By Matt Brunson
KICK-ASS
DIRECTED BY Matthew Vaughn
STARS Aaron Johnson, Nicolas Cage
Based on Mark Millar’s popular comic series, Kick-Ass begins as a PG-13 delight before eventually turning into an R-rated ordeal. Adaptations of this sort often squarely fit into the more restrictive rating (e.g. Watchmen, Sin City), and Millar’s illustrated series certainly isn’t for the kiddies. But despite this fact, here’s one graphic (in all senses of the word) retelling that would have benefited from a more family-friendly rendition.
The title refers to Dave Lizewski (Aaron Johnson), a geeky teenager who loves comic books and wonders why no one has ever mimicked the caped crusaders seen battling evildoers in print. Even though he concedes that his only superpower is being “invisible to girls,” Dave decides to don a slick scuba suit and mask and take to the streets to fight crime under the moniker of Kick-Ass. His first encounter with a couple of street punks ends with him receiving a shiv in his stomach before getting slammed by a speeding car, two incidents that land him in the hospital. Released with damaged nerve endings and a semi-steel body that basically turns him into a Wolverine-with-training-wheels, he again tries his hand at crime-fighting – this time, his skirmish is captured on film and broadcast all over the Internet, turning him into a media sensation.
As long as Kick-Ass remains focused on Dave and his exploits in and out of costume, it remains a clever modern riff on the classic Marvel tale, like watching Peter Parker’s travails reimagined for Napoleon Dynamite. But this is only half the movie. The rest involves the efforts of two far more accomplished superheroes, Big Daddy (a woefully miscast Nicolas Cage) and Hit-Girl (Chloe Grace Moretz), to take down a ruthless criminal named Frank D’Amico (Mark Strong, fresh from playing the ruthless criminal in Sherlock Holmes). Big Daddy and Hit-Girl are the secret identities of ex-cop Damon Macready and his 11-year-old daughter Mindy, and they’re both bent on revenge. Make that bloody revenge.
A glaring streak of sadism proves to be Kick-Ass’s undoing, as the can-do pluck and spirit exhibited in, say, Spider-Man (the movies and the comics) is ignored in favor of unrelenting violence at every turn. Writer-director Matthew Vaughn (who previously helmed the memorable Layer Cake) and co-writer Jane Goldman might believe it’s fair game for the bad guys to get offed in jokey, gruesome ways (most notably the goon who explodes in an oversized microwave), but how funny is it when D’Amico fatally shoots a costumed kid in the head after mistaking him for the real Kick-Ass? Equally troubling is the handling of the character of Hit-Girl, who, taught by her father, proceeds to kill scores of men (and one woman) by any means necessary (guns, knives, you name it). One character chastises Damon Macready for turning Mindy into a pint-size killer, correctly asserting that this little girl deserves a normal childhood. Yet Kick-Ass then completely ignores this line of thought, allowing Macready to steadfastly remain a good guy and never once questioning the fact that he’s transformed his daughter into a soulless killing machine. And those who are already celebrating Hit-Girl as the new face of female empowerment are completely missing the point that she’s been brainwashed by her father (the patriarchy, if you will) into carrying out his desires.
As to the controversial matter of whether the movie turns this 9-year-old girl into a sexual object of desire, I’ll let others hash that one out. I personally don’t think so, but try telling that to the pedophilic fanboys who are already posting lewd comments about what they’d like to do to her underage body.
This article appears in Apr 20-26, 2010.
Sounds like a damned if you do, damned if you don’t scenario. They stayed true to the violence of the comic which upset people. If they had gone the family-friendly route, fanboys would be outraged that the original story and violence were ignored.
I think you miss the point of the movie. The story never intended to be goofy in the sense of comic books. It is almost a satirical comment on them. While I don’t appreciate the additional violence presented in the movie, neither could I condone cleaning it up for mass consumption. A movie based on a story should stick as close to the spirit of the source material as possible. If it is going to be radically altered for its film rendition, as you wish they have done with Kick-ass, why bother doing it in the first place? Better to make your own original movie instead.
