships and those who enable their sale, including an accountant who allegedly arranged for the sale of vessels. A government spokesperson told the New Statesman: 'We are working with G7 and EU partners to eliminate remaining dependencies on Russian energy as soon as possible. We will not hesitate to take further action to increase economic pressure on Putin.' Why can't we stop paying Putin immediately? In a word: inflation. If Western countries entirely quit the Russian oil and gas habit, the wholesale price of energy would spike in a similar manner to 2022, bringing the price of almost everything else with it. The last inflationary surge cost the UK government £67bn in a single year in additional spending in support for consumers and businesses, and the population still endured a historic rise in the cost of living accompanied by strikes across the public sector. No government is going to impose that upon its voters, and even if it did, it wouldn't last long. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe This doesn't mean there is nothing the UK can do. Energy analysts say it is a question of supply: when the oil and gas market has enough capacity to make a sudden drop in Russian fossil fuels less important, sanctions can be imposed and enforced. The pragmatic answer is probably then to secure LNG and crude from other countries. The most realistic answer to this problem therefore comes from productive diplomacy with the US for LNG, and Saudi Arabia and others for oil. In the long term, of course, it means not relying on fossil fuels, because we don't have enough to power our country. Amid all the talk of how much we're going to spend on our military, it's important we also try to avoid paying for our enemy's. [See also: Revealed: how the City of London keeps Putin's oil flowing] Related
The Independent
39 minutes ago
- The Independent
Met Office issue thunderstorm weather warning as UK braces for wet weekend
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference.
