Kick-Ass
The Kick-Ass movie opens in America tonight. It’s been out in Britain for a couple of weeks, and I went to see it yesterday. Largely, to be honest, because it’s the sort of film I’m obliged to have an opinion about, so it might as well be an informed one.
And do you know what? It’s good. It’s really good.
As you must surely know by now, the basic idea goes like this. Teenage boy decides to become a superhero, despite completely lacking any qualifications for the job other than good intentions and a willingness to wear stupid clothes in public. More by luck than talent, he ends up crossing paths with actual bad guys and proper vigilantes. Beyond that… well, they’ve changed the plot somewhat from the comic, though they’ve stuck to the same basic story. But I won’t go into the spoilers.
What’s interesting, if you compare the synopses of the comic and the film, is that the film has actually reined in Millar’s more egregious tendencies. This probably doesn’t come across from reading the reviews. But the film has dialled back the levels of cynical nihilism from “prohibitively toxic” to merely “black comedy.” So the film, for example, is much more willing to embrace Big Daddy and Hit-Girl as real, proper superheroes inexplicably bleeding into Kick-Ass’s otherwise more-or-less real world. It resists the temptation to undercut them. It just goes with the idea that an eleven-year-old ninja is inherently cool. And because they’ve somehow migrated into Kick-Ass’s world from a different film, their total lack of realism ceases to be a problem.
Once you get rid of those bits in Mark Millar’s writing that make you roll your eyes and go “Oh, Mark…”, and once you impose a bit more structure on what remains, you end up with a really entertaining film. (By the way, the film does manage to include John Romita Jr’s art as the basis for Big Daddy’s animated origin sequence.)
And yes, Chloe Moretz and Nicolas Cage are excellent as Hit-Girl and Big Daddy. They’re the best thing in the film.
Now, you can argue that the film doesn’t work as a satire because it’s still trying to have it both ways – being a superhero is manifestly unworkable and incredibly cool at the same time. The result is moral bankruptcy, albeit ironic. There’s a lot of truth to that criticism. Frankly, the film is entertaining enough that it doesn’t matter whether it has a coherent worldview to offer. But I think it works because we’re never asked to accept the two genuine vigilantes as remotely realistic. They’re don’t belong in the real world (which isn’t really the real world, of course, but which otherwise plays by the rules of black comedy rather than John Woo movies) and the story warps to accommodate them. It’s funny because it’s a collision of elements that don’t belong in the same film. Is this making a point? Probably not, but it’s an enjoyable thing to watch.
This is probably the most genuinely ‘fun’ movie I watched in months.
Being 19 doesn’t hurt either though.
I’m not sure what being 19 has to do with it. I’m 30 (as, I believe, is Paul) and both of us enjoyed it.
I agree with the review. The movie was very entertaining. I am amused by the papers reviews seeming to split along party lines, with the Guardian saying that it was fun, although it doesn’t really make a point, while the Daily Mail said that it was morally bankrupt and made some confusing paedophile comments that have nothing to do with how Hit-Girl is portrayed in the film.
I did almost punch the lad next to me though when, after the film, he said “I like that it was very realistic”. This was just after the 11-year-old Ninja got someone to shoot themselves in the head in the most creative way I’ve seen in a movie.
Well, to an 11-year-old that’s the sort of thing they badly want to believe is realistic.
I imagine the film is quite entertaining, but I can wait for the DVD on the ground that it’s unlikely to be essential viewing.
It is one of those “benefits from a big screen and people laughing along” type of films, if that helps.
Yes, if only to reassure you that you’re not the only one laughing at the horrible thing that just happened.
I saw it at an early preview showing last night at 10 PM. We arrived early expecting the place to be as packed as most midnight movie releases of these types but the theater was surprisingly almost empty. I’m guessing that’s because school is still going.
The people who were there were the people you’d expect, myself included. There were smatterings of applause of the Iron Man 2 trailer and it seemed everyone there got the joke and was instantly laughing along with the black comedy. There was even a bit of an applause break at the moment where we meet Nic Cage and Hit-Girl.
One thing I experienced that most likely you did not: just before the previews started, a fully decked out Gambit cosplayer walked into the theaters, 90s cartoon version. He looked around and realized he was in a costume for about 30 people, then quickly darted out to the bathrooms to take off the get-up before anyone else saw him.
There are several reasons why Kick Ass (The Movie) works a lot better than Kick Ass (the comics):
The first is that it avoids the immature audience baiting tendencies of Mark Millar (“Sickening violence: just the way you like it”) which comes across as the author looking down at his audience for reading his work (see also – the final of Wanted).
Second is that it actually allow its hero fantasy to have some (small) measure of heroism – the scene with Kick Ass standing up for someone and saying he only does it because it needs to be done is actually touching – and I don’t remember ever feeling touched by a Mark Millar comics (not that I read many).
The most important reason is that it’s an action plot, and no matter how good your artist is (and Romita Jr. is one of the best ‘kinetic’ artists out there) a movie can do action much better than still images – especially when the director is as talented as Vaughn – the one shot with Big Daddy killing gangsters in the warehouse is very impressive (action-wise).
So yah… Kick Ass is much better than the source material should allow it be.
I loved the film. Definitely prefered it to the comic.
Gambit, of all costumes? The one with pink in it?
I am interested that what you think makes the film “work”, Paul, is precisely the problem I had with it. Instead of sticking to one tone, the film fluctuates between satirizing and relishing how outlandish it is. While Millar’s original work is fairly oppressive, it also is fairly consistent in its oppressiveness, with the sole exclusion of Hit Girl (even Big Daddy, in the original comic, turns out to be a fanboy in a Batman suit). Vaughn, instead, buys into the kicking of ass, and in turn allows the film to become a finely designed but familiar violence fantasy.
The movie was definately better than the comic, which was really a malicious thing. The film had more structure and heart, even fleshing out characters like the Red Mist and the girl to some degree.
A is the grade I give it. It was a good time, and I really hope to see a sequel.