Ebert Calls Kick-Ass Movie "Morally Reprehensible"

Tom Goldman

Crying on the inside.
Aug 17, 2009
14,499
0
0
Ebert Calls Kick-Ass Movie "Morally Reprehensible"


Famous movie reviewer Roger Ebert does not see any value in the new comic book inspired movie Kick-Ass [http://www.amazon.com/Kick-Ass-Two-Disc-Blu-ray-Combo-Digital/dp/B002ZG9846/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1278529702&sr=1-1].

**Warning: Contains light spoilers for Kick-Ass**

The Kick-Ass movie, released in theatres today and based on the comic book of the same name, did not sit well with Roger Ebert, as is evident by his rating of one star. True to the comic, the movie features an extreme level of violence, which Ebert doesn't understand the context or purpose for.

Kick-Ass is a unique tale of normal people that try to become superheroes, but it casts this somewhat foolish intention in a more realistic light (in the beginning, anyway). The story's main character, a high school student named Dave, suits up to become Kick-Ass perfectly well, but usually only ends up in the hospital after trying to stop crime. After meeting father and daughter superheroes Big Daddy and Hit Girl, a duo that reduces the criminal population with their own methods of extreme violence, the story's meat begins and things get more complicated for Dave.

In his recent review [http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100414/REVIEWS/100419986], Ebert calls Kick-Ass "morally reprehensible," primarily due to violence committed by the very young Hit Girl. "A movie camera makes a record of whatever is placed in front of it, and in this case, it shows deadly carnage dished out by an 11-year-old girl, after which an adult man brutally hammers her to within an inch of her life. Blood everywhere. Now tell me all about the context," he writes.

"At the end, when the villain deliciously anticipates blowing a bullet hole in the child's head, he is prevented only because her friend, in the nick of time, shoots him with bazooka shell at 10-foot range and blows him through a skyscraper window and across several city blocks of sky in a projectile of blood, flame and smoke. As I often read on the Internet: Hahahahaha." Ebert thinks that if there's a world where the Kick-Ass movie faithfully represents the comic book, that's a world he is "so very not interested in."

Ebert also trashes the meager regard for human life Kick-Ass appears to exhibit. "This movie regards human beings like video-game targets. Kill one, and you score. They're dead, you win. When kids in the age range of this movie's home video audience are shooting one another every day in America, that kind of stops being funny."

As can be viewed in the Kick-Ass trailer, the movie is quite over-the-top, and despite its seemingly realistic intentions at first, becomes more of a superhero fantasy when Hit Girl is introduced. It's completely absurd to think that an 11-year-old could brutally take out a dozen armed gangsters with ease and not be affected mentally. If anything, Kick-Ass is just like any other superhero tale but with a more brutal real-world tone.

Ebert says: "I know, I know. This is a satire. But a satire of what?" I'm wondering the same thing, even though I loved the Kick-Ass comic and assume I would love the movie as well. Should we be enjoying the violence dished out by Hit Girl? What is it about this violence that has an appeal? The Escapist's Movie Bob calls Kick-Ass fun [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/escape-to-the-movies/1624-Kick-Ass] despite its juvenile intentions, so Ebert might not be in the movie's target audience as he says, but a little piece of me still wonders why extreme violence perpetrated by pre-teens is entertaining to us.

Source: Bleeding Cool [http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100414/REVIEWS/100419986]


Permalink
 

MR T3D

New member
Feb 21, 2009
1,424
0
0
some people really don't like violence and/or have uncomfortable feelings about 11 year olds.

I have neither, he has one or both
no biggie
 

Poomanchu745

New member
Sep 11, 2009
1,582
0
0
Somehow has to bring up video games! Even when video games are not involved they still bring them up to make them out to be the bad guy. Seems like video games are the pariah of this generation and anything "morally reprehensible" will be automatically linked to video games.
 

zelda2fanboy

New member
Oct 6, 2009
2,173
0
0
It's that rare combination of horribly brutal violence and cheap jokes that he never goes for - see his review of Fight Club. I have to say I'm not much different in that regard.
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
I must admit, the extremely contrasting tones don't fit together all-too-well; one minute you're laughing at a guy for dressing up as a shitty batman doing a stupid voice, the next minute he's cutting and shooting 7-shades of shit out of everyone because of what happened to his wife.

It is, however, hilarious to see an 11-year-old girl walk into a room and say: "come on you c*nts".
 

uppitycracker

New member
Oct 9, 2008
864
0
0
Nice spoilers contained in the review parts. Should probably mention something about that. I certainly stopped reading as soon as I realized that. Sure, it's not much, but I like my cinematic experience to come without detailed previous knowledge of what I'm watching.
 

