But what I can tell you is this: if you told me my father (who i'm estranged from) died, I would thank you for taking the time to tell me... finish cooking my dinner....eat it while watching tv....and sleep peacefully. Then, perhaps a week later, out of nowhere I would break down and CRY about the missed opportunities and how much I miss him.

From my experience, I am more similiar to many males then they'd like to admit. So if you asked me what actor best represents me I would immediately reply "Keanu Reeves." However, I would also contradict that he is not a "skilled actor" because he brings this emotional retardation into every role he plays.
So is Keanu a skilled actor? No. Why not? Because he can not slip into the role and mindset of the majority of characters that a script calls for. He reacts to situations how they make sense TO HIM, not the character. However, as an emotionally-challenged male I will tell you this- every one of Keanu's reactions make logical sense. Emotional sense? no. Logical? Yes. And I would argue that he is a "necessary evil" because he brings people like ME into the media conscience.

P.S: I am a huge fan of Samurai philosophy and because of this I've read "Hagakure" which preaches: Every important decision should be made in the span of three breaths. Following this philosophy, I can see why Keanu reeves is so intrigued by the samurai and eastern martial arts. One must set their mind/logical thoughts first, and their emotions second.

Thank you for taking the time to read this.

I also relate a lot to Keanu and identify with his responses to things, possibly for the same reasons you do.

But unlike you, I do also think he's a skilled actor. Perhaps not in the way that most people consider skilled acting, but skilled all the same. And none of his characters are the same to me. He does slip into each one of them; perhaps not in the way the writer or director meant, but as far as I'm concerned (like many of us here) he still manages quite successfully and convincingly to create a different character each time.

There's no reason to consider acting based on 'logical' reactions any inferior to acting based on emotional ones.

---

He reacts to situations how they make sense TO HIM, not the character.

---

I just honestly don't get this. Shane's reaction is totally different than Constantine's is totally different than Jack's is totally different than Kevin's is totally different than Conor's, etc...each of them separate and distinct and each fully appropriate within the world of the character and story they're in.

I'm also not quite sure I see the sense in your breakdown of logic vs. emotion. Someone might not show emotion in the example you describe (your father's death), but that doesn't mean he feels nothing. After all, why do you think the crying breakdown happens a week after you get the news? It's not because of the sudden influx of emotions filling a lifelong vacuum; it's because of the emotions that were there all along that finally demanded acknowledgement.

1)I certainly do not feel that Keanu is "evil" - perhaps you'd be happier talking to the Sarah Palin crowd who are convinced that he is using mind control to scare Ms Palin.

2)I'm not so sure that we have empirically established the "necessity" of bringing people like you "into the media cosncience" (the media has a conscience? who knew?)

3) the crux of your "argument" is that Keanu's portrayal of emotional reactions is not how you envision emotional reactions, and that it is therefore, viz a viz, concordantly etc, invalid.

if being "emotionally challenged" (welcome to the human condition, buddy) causes you to seek out a group of people who enjoy Keanu's work and also like and respect him, and immediately proclaim how and why he's a bad actor, I think you'd probably be happier seeking a new and less sarcastic hobby. Just a suggestion.

P.S: I've given her a golden shower. It was less than satisfying.

---

This is a forum.

---

Somehow I'm not convinced you returned here to discuss anything. I'm pretty sure you'll visit again, though.
Until then, sayonara ;)

---

Keanu Reeve's asshole

---

The apostrophe should come after the 's', not before, because 'Reeves' is the owner of the asshole in question, not Reeve. If, on the other hand, you were referring to, say, the asshole of Christopher Reeve (no 's'), then "Reeve's asshole" would be correct.

---

P.S: I've given her a golden shower. It was less than satisfying.

---

Was this shower administered during the five minutes of asshole-separation?

Meanwhile, while we don't (yet) have any hard and fast rules about erotica on this site, it's tradition for literary fantasies about Keanu to be posted under the 'Fan Creations' forum.

The first rule of WINM is that you do not talk about Fight Club. I am pleased to see that you have adhered to that rule. However, another rule of Fight Club is to be excellent to each other, which you have failed to do. Disagreement is allowed. Angry disagreement is also allowed; we're all adults and mature teenagers here. But the nature of your insult was crass, uncalled for, and not at all logical. This is not that kind of forum.

I don't believe in banning or deleting people from this site, because I'm not a fan of censorship in general. But I hope for this community to be a space of mutual respect even amidst disagreement.

Fine keep the lips where they are, you're not in my way...moves round the front. *high-fives* Luca.

Ok....
What's cooking in the kitchen?

Most excellent responses from most everyone - kudos to us!