Ebert Calls Kick-Ass Movie "Morally Reprehensible"
- Thread starter Tom Goldman
- Start date
I used to agree with him on almost everything. In the last couple years though, his tastes seem to have shifted, and he's no longer a reliable reviewer for my tastes. However, I don't know if that means I've changed my preferences or he's gotten more conservative in his opinions. I think it's the later because his older reviews still sync up with my opinions more or less.jackanderson said:
It's certainly a bit iffy that whe was actually eleven when she was filming this. It's also odd that she calls the movie "Kick-Butt" and hasn't ever sworn outside of the movie set.
I just remember the little kid in "The Omen" and how screwed up he went, and realize that I personally don't want children doing... questionable... things in films, if only for the principle of it.
I just remember the little kid in "The Omen" and how screwed up he went, and realize that I personally don't want children doing... questionable... things in films, if only for the principle of it.
How would one know whether or not they liked it without watching it first? You make no sense.Evilproduct said:
Also, since he is a Film Critic i think you'll find that he has to watch the latest summer blockbuster regardless. You know, to make a living and all.
This doesn't surprise me. He had similar issues with The Professional. Ebert is clearly uncomfortable with children being the perpetrators of violence.
What bothers me about Ebert's review, is that he is fine with films like Kids, which has a huge amount of sexual violence in it, as well as a fair share of physical violence. I suppose as long as a film has a serious message, the violence and sex is okay, but if the violence is shown in a satirical light, apparently it's exploitative and disturbing.
Both uses of children portraying violence are by definition exploitative. It's equally exploitative because audiences of both types of films forked over money to see children committing violence. Whether or not some of them interpret some sort of serious message from the film is irrelevant. Some people will see Kick Ass and see a dark satire where the violence is so absurd that it's obviously a comment on society. And some people will go watch Kids and get off on children abusing each other.
What bothers me about Ebert's review, is that he is fine with films like Kids, which has a huge amount of sexual violence in it, as well as a fair share of physical violence. I suppose as long as a film has a serious message, the violence and sex is okay, but if the violence is shown in a satirical light, apparently it's exploitative and disturbing.
Both uses of children portraying violence are by definition exploitative. It's equally exploitative because audiences of both types of films forked over money to see children committing violence. Whether or not some of them interpret some sort of serious message from the film is irrelevant. Some people will see Kick Ass and see a dark satire where the violence is so absurd that it's obviously a comment on society. And some people will go watch Kids and get off on children abusing each other.
I think that the reason behind Ebert's responses, and to this who critique violence in cinema in general as being 'morally reprehensible' is that they seem to forget that children are people too. They are NOT information sponges who soak up and recreate everything they see on television without giving it at least some consideration. Sure, toddlers and young children, but i'm talking about children from say, age 10 (though possibly younger still) up to their teens have at least some form of moral values and common sense to understand a situation. People seem to think that children are complete idiots who are devoid of any respect and grasp of maturity and that they have to have everything censored for them. I'm not saying that it should be okay to make '18' or '15' rated movies for anyone of any age to view. I'm just saying that there should be a big fucking distinction between over the top action and shit-your-pants horror like The Ring. While we're on that, if your young daughter saw that, she'd try to kill people because they saw (a) film. Right? Ri- oh wait.
I understand that the context for this is taken way out of place, since "over the top" and comic book style characters imply a childish, almost tone to the whole thing (with the inclusion of Hit Girl of course) and that violence, blood (if there is any?) and such clashes with it to make the viewer feel uncomfortable, but really, if it was that bad in terms of graphic violence i'm sure the people who give the film an age rating will do their job properly. Aside from a few exceptions, they're pretty anal when it comes to what is considered mature or not.
Another thing to note is that that sense of feeling 'uncomfortable' about putting two contrasting aspects together will probably go over the top of most kids' heads. To us, we see a young girl and go "children shouldn't behave so violently" but to the child, they look at the fighting and go "Hey! Cool! She (literally) kicks ass!". Doesn't mean they're going to put on coloured undies and start beating people up or shooting them. We analyse the character of Hit Girl, whereas younger viewers would probably identify with her. Just like how a feminist may identify with a strong female lead in some other movie.
I understand that the context for this is taken way out of place, since "over the top" and comic book style characters imply a childish, almost tone to the whole thing (with the inclusion of Hit Girl of course) and that violence, blood (if there is any?) and such clashes with it to make the viewer feel uncomfortable, but really, if it was that bad in terms of graphic violence i'm sure the people who give the film an age rating will do their job properly. Aside from a few exceptions, they're pretty anal when it comes to what is considered mature or not.
Another thing to note is that that sense of feeling 'uncomfortable' about putting two contrasting aspects together will probably go over the top of most kids' heads. To us, we see a young girl and go "children shouldn't behave so violently" but to the child, they look at the fighting and go "Hey! Cool! She (literally) kicks ass!". Doesn't mean they're going to put on coloured undies and start beating people up or shooting them. We analyse the character of Hit Girl, whereas younger viewers would probably identify with her. Just like how a feminist may identify with a strong female lead in some other movie.
