"Kick Ass" Review Thread

[Checkmate]

Knowing who Red Mist was from the beginning was a smart move. I mean, how are you not going to know that Red Mist is Chris, especially since he's being played by McLovin'.

Easy: They could have fooled us by emphasizing his desire to rebel against his father in a twisted attempt to prove to him that he really was a "man" who could do whatever he set his mind to. As it stands, having him in the comic book store at all is kind of pointless. It added a whole lot of nothing to the movie and the character.

It would have been fairly believable, too. It's a very common stereotype for the son of a crime lord to rebel and become a 'good guy' in fiction, especially super hero fiction.

Personally, I liked the more screen time given to the villains. It fleshed out their character a whole lot more than what was in the book.

That could have been done better.

 

[marillion]

This is coming from someone who has not read the comic, so take it for what it is...

I was really impressed with the movie.. It was much darker than I thought it would be and I agree that Hit-Girl really stole the show. I ended up feeling kind of empty for her even though she has a mostly happy ending.. At first you laugh along with her premise but by the end, your heart is really sad for her loss of childhood.

The jetpack thing was a bit wonky but it worked for me and I think they handled it well. It was a bit of an easy out, but the set up worked for me.

I'll agree with the Red Mist thing.. There's no point in trying to con the audience with trying to hide his true identy.. We all know that Clark Kent is Superman, so there's no way we wouldn't know who Red Mist is from the beginning.

I'm going to head out at lunch today and find the comic...

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

^ There are no set plans for a sequel yet nor do they intend on doing one...

This is a good thing, since the kind of business it's doing won't support one. Direct-to-DVD, maybe.

 

[Trekker4747]

The jet-pack thing:

Some people complain that this violates the "realism" the movie tries and to establish for itself. Me, I don't see it this way. There's little in this movie that tries to set itself in a completely mundane world. The only thing it establishes is that there's no "superheroes" in the world of the nature we generally see in the comics. No people who're benifiting from spontaneous macro-evolution, no victims of radioactive/GE-spiders, no aliens from distant galaxies and no eccentric billionaires with too much time and money. All of those things, like in our world, simply don't exsist.

That doesn't mean the technologicaly "feasible" exsistance of a "jetpack" doesn't exsist or that highly-trained pre-teen girls don't exsist. And we're also shown in the movie that the criminals, unlike in comics, are relentless and uncaring. Kick-Ass got his ass-beat by both the muggers he encountered and the head-boss was ready to shoot an 11-year-old girl in the head. That, along with the absence of superpowers, is where the "realism" of this movie's premise comes into play.

The jetpack? Outlandish and only a tiny bit unrealistic but I don't think it violates the premise of the movie.

This is a good thing, since the kind of business it's doing won't support one. Direct-to-DVD, maybe.

Worldwide-estimates compared to estimated production costs has the movie paid for already. Further sales, word of mouth and DVD sales will probably mean this movie will do decent business. I would suspect aq sequel "could" be in the works in the future if the creators are willing.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Worldwide-estimates compared to estimated production costs has the movie paid for already.

No, that's estimated worldwide gross (less than forty million so far), of which only a percentage will go against the studio's sunk costs. Whether the movie can even earn back its production budget much less distribution and whatever the promotion costs were (and they don't appear to have spent a ton of money, there) will probably depend on the coming weekend. Add in likely strong DVD sales for a movie on this level, and the film might yet earn out - but it's a big leap from there to greenlighting a second film on the basis of sales that fell short of expectations on the first.

 

[SG-17]

You know, even a middle class working person could have enough money to supply themselves as a vigilante hero in a level between what Kick-Ass (lowly spandex and batons) and Big Daddy (gear and armor coming out the ass) are.

I mean getting a bulletproof vest/leg protection/head protection and knife resistant clothing will set you back a good $2000, but other materials such as sap gloves, taser-knuckles, telescopic batons, throwing knives, handcuffs, etc are relatively cheap.

The concept of regular people becoming caped crusaders is entirely feasible and the movie portrayed it well up until the jetpack but the movie already had me by then so I didn't really care.

 

[JacksonArcher]

Easy: They could have fooled us by emphasizing his desire to rebel against his father in a twisted attempt to prove to him that he really was a "man" who could do whatever he set his mind to. As it stands, having him in the comic book store at all is kind of pointless. It added a whole lot of nothing to the movie and the character.

It makes perfect sense. Chris is a character that's very lonely with probably no social life. I mean, he goes to movies with his dad... do you know how many teenagers do that willingly without being hardasses? He obviously had a very close relationship to his dad, since he didn't seem to mind going to a movie with him (and be seen with him), and furthermore, it's shown throughout the movie that he wants to be a part of his dad's business. He wants to prove to his dad that he's worthwhile. I think a lot of people out there can relate to that... trying to connect and prove yourself to your father.

