There is a plot to the John Wick movies, it's just not very deep. The plot can largely be summarised as "Wick was an assassin, but gave it up because his wife died, then some Bad People killed his dog. Wick is very upset by that, and will now express that via the medium of choreographed fight scenes". Also, there's a whole assassin sub-culture, which is wonderfully executed, if completely mad.

Overall the plot doesn't really make any sense, but it also doesn't need to, it's just a hook on which to hang some spectacular set pieces.

I haven't seen any of these, but sounds like it has about the same depth as Kill Bill, which I remember also being pretty popular.

Give the first one a try. You might be surprised.

Thanks, I might. Is there much difference in style between the first one and the others?

So I watched John Wick yesterday evening, and unfortunately I didn't like it.

I didn't feel invested in the main character at all, let alone any of the other characters. Was it the camera work, or the editing, or the acting, or the way the story was told? I don't know. In any case as a result I found the whole movie extremely boring.

Someone here mentioned Kill Bill which in a way has a similar story and over-the-top fighting scenes. But I do love Kill Bill (even though I think the fight with the Crazy 88 would have been better if it were not as long). I also found movies like The Transporter or Taken entertaining (which I think are more or less in the same genre as John Wick).

Then what exactly is it that makes me like some of these movies but not John Wick? I'm afraid I don't have the answer to that.

Not much - but the second and third do suffer from “Bigger, Better” syndrome to a certain degree. The first has the most general appeal.

Not really, I actually think the continuity in the series is better than most series these days. I think that how you feel about the first movie will be a pretty good indication of how you feel about the sequels.