Ebert Calls Kick-Ass Movie "Morally Reprehensible"

[Visuality]

The film is brilliant and if he gives it one star, then it just makes me remember why i don't listen to critics on pretty much anything, especially if he is so highly 'respected'.

Go see it, if you enjoy a film more this year than kick-ass then you should stick to books.

 

[Matt_LRR]

More whiny conservative D-bags. I really hate when people complain "that a (insert entertainment media here) is corrupting our youth!", it's called Kick-ass (emphasis on the ass) for christ's sake, no self respecting parent would buy this movie for their 5 year old kid. I personally respect this movie in the fact that it does what it sets out to do, that is, of course, to give us a movie thats true to it's name, IT KICKS ASS!

You realize that Ebert is a hard-line liberal democrat, right?

-m

 

[antidonkey]

I trust Movie Bob's opinions more than Ebert's. Bob seems to get it while Roger often appears to be talking out of his ass. Granted it's been a long, long time since I've paid attention to one of Ebert's reviews but it seems to me he just doesn't understand this movie. I'll most likely watch this flick sometime during the week when the theaters aren't so crowed and the ticket prices are cheaper.

 

[EnzoHonda]

Half the people in this thread completely missed the point of Ebert's argument. He's not saying that violence is bad. He's saying that when you do something as distasteful as having an 11 year old girl kill people there has to be context or it's simply distasteful for the sake of being distasteful. And yes, even for a film there is a difference between Arnold killing people and an 11 year old girl killing people.

That said, I haven't seen the movie yet. I probably will. I generally enjoy humourous violence.

 

[tk1989]

Tbh, i saw it in the cinema a few weeks ago and i thought it was pretty shit. Ended up leaving 30 mins before the end, i couldnt take it. There were some hilarious moments, yes, but a few hilarious moments do not make up for what i thought felt like a childrens film where the protagonist 11 year old shouts '****' every 20 minutes.

Im sorry, but it wasn't my cup of tea.

 

[SomeBritishDude]

While I like Ebert a lot and I think he makes many interesting and well thought out comments this would have to be a point on which I whole heartily disagree. Personally I see Kick-Ass as a very niche film and could understand if Ebert didn't enjoy it.

He just doesn't like violence for comic effect, which is a perfectly legitimate reason. However the movie did manage to achieve it in such a way that I have a lot of trouble not seeing at least a chuckle from any viewer. The fact that my mum, a 50 year old women who shuts her eyes at the sight of blood was sat next to me in hysterics in the movie theater is just one example of this (though being a comic book nerd she may just have liked the style).

Personally I love hilarious violence and thought Hit-Girl is one of the most ingenious concepts to come out of media, comic or film, in years. Her very presence turns any action scene (which are brilliantly done even on their own) into a piece of cinematic genius making for probably one of the best gun fights I have ever seen in a film.

This film revels in it's wrongness, and I am not surprised or sad to see a large backlash towards this movie, as all it does is put butts in seats. I am however a little sad to see Ebert couldn't see past the 11 year old with a gun and see the beautiful bit of film making underneath.

I leave you with a comment from Quentin Tarantino.

"Woman Who's Interviewing Him:Why do you have such horrible violence in your films?
Tarantino: Because it's fun!"

God I love that interview. The man rips her apart.

 

[Cousin_IT]

Why is it that when critics give a negative opinion about a film some people like, those people react like the critic just stood on the table at family dinner and crapped all over the dessert? It's just a guy & his opinion.

 

[Lamppenkeyboard]

I can see where he is coming from. I will probably see the movie once I get a chance to pick up the comic.

 

[Tolkienfanatic]

The thing I like about Roger Ebert is how he never stops proving how irrelevant he truly is.

 

[Flames66]

but a little piece of me still wonders why extreme violence perpetrated by pre-teens is entertaining to us.

Seems to me like pretty much the same reason it is when perpetrated by anyone else.