Having him at the comic-book store showed that he was in fact a comic-book fan, so it made sense for him to come up with the idea of Red Mist. I mean, verses him not being shown liking comics, and it coming sort of out of nowhere, here it has some resemblance of validity. There's a foundation for his interest... I think that the reason why he became Red Mist was twofold: He wanted to prove to his dad he was worthwhile, but also, at its core, he wanted to do what Kick-Ass was doing: he wanted to be a superhero. When he tells Kick-Ass that without him there would be no Red Mist, I think that was actually a very true line indicative of his character and motivation. Yes, he was out to deceive Kick-Ass, but he was really out to deceive Big Daddy, since he pleaded with his dad to let Kick-Ass go.

It would have been fairly believable, too. It's a very common stereotype for the son of a crime lord to rebel and become a 'good guy' in fiction, especially super hero fiction.

See, it's exactly that. A stereotype. I think it would have been a lot more cliche and predictable for Red Mist to have that sort of character journey. Would it have been easier to empathize with a spoiled rich kid who hates his father or a lonely, repressed kid who yearns for his father's affection?

 

[Broccoli]

^ There are no set plans for a sequel yet nor do they intend on doing one...

This is a good thing, since the kind of business it's doing won't support one. Direct-to-DVD, maybe.

I disagree. The movie was fairly cheap to make in addition to getting mostly positive reviews and a very strong positive audience reaction to it. This movie is going to have legs and I suspect that it'll explode on DVD. When all is said and done, it'll churn out a decent profit. True, it is not spitting out Iron Man or Dark Knight numbers, but it wasn't expected to.

Knowing who Red Mist was from the beginning was a smart move. I mean, how are you not going to know that Red Mist is Chris, especially since he's being played by McLovin'.

Easy: They could have fooled us by emphasizing his desire to rebel against his father in a twisted attempt to prove to him that he really was a "man" who could do whatever he set his mind to. As it stands, having him in the comic book store at all is kind of pointless. It added a whole lot of nothing to the movie and the character.

It would have been fairly believable, too. It's a very common stereotype for the son of a crime lord to rebel and become a 'good guy' in fiction, especially super hero fiction.

What Jackson said.

Personally, I liked the more screen time given to the villains. It fleshed out their character a whole lot more than what was in the book.

That could have been done better.

How so?

Mark Strong's character was an almost non-entity in the book, and they made him into a realistic, rounded character.

 

[JacksonArcher]

Yeah, and I am really warming up to Mark Strong as an actor. He seems to give consistently good performances, and he definitely helped make Frank D'Amico more than just your average mobster.

 

[Broccoli]

^ Yeah. Though I haven't seen Sherlock Holmes yet, I do hope that he breaks his string of villain characters and branch out so something else in the mainstream. After seeing Kick-Ass, I can see him have a good feel for comedy (more George Clooney comedy, less Will Ferrell comedy).

 

[JacksonArcher]

^ Yeah. Though I haven't seen Sherlock Holmes yet, I do hope that he breaks his string of villain characters and branch out so something else in the mainstream. After seeing Kick-Ass, I can see him have a good feel for comedy (more George Clooney comedy, less Will Ferrell comedy).

He was good in Sherlock Holmes, but his character was more of your generic villain type. The writing wasn't as strong as it was in Kick-Ass. I do agree he should branch out, however I still look forward to him as Sinestro in Green Lantern. I think comedy would be a good place for him to branch out.

 

[Checkmate]

See, it's exactly that. A stereotype. I think it would have been a lot more cliche and predictable for Red Mist to have that sort of character journey. Would it have been easier to empathize with a spoiled rich kid who hates his father or a lonely, repressed kid who yearns for his father's affection?

Dude.

The point is that in the comic, he wasn't that stereotype. He was a "supervillain" that was taking advantage of that stereotype to do exactly what he did in the movie, for exactly the reason you mentioned. The only difference is that it was a genuine twist in the comic that wasn't obvious until it occurred. And his "wait til they get a load of me" bit at the end of the comic was far more menacing than what we got in the movie because of it.

 

[JacksonArcher]

See, it's exactly that. A stereotype. I think it would have been a lot more cliche and predictable for Red Mist to have that sort of character journey. Would it have been easier to empathize with a spoiled rich kid who hates his father or a lonely, repressed kid who yearns for his father's affection?

Dude.

The point is that in the comic, he wasn't that stereotype. He was a "supervillain" that was taking advantage of that stereotype to do exactly what he did in the movie, for exactly the reason you mentioned. The only difference is that it was a genuine twist in the comic that wasn't obvious until it occurred. And his "wait til they get a load of me" bit at the end of the comic was far more menacing than what we got in the movie because of it.

As Broccoli said, the moment Red Mist would have opened his mouth, audiences would have known it was the guy playing McLovin' aka Chris. Unless he pulled a Christian Bale and computer modulated his voice, that twist would have been completely ruined.