The comic book had the main character tortured through genital electrocution, and Hit Girl consuming cocaine before going on her final rampage. I'm told that the movie has neither, so the version in theaters was actually toned down from the comic.
It's not a great sentence, but I think he meant: watch it, then like it or not, or don't watch it.Treefingers said:
I do get the whole 11 year old girl thing, but the literal only reason that there are complaints is because of the fact it's a film.
If the Eragon film (Before flaming hear me out) had included a scene in the book where a newborn baby had a pike sticking out of its torso there would have been uproar, yet in the book it is totally acceptable, and in my eyes the books are more realistic than films, they describe the feelings and situations to you.
Also
And for the record, I despised the Eragon film.
If the Eragon film (Before flaming hear me out) had included a scene in the book where a newborn baby had a pike sticking out of its torso there would have been uproar, yet in the book it is totally acceptable, and in my eyes the books are more realistic than films, they describe the feelings and situations to you.
Also
True, however, she had been trained since 5, she'd be over the issues. (If anything it only got realistic when she got the shit beaten out of her, 11 year olds don't just slaughter full grown men i refuse to believe it is possible.
And for the record, I despised the Eragon film.
It is, and honestly I believe it's a lot better for it. Kiss-Ass the comic was ok, not great like the movie. It's main problem is that it did a lot of very "edgy" and "dark" moments that did nothing but add controversy for controversies sake. It's entertaining to see a 11 year old girl cool off some really cool stunts and quick clean kills. It's not very entertaining to see her burning people to death.Milkman Dan said:
In this is why I don't respect this douce, or the other two beloved critic douches (Who didn't give ID4 two thumbs up, but gave congo, a movie that kills off tim curry, bruce campbell, and ernie hutchinson, a thumb up)
I think I know what sets people off against this movie...
Watch the Trailer again. Except mentally censor the word, "Ass" from the title, and pretend that it is being released by Disney as a kid friendly super hero romp. The natural reaction from the trailer is to think that it is, maybe, slightly dark for a Disney kids movie, probably targeted at a late tween demographic. Seriously, the writing, the cliches, the cheese, the colorful costumes and awkward high school drama...I mean honestly, parents have a problem with buying video games named after felonies for their children, then freaking out because they, "Had no idea it was so bad". Take a movie that looks like its the sequel to Shark Boy versus Lava Girl 3D in the trailer, and expect parents to do actual, full fledged research and figure out that it's a incredibly violent movie that juxtaposes the cheesy flash with gory visuals for shock value appropriate only for adults, and you have a recipe for disaster. I'm almost tempted to not fault parents for not realizing that this is a rated R movie, and think that they should have probably done a better job of conveying the fact that it is not a kids movie. Personally, I haven't seen the movie, but think it looks interesting, in a guilty pleasure sort of way.
Watch the Trailer again. Except mentally censor the word, "Ass" from the title, and pretend that it is being released by Disney as a kid friendly super hero romp. The natural reaction from the trailer is to think that it is, maybe, slightly dark for a Disney kids movie, probably targeted at a late tween demographic. Seriously, the writing, the cliches, the cheese, the colorful costumes and awkward high school drama...I mean honestly, parents have a problem with buying video games named after felonies for their children, then freaking out because they, "Had no idea it was so bad". Take a movie that looks like its the sequel to Shark Boy versus Lava Girl 3D in the trailer, and expect parents to do actual, full fledged research and figure out that it's a incredibly violent movie that juxtaposes the cheesy flash with gory visuals for shock value appropriate only for adults, and you have a recipe for disaster. I'm almost tempted to not fault parents for not realizing that this is a rated R movie, and think that they should have probably done a better job of conveying the fact that it is not a kids movie. Personally, I haven't seen the movie, but think it looks interesting, in a guilty pleasure sort of way.
I love this movie, if ebert is so damn sensitive to violence perhaps he shouldnt watch movies that contain violence?
Oh no, a little girl is doing the killing, this is bad.
That's what Ebert is saying, right? Why does it matter that it's a little girl? Because that's seriously the only thing he's complaining about. Sexism and ageism, go! Reminds me of the inability to kill the douche bags in Little Lamplight in Fallout 3, kids are held to some retarded immunity level in the media.
I agree so much with whoever it was that said it's just old people hating modern culture.
Also, saw the movie last night at a midnight showing with some friends. It was awesome.
(I thought this was going to be about Homestuck for a second here, Ebert and Egbert are this close.)
That's what Ebert is saying, right? Why does it matter that it's a little girl? Because that's seriously the only thing he's complaining about. Sexism and ageism, go! Reminds me of the inability to kill the douche bags in Little Lamplight in Fallout 3, kids are held to some retarded immunity level in the media.
I agree so much with whoever it was that said it's just old people hating modern culture.
Also, saw the movie last night at a midnight showing with some friends. It was awesome.
(I thought this was going to be about Homestuck for a second here, Ebert and Egbert are this close.)
I saw this movie at the cinema today. It's pretty good though not really a popcorn movie. The gore and violence isn't really over the top, I'd say it's just gory enough.