While in regular comic book movies there are barely any consequences to all the violence, Kick-ass shows you what would really happen with some flair. It is neither pretty or glamorous. You hit people, they bruise; you cut people, they bleed. Can’t take one without the other.
I wasn’t thrilled by Nicholas Cage, specially after it’s rendition of previous comic book characters, but he did an ok job. His character is meant to portray an obsessed, mentally damaged person. In his micro-cosm he is taking his daughter out of a dull life into one full of adventure. This was partially changed on the movie, but his issues always stem from a damaged mind, logic or common sense don’t need to apply.
If your preference is for traditional, golden-age type of heroes, Kick-ass is not the movie you want to watch or review.
Well said Magius. I’m conflicted about the movie. I think technically it was well-presented. It certainly did have a rawness, an uncomfortable ‘wth is going to happen next’ quality that I appreciate in risky filmaking. But I also believe it didn’t really know, or have the time or desire, to figure out what sort of world it wanted to present.
On the one hand you have most of the bad guys, Kick Ass, his high-school chums and various thugs operating in the ‘real world’ where heroic behavior will 99% of the time end in gruesome failure. Then you introduce two characters who represent the non-real Comic Book Reality where they simply cannot fail unless the writer needs them to for some dramatic cliffhanger ending. By the end of it we are pretty much left in Comic Book land with jet-packs, miniguns, diabolical adversaries, good triumphing over evil and so forth. Stylishly done, but at odds with ‘the other half’ of the film that was an interesting take on the super-hero myth.
As for Hit-Girl. I think it was a bold move on the filmakers part, but I was equally dismayed that anyone felt it necessary to make such a statement with a prebuscenent child. I really don’t think I’m ready for a slew of R-rated versions of “The Goonies” and “Home Alone” in order to up the ante on boy/girl/child empowerment.
As a one-off discussion piece, Kick Ass has some merit. And again, I think the action was action choreography was quite well done (mostly for the Hit Girl gimmick). But I don’t know if we should linger long, or be too quick to return, to the worldview and aesthetics presented here…
I have two objections with this review.
The first being is that you seem to have a problem with the unrelenting violence of this film. But I think you forget that in this “universe” if you will. There are no superpowers. No one can fly, has super strength, laser vision, etc. You forget that this are real people, capable of real violence, when the Mob Boss shoots the kid posing as Kick-Ass he is doing what most likely a real Mob Boss would do. No lengthy “Good VS. Evil” monologue. He solved his problem. Comic Books are intended to appeal to children, which is why violence is so often let out. Kick-Ass was a breath of fresh air because in the real world (even though many events in the film are highly improbable) violence is real. People get stabbed, shot, and beaten to death. Sorry that does not conform to your cookie-cutter world.
My second problem is that you, like others, seem to have a problem with the character of Hit-Girl. I disagree with the statement you make that her father dragged her into a world of violence and that he was using her to only carry out HIS mission. This is wrong. Her mother died because of D’Amico, almost killing her in the process. Any child could realize that and feel the need for revenge. She also was well-adjusted, had a strong sense of justice, and seemed that she could easily acclimate into normal society. I don’t see the problem. It is sick though what the disgusting fanboys are saying about her though I do not think that was anyones intention.
It certainly seems that the most noteworthy aspect of Kick-Ass (a movie I enjoyed enough to see twice) was Hit-Girl’s polarizing character–in fact, I’m delighted by the questions her role forces us to ask; there is inherent value to making us dust off our conventions and mores by demanding a response.
The only part of the film that I felt really dropped the ball with her character was at the end, where she is depicted as seamlessly reintegrating back into a normal childhood…although I understand that this is simply following the gist of the original comic’s ending, it seems completely unbelievable that someone could psychologically just walk away from a life of such extreme violence and apathy to human suffering. That portrayal is far more troubling to me than her actual actions as a child soldier, specifically because it trivializes the magnitude of those actions by implying that they carry no personal or social repercussion.
