
Most critics welcome John Wick as a confident revenge thriller whose familiar premise benefits from unusually clear, precise action. Praise centres on the choreography: longer takes, readable movement and restrained cutting let the performers’ physical work carry the fights. Keanu Reeves also earns broad approval for his physicality and suitability for the role. Several reviews find additional pleasure in the dry humour and the criminal underworld, particularly its rules and hotel for contract killers.
The reservations concern how little story supports that craft. For most critics, the thin plotting and absurdities are acceptable costs of the entertainment; for others, they limit its appeal. Slant Magazine finds the action repetitive and the themes thin, while Collider questions the half-hearted storytelling and lack of memorable action moments. The spread runs from enthusiastic to mixed, with no outright negative verdicts: the disagreement is chiefly over whether skilful execution makes the generic revenge material satisfying.
R
RogerEbert.com
24 October 2014 · Christy Lemire
90*
The film breathes exhilarating life into a tired revenge premise through dazzling action choreography and a strong anti-hero performance from Keanu Reeves. The directors, veteran stuntmen, deliver confident, well-choreographed fight scenes without shaky-cam or excessive editing.
Read the full review →S
Screen Daily
26 September 2014 · festival review
90*
Keanu Reeves successfully reinvents himself as a former assassin in this lovingly nostalgic shoot-em-up from stunt pros turned directors. It is an enthusiastically violent slice of escapism devoted to old-school practical action techniques.
Read the full review →H
The Hollywood Reporter
22 October 2014 · Justin Lowe
90*
The critic praises the film's nonstop action sequences and Reeves' return to form in a kinetic revenge thriller. They single out the directors' skillful framing of fight scenes for praise.
Read the full review →E
Empire
23 March 2015 · James Dyer
80*
The critic praises the inventive, precise gunplay and choreography in the action sequences, noting the film's self-aware humor and Reeves' strong performance. The thin plot serves mainly to deliver stylish violence.
Read the full review →L
Little White Lies
9 April 2015 · 3/4/4 · Nick Newman
80
Keanu Reeves delivers his best performance in years in this slick redemption-based actioner. The directors stage the fight scenes with respect for their performers and give the sequences breathing room.
Read the full review →L
Los Angeles Times
23 October 2014 · Robert Abele
80*
The sleek revenge tale jabs above its weight class with Keanu Reeves' physicality and a mix of humor and expertly choreographed hyper-violence. It's a B movie made with A-student love for the thrill of bodies in brutal motion.
Read the full review →G
The Guardian
23 October 2014 · Peter Bradshaw
80*
The critic calls it a slick, propulsive and ridiculous crime picture with confidence and élan that twists genre conventions to exhilarating effect. They single out the fierce clarity of the action choreography by debut directors Stahelski and Leitch and the refreshing world-building around a hotel for contract killers.
Read the full review →V
Vulture
24 October 2014 · David Edelstein
80*
The review highlights the film's beautiful, stylized violence and Reeves' mythic presence, praising its aesthetic ambitions over moral ones and singling out the fluid action choreography.
Read the full review →T
Total Film
6 April 2015 · Matt Glasby
75*
The review highlights the well-choreographed action and the film's graphic novel-like world, commending Reeves' fitting role while noting it feels like a stuntman's showcase with some ridiculousness.
Read the full review →N
The New York Times
23 October 2014 · Critic's Pick · Jeannette Catsoulis
70*
The crafty revenge thriller delivers with style and wit, making the execution of a familiar story near flawless despite limited substance. Director Chad Stahelski proves an elegant choreographer of fluid, coherent fight scenes.
Read the full review →V
Variety
16 October 2014 · festival review · Peter Debruge
70*
Reeves reminds viewers what a compelling action star he can be while the director makes a remarkably satisfying debut with clean, efficient action. The material is generic but delivered with suave elegance and spectacular set pieces.
Read the full review →S
Slant Magazine
23 October 2014 · Chris Cabin
60*
The critic notes the film's competent B-movie action but criticizes its lack of ambition and substance, praising the clear action framing while complaining about repetitive elements and thin themes.
Read the full review →T
Time Out
7 April 2015 · ★★★ · Joshua Rothkopf
60
The cleanly designed shoot-em-up sequences are manna for action fans, but the revenge plotting is deeply dopey. The co-directors have designed the movie with an eye for impact and elegant sparseness.
Read the full review →/
/Film
24 October 2014 · 8/10 · Germain Lussier
80
The critic praises the film's unique crime underworld and grounded, intense action choreography in long takes, while noting some conventional plot conveniences as minor flaws. It's an inventive action movie.
Read the full review →W
The Wrap
22 October 2014 · James Rocchi
80*
The critic calls the film a violent, stylish B-movie that stands out for its old-school action approach with long takes and choreography rather than quick cuts. It is ludicrous yet ludicrously entertaining despite a thin premise.
Read the full review →C
Collider
23 October 2014 · B- · Matt Goldberg
70
The critic praises the clean, efficient action choreography and the intriguing criminal underworld with its rules and codes, but faults the half-hearted storytelling, lack of memorable action moments, and the film's safe, mechanical approach to revenge.
Read the full review →D
Deadline
20 October 2014 · Pete Hammond
60*
The critic praises Keanu Reeves' return to action form but expresses uncertainty about the rest of the film overall. It may appeal strongly to fans of the star and the genre.
Read the full review →Ordered by the weight we give each publication, then by score. Scores are normalised to 100; * means inferred from an unrated review. Summaries are ours, not quotations; follow the links for the reviews themselves. How we rate