IrrelevantTangent

New member
Oct 4, 2008
2,424
0
0
Really, Ebert? I know you've had problems with movies with a high amount of violence or gore in the past, especially horror flicks, but I'd have thought you'd realized by now that in America, there's always a market for ludicrous, over-the-top violence and gore. And why? Because it lets the audience take pleasure in something that's considered a deep taboo in real life, and revel in the escapism of it all. It's the same reason people play games like God of War, and watch movies like Kill Bill. For some people, over-the-top violence in the media they watch is fun. And there's nothing necessarily wrong with that.

I'm not overly fond of the movie myself, personally speaking, but just because Kick-Ass is unimaginably over-the-top in its violence doesn't mean it can't have some entertainment value.

ChrisRedfield92 said:
Why the hell do all of you give a damn?!
Well, while this site mostly focuses on vidya games, it can focus on other forms of media as well. And the whole 'extreme-violence-in-Kick-Ass' argument is very similar to the whole 'extreme-violence-in-video-games' argument, so there you go.
 

Matt_LRR

Unequivocal Fan Favorite
Nov 30, 2009
1,260
0
0
It's worthy of note that while Movie Bob said the movie was fun, he also made very clear that we are supposed to be made very uncomfortable by the role of hit girl in the film. entertaining and beautifully choreographed or not, the contrast (and associated cognitive dissonance) created by framing an 11 year old as a perpetrator of brutal violence can still have a message.

Hell, wasn't hard candy essentially about a 14 year old girl torturing pedophiles? What did he rate that?

Edit: oh, look at that, 3 1/2 stars.

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060427/REVIEWS/60421003/1023

(though to be fair, he does congratulate the movie for not using an actual 14 year old in the role.)

-m
 

jackanderson

New member
Sep 7, 2008
703
0
0
Wierd. I usually agree with Ebert... and I'm British (hey! There are no decent film reviewers here in the UK!). But I absolutely disagree with him here. I loved, LOVED this movie.

Not every film has to have a big old message and be deadly serious. Some can just be insane amounts of fun. And that's what Kick-Ass is. Pure, silly, violent, un-adulterated FUN. Something I haven't had in a movie in a long long time.

But now, I must use my dad's line of choice when he wants to cop out of an argument... "Each to their own." I hate myself for typing that.
 

Jared

The British Paladin
Jul 14, 2009
5,630
0
0
I think in the case of the arguement, he had a point.

However, it's what people want to see, and, with the title don't you think it should be expected?
 

cobra_ky

New member
Nov 20, 2008
1,643
0
0
This is the same guy who doesn't think a video game can be art. I'm not very interested in Mr. Ebert's world, either.
 

Crunchy English

Victim of a Savage Neck-bearding
Aug 20, 2008
779
0
0
Ebert claims games can't be art. Strike 1
Ebert claims that all violence should have context and purpose: Strike 2

To clarify both point.
1) Not all games are art, and that's ok. Most movies aren't art either, they're committee-built bile. Shadow of the Colossus on the other hand, art.

2) Much like a good percentage of games and romantic comedies: Kick-Ass's only purpose is to appeal to our love of violence. Why do we love violence? Well, why do we love monster movies, slasher flicks and ghost stories? Violence scares the crap out of us and that's fun. And just like slasher flicks play on our pre-existing conceptions of what's safe and what's not, Kick-Ass delivers a tiny six year old girl and turns her into a murdering psycho. Now THAT's subversive horror.
 

LiquidGrape

New member
Sep 10, 2008
1,336
0
0
jackanderson said:
Wierd. I usually agree with Ebert... and I'm British (hey! There are no decent film reviewers here in the UK!)
Mark Kermode wishes to have a word with you.
 

Hurr Durr Derp

New member
Apr 8, 2009
2,558
0
0
You sound like my mom, the first time she saw Jurassic Park. You know the scene: the boring guy flees into the little toilet building, and the T-Rex breaks through the roof and eats the guy right off the toilet. The entire theater was laughing. It's funny. My mom: "A man just got killed, what's so funny about that!?"

You either think it's funny or you don't (and there's nothing wrong with either option), but it has little to do with the 'reality' of what's happening to the people on-screen. It's the context that makes it funny. Guy getting eaten by a monster in real-life? Horrible. Guy getting eaten by a monster in a movie, while sitting on the toilet? Funny. The same applies here. Little girl killing people in real-life? Horrible. Little girl killing people in a movie, dressed up like a parody of teenage side-kicks like Batman's Robin? Funny.
 

archvile93

New member
Sep 2, 2009
2,564
0
0
Ebert's an idiot. He couldn't of missed the point of the movie more if he fired in the wrong direction and started in a different country all together. Human's enjoy violence. It's inherent because it allowed you to kill things you were going to eat, just like every other carnivor on the planet.