 

[Checkmate]

Yes, and it wouldn't have fucking mattered even if everyone in the movie knew he was.

Jesus. The point is that he would still be faking being a hero. The only difference is that the audience wouldn't have known that from the very beginning. You know, just like in the comic. And he could have even added to the ruse by bitching about his dad while hanging out being a 'hero' with Kick Ass.

He actually was something of a mastermind villain in the comic. In the movie, he's just a twat.

 

[JacksonArcher]

Yes, and it wouldn't have fucking mattered even if everyone in the movie knew he was.

Jesus. The point is that he would still be faking being a hero. The only difference is that the audience wouldn't have known that from the very beginning. You know, just like in the comic. And he could have even added to the ruse by bitching about his dad while hanging out being a 'hero' with Kick Ass.

He actually was something of a mastermind villain in the comic. In the movie, he's just a twat.

I have a slight feeling like you're getting frustrated. I dunno. Maybe I'm wrong.

I might be dense, but I thought Red Mist/Chris was faking being a hero? The entire thing was a ruse from the beginning. The only people that knew about it were the audience and Frank D'Amico and his gang. I mean, if the audience knows Chris is Red Mist, how is that fooling them? Even if we didn't have the scene where Chris tells Frank his plans, and he just shows up as Red Mist, the audience still would've known he was Chris D'Amico, Frank D'Amico's son. Or am I just completely missing the point here?

 

[Checkmate]

Or am I just completely missing the point here?

Yes. You seem to think the big secret was who Red Mist was. It wasn't.

 

[JacksonArcher]

Or am I just completely missing the point here?

Yes. You seem to think the big secret was who Red Mist was. It wasn't.

I'm sorry, but then... what was the big secret? This deviation from the comics?

 

[Trekker4747]

I've not read the comic, but I suspect making it work would have to involve a good amount of trickery or diversion from the book.

First of all they'd either have to not have any scenes between Chris and Frank before the "reveal" and this would cut-out the shunned son dynamic or they'd have to have a different actor play the son and have McLovin playing Mist. And that'd be cheating as one would have to "win the role" to play the character after the reveal/in any future movies.

They could've been "creative" with lighting, voices and such during Red Mist's scenes to keep his real identity "hidden from the audience" and then kept McLovin' in both roles. This "could've" worked.

I think it works fine as it is, having not read the book I didn't know that McLovin was going to remain "bad", I honestly expected him to be "inspired" by the good Kick-Ass had in him and would be the one to rush-in to save Hit Girl. (Afterall, he seemed genuinely shocked his dad went back on his word and still captured Kick-Ass and intended to kill him.)

Books and movies are very different mediums and work by very different rules. There's a number of ways a graphic novelist can draw two characters differently (even though they're supposed to be the same person) to "fool" the reader. That's not so easy to pull off in a movie without cheating or using trickery. For the movie, it seems to be it just wasn't supposed to be a "surprise" that Chris and Red Mist were the same person. In the movie the "tension" comes from whether Red Mist will stay loyal to his dad or Kick-Ass.

Still doesn't matter, it was Hit-Girl's movie anyway.

 

[JacksonArcher]

Well said Trekker.

 

[Checkmate]

I'm sorry, but then... what was the big secret? This deviation from the comics?

<sighs> I hate it when people pretend to be obtuse. So god damned annoying.

Even in the comic, it was pretty obvious who Red Mist was from the beginning. Did that change the fact that his betrayal was shocking? No. Because it's a very common stereotype in the comics and fiction in general for the son of a crime boss to want to 'prove' himself by rebelling against his father. And that was a stereotype Christ was using as part of his scheme, because he really was a cunning mastermind. Even in the movie, the early scenes between him and his father showed that desire. The problem is, in the movie, they just came right out and told you what he was actually doing rather than continuing to play up the fact that Chris was upset with his father constantly ignoring him and pushing him away from the family business.

Instead, they could have played up his own love for comics more. They could have skipped the whole "hey daddy, buy me these things so I can trick Kick Ass into letting his guard down so we can betray him!" scene -- that one, single scene is what really ruins it -- and just have him start showing up exactly like he did in the comic. They could have had him run around with Kick Ass a little more, actually doing one or two 'heroic' things without Red Mist constantly sneering and acting double-crossy the entire time. They could have let him 'help' Kick Ass and Hit Girl sneak into the apartment complex and then reveal that he was a backstabbing villain from the very beginning, and that the complex was an elaborate death trap.

It served no functional purpose to reveal all of that from the very beginning. It just made the character boring and impotent, and it made his final scene ridiculous and goofy. He went from a Lex Luthor type with a hint of genuine malevolence and cunning in the comic to a bumbling 60's-style Batman not-really-a-villain in the movie.