I should point out, though, that her character is 11 (and the actress 12), not 9, and any implication that the movie sexualizes her is ridiculously off the mark; there is no compelling content within the film to support this (unless you want to cite blowing a kiss as moral decay), and ‘fanboy’ reactions are completely irrelevant since they simply represent the psychology of those viewers themselves.
Age was correct in one mention but not the other; thanks for the catch.
Let me fall into this and please take your time to read my comment as I took my time to ready ours. Sorry in advance, i am not a native english speaker.
I think that people are overreacting to that movie. Especially when it comes to hitgirl. Of course it’s nothing good to sexualize a kid – but I am pretty sure there was never even the slightest intent to do so, even leon the professional did hint more into a direction like this – but actually I am sick about those counter-reactions that people are so fond of these times. Everyone’s a pedophilia-phobiac. Not every young girl in a skirt or a leather-fight-suit means something sexual. And I am pretty sure that most girls out there won’t start killing people because of that movie.
Hitgirl was – in my view – an artistic valve to play with opposites and it was necessary to stay true to the source material, as someone of you already mentioned. I personally am sick of half baked media for the masses and something like kick-ass is some refreshing stuff in my book. You know, hitgirl, polarizing on purpose. She wears leather, a school-girl skirt and she’s underage. Whoohooo, can’t you see that this was the intention, to SHOW how decadent and retarded our society has already become, it’s not the filmmakers wanting to show something “wrong or bad” it’s YOU thinking bad. And about the violence, it’s a movie for christ’s sake.
Violence can be used for emphasis, for style, for whatever. And one thing is sure, banning violence out of of movies doesn’t stop real violence from happening. Showing violence in a gross and stylized way does not promote violence, in the theatre I was most people were going “oooooh” and “waaah fuck…” when they saw what was happening. thats good. makes them think. they expected a teen/kid-movie and they got shocked, their grey matter working. polarizing characters and breaking with the “do’s and don’ts” of mainstream filmmaking is the only thing that gets us out of that dullness..
The WORST, Disgusting, HORRIBLE movie I ever saw in my whole entire 36 y.o. life! This movie needs to forbidden, and it will be in all other civil countries,others than US, of course and unfortunately! Because I have my son living here, who’s 12, and who will have his future here…AROUND WHO? Tell me, Mr. movie’s producers, what were you trying to say to teens through this movie? what did you teach them? how to Kill, hot to swear, how to be sexy when you are 11y.o., how to Skip school( who cares about school! life is very exiting and without it!)Your movie SUCK, and I wish not only to get my 11 backs back, you own me much more than just a ticket’s money- you own me my time, my health, my trust in America and it’s future! go to hell of you. But parents, please, Attention: DO NOT EVEN THINK TO show this movie to your children, at least unless they are 18!
So Matt, what did you think of Kill Bill? Why not review the movie for what it was meant to be, rather than for what you want it to be?
> try telling that to the pedophilic fanboys who are already posting lewd comments about what they’d like to do to her underage body.
I’d rather imagine what Hit Girl would do to their bodies.
Galina, dorogaja, Vy nichego ne ponjali. Kto Vam skazal, chto eto fil’m dlja detej? Khotja Vashi deti navernoe luchshe ponjali by chem Vy.
One of the main things about Hit Girl is she is supposed to be immoral, bloody, ruthless, because her dad raised her to be like that. I almost feel like the entire point of the movie was to high-light desensitizing. Marcus was almost brought in for the sole purpose to illustrate BD and HG’s background, to scream at us “IS THIS OKAY”. No, it isn’t, and then the movie brings you back to a world where it is okay, where the epitome of awesome is to see an 11-year-old girl shooting and slicing her way through a hallway. This isn’t even mentioning that the entire scene inside the warehouse is pretty much screaming “Killing people in real life is just like killing them in video games!”. This movie isn’t moral, don’t need to be a genius to figure that one out.
