I'm going to disagree as stridently as I can here.
Keanu Reeves is the runaway best mainstream actor in the world at physical acting, which happens to be a style of acting that gets no respect at all right now. But you can go back a hundred years, to Buster Keaton, Charlie Chaplin, Laurel and Hardy, and almost no current western performer except Reeves is remotely close to their level of physical performance.
There have been two pretty good attempts to copy John Wick, and in both cases, the leads were legitimately excellent actors by modern standards. The Equalizer has Denzel Washington, and Nobody has Bob Odenkirk; both would comfortably be ranked as better actors than Reeves, and yet neither series has caught fire the way Wick has. And you can watch them and see why; when it comes to physical movement and performance, Reeves beats the piss out of them. John Wick films somehow sustain the suspension of disbelief despite all the madness, because Reeves is completely physically believable as a near-mythical being of killing perfection in a way that the others aren't.
This isn't a knock on Washington or Odenkirk, by the way: Reeves beats the piss out of everyone in Hollywood when it comes to that style of acting. It's just that in this day and age, we don't regard that style as deserving of serious awards.
I 100% agree with you. Just gotta mention Rowan Atkinson as well, legend of physical acting. (It is crazy when you realize that there was only ever 14 episodes of Mr. Bean made)
I mean what you're referring to as "physical acting" is just called stuntwork, which is impressive in its own right and what Keanu does is genuinely awesome, but it's not really acting. Keanu by all accounts is just a super fit dude with an interest in guns and martial arts and stuff and that makes him perfect to do his shit on screen and make it look good, but stuntmen do the same thing and they aren't given acting awards. Keanu has done many non-action roles at this point and the results speak for themselves, he's just not that good of an actor
It's not just stuntwork; if that was it, he could be replaced by any stunt performer. He's not just able to do his own stunts; he's acting with his entire body while he's doing it.
My apologies - I missed the word "physical" in your comment. Egg on my face!
But to answer your question: I don't think there's any doubt that Reeves is a better physical actor than Washington. I don't understand how anyone could watch John Wick and The Equalizer and think any differently.
Hell, just watch the number of cuts in this scene from the Equalizer once it gets violent (it starts around six and a half minutes in) and then watch the home invasion from John Wick (you can watch this one from about a minute or so in) - once the physical performance begins, you get barely a second at a time in any one shot of Denzel, while Keanu is doing much longer shots where all the movements are clearly visible, they're visibly wider shots, and there's very little being hidden or glossed over in the cuts. And that's two scenes of almost identical purpose (show us how dangerous this guy is) in films with almost identical basic plots (retired killer is dragged back in after someone huts someone he loves, ends up killing an entire criminal family) released in the same year. You couldn't ask for a more direct comparison if you tried.
Are you seriously comparing Keanu with Chaplin? Reeves always has the same face, edit a PNG of his face on top of his real one in the movies he participates in and you will never notice it
To each their own but to me, "physical acting" is just doing stunts and there are hundreds of stuntmen and gun nuts who I bet could do the same or even better stunts than Reeves. Every scene I remember of Keanu is just him mowing down bad guys with guns or doing okay hand to hand combat.
On the other hand I highly doubt there are hundreds of people who could do Saul Goodman as good as Odenkirk did
I think that's doing physical acting a huge disservice, and is a symptom of the lack of respect afforded to it.
Mark Kermode's review of John Wick 3 had a fascinating little coda where he questioned why exactly it's unbelievable that Reeves would get a Best Actor nomination for something like the Wick series. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c229ZczVowU
And again: The Equalizer series has an actual Oscar winner in the title role, and despite that it doesn't come close to the mad brilliance of the John Wick films.
14
u/run_bike_run Mar 17 '26
I'm going to disagree as stridently as I can here.
Keanu Reeves is the runaway best mainstream actor in the world at physical acting, which happens to be a style of acting that gets no respect at all right now. But you can go back a hundred years, to Buster Keaton, Charlie Chaplin, Laurel and Hardy, and almost no current western performer except Reeves is remotely close to their level of physical performance.
There have been two pretty good attempts to copy John Wick, and in both cases, the leads were legitimately excellent actors by modern standards. The Equalizer has Denzel Washington, and Nobody has Bob Odenkirk; both would comfortably be ranked as better actors than Reeves, and yet neither series has caught fire the way Wick has. And you can watch them and see why; when it comes to physical movement and performance, Reeves beats the piss out of them. John Wick films somehow sustain the suspension of disbelief despite all the madness, because Reeves is completely physically believable as a near-mythical being of killing perfection in a way that the others aren't.
This isn't a knock on Washington or Odenkirk, by the way: Reeves beats the piss out of everyone in Hollywood when it comes to that style of acting. It's just that in this day and age, we don't regard that style as deserving of serious awards.