 

[Elesar]

Context and reason behind violence matter quite a bit. A Clockwork Orange is brutally and unrelentingly violent, but it's still considered an extremely intelligent and important film BECAUSE that violence was put into context and used/shown for a reason.
I have not read, nor seen Kick-Ass, so I have no comments on the actual film, but I understand Ebert's point.
Also, just to make the point to nerds, so this doesn't become a thing: When someone attacks something related to geek-culture, we don't need to circle the wagons or attack him. He's a critic, it's his job to voice his opinion, let's try to be mature about this.

 

[JourneyThroughHell]

Yes, I'll have to pretty much agree with Furb (or is it Furburt and only Furburt?). Although I don't think that he is bashing the movie just for the whole violence thing.
I guess that if the rating is so low, he didn't find the movie genuinely fun.
Oh, and that violence thing is actually stopping me from going to see that movie? Is it really that unpleasant? Because I really can't stand movie gore for some reason.
It has Nick Cage though so I am tempted to see it (remember, The Rock).

Nah, it's not that bad. It's a lot more gory then I would have thought, but it's 15's rating gory, nothing hugely brutal, just standard 'blood spurt' kind of gore. It's no From Dusk Till Dawn, is what I'm saying.

As for Ebert, I can take him or leave him. His main quality is one I both like and dislike. He takes films as a whole, so while he liked Avatar because it entertained him overall, he also has a tendency to focus on one element, and let it colour his end opinion, which isn't great. So in this case, if the film didn't have Hit Girl in it at all, he probably would have liked it a lot more.

Still, he did give Dawn Of The Dead 4/4 back in the day, and even now, that's way gorier than Kick-Ass, so it's not all about the violence.

Well, from what I've understood, it's the Kill Bill level of gory? I can take that.
Btw, I respect Ebert's opinions and all but I do get the vibe of Yahtzeeness from his reviews. He seems to emotion-based, so much so that he gives frankly polarizing ratings. For example, he gave Avatar a rating of 4/4 which I and I think even you find ridiculous. And here is a technically fine movie that he rates real low.
Don't get me wrong, I'm the one who is willing to disregard all the faults in MW2 and declare it a 10/10 but that's why I am not a professional critic. And I start to think that he also isn't.

 

[Geo Da Sponge]

That's nothing. The Daily Mail called it evil child pornograhpy.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/reviews/article-1262948/Kick-Ass-Dont-fooled-hype--This-crime-cinema-twisted-cynical-revels-abuse-childhood.html

To quote the first line of the review:
"Don't be fooled by the hype: This crime against cinema is twisted, cynical, and revels in the abuse of childhood".

The best part?
"The movie's writers want us to see Hit-Girl not only as cool, but also sexy, like an even younger version of the baby- faced Oriental assassin in Tarantino's Kill Bill 1. Paedophiles are going to adore her."

Followed by:
"As if that isn't exploitative enough, she's also shown in a classic schoolgirl pose, in a short plaid-skirt with her hair in bunches, but carrying a big gun."

Apparently they forgot the fact that she is a schoolgirl.

 

[TIMESWORDSMAN]

I think Ebee's gettin' a bit funny in the head.
What is he like, eighty?

 

[SomeBritishDude]

*snip*

It's the fucking Daily Mail. Their readers need to worry or hate something or their small black shriveled hearts explode.

But seriously...child porn? Wu? I more interested in locking up the sick individual who thought that rather than Hit-Girl's inventor.

 

[Evilproduct]

Dude, she is an ACTRESS. Chloe Moretz was playing a part written by Mark Millar. It is a movie! Either watch it or dont and like it or dont. I have no problem with the character of Hit-Girl. And if there is an 11-year old kick-ass superheroine out there somewhere, you better be damn scared of her cause what is it that you would be least expecting if you hear there is a vigilante/assassin after you? Thats right. An 11 year old girl.

 

[JaredXE]

He's just one of those odd people that believes human life has a purpose, when it oh so obviously doesn't. Therefore, humour at the expense of lives isn't funny to him.

 

[suzukaGongen]

Of course we like violence committed by pre-teens-- otherwise the anime market would have collapsed on its own decades ago.

 

[Treefingers]

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.

He makes a valid point though.

I mean, obviously i don't think that violent video games are bad, but noting that the violence in Kick-Ass and other films (say, 300 for example) bears similarities to video game violence isn't unreasonable.