Another thing is challenging modern conventions, be surprising, shocking, DIFFERENT! From the very first scene, Big Daddy and Hit Girl jump at us, every scene builds on their character and makes them seem more badass, more intersting. People walked in thinking “Kick-ass”, walked out thinking “Hit Girl”. She goes against all modern convention, mixing bloodbath with cussing for a shocking and attention-grabbing performance. She is never really sexualized, though small jabs are made it to be quickly shut down. When she is in her school-girl outfit, she is more about innocence than bizzarre fetish, but when the guy is down there with a bulge coming out of his cheek, you know what your first thought was. And earlier, one of the characters mentions loving her, which is more for comedic purposed BUT, and a big but here, the movie never beckons us to look at how hot she is.
Sorry if my post was meandering, don’t really have time to organize my thoughts.
@Asur: I think you hit the nail on the head regarding the character of Hit-Girl. I’m not sure if the character poses any questions that specifically needed to be asked, but it is enough to raise controversy (check all the posts). I hadn’t even considered the return to a ‘normal childhood,’ but that’s certainly a valid point to make, especially since violence of this caliber is perpetrated by children throughout the world. THAT is an inescapable reality, and if this movie causes one person pause to consider this issue, then her controversial character has done some good.
In regards to ‘pedophilic fanboys,’ this should be a non-issue. It’s on the same level as raising concerns of bestiality with regards to Ace Ventura; people with those persuasions will see what they want to.
@Galina: I’m confused as to why the movie would be inappropriate for your children while they’re under 18, but it suddenly becomes more permissible once they’ve reached that magical age. Children will be (and already are) exposed to pervasive violence whether we like it or not. Rather than leaving kids to work through these issues on their own, allowing them to get their information from God-knows-where, and then blaming someone 2 or 3 steps removed from any culpability, doesn’t it make more sense to just talk to them about it. The same rules apply to sex as to violence- kids will learn about it whether parents want them to or not. Shouldn’t parents act directly in their childrens’ lives to determine the kind of input they’re receiving?! Granted, the conversations aren’t easy, but (and I may be reaching here) it seems to me that anything less demonstrates a lack of commitment to the well-being of the child and society as a whole. Starting this conversation could be as easy as sitting down, watching a movie containing violence and discussing the actions and their implications.
I feel like I’ve been on a rant of sorts, so I’ll close with two comments. First, this movie (however you feel about it), has placed important issues on the table, and- so long as people take the time to thoughtfully and respectfully consider them- that’s a good thing. Second, if you really want a movie that addresses the problems of violence and its relation to the media in modern America, I’d recommend Oliver Stone’s Natural Born Killers.
My email is below: I’d love to continue this conversation/debate if anyone feels game.
nordicon@gmail.com
ITS A MOVIE! A WORK OF FICTICIOUS IMAGINATION! … AN ESCAPE INTO A WORLD THAT DOESN’T EXIST! STOP TAKING YOURSELVES TOO SERIOUSLY … & DON’T TAKE THE FILM TOO SERIOUSLY! – IT WAS FUN & I LEFT IT AT THAT! … DIDN”T REALLY TALK TOO MUCH ABOUT IT AFTERWARDS EXCEPT TO SAY “WOW! HADN’T SEEN ANYTHING QUITE LIKE THAT BEFORE … ORIGINAL & A FUN RIDE FOR A WEE WHILE.” GET OVER YOURSELVES FROM THE AUTHOR OF THIS REVIEW ON DOWN … JUST A MOVIE … NOT EVERYONE WILL SEE IT OR LIKE IT IF THEY DO … JUST A MOVIE! WELCOME TO THE REAL WORLD WHERE MOVIES ARE MOVIES & NOT ALWAYS WHAT YOU WANT THEM TO BE TO SUIT YOUR PRETENTIOUS INTERPRETATIONS … GO FOR THE RIDE & LEAVE IT IN THE THEATER … WANNA BE CRITICS! … GO DO SOMETHING WORTHWHILE…