Is Kick-a** the best movie ever?

[mrsupercomputer]

Hey guys, just a friendly reminder that talk about piracy, whether it be games, software, or movies is prohibited on the forums. Please refrain from encouraging or assisting with that behavior. Thanks!

[v0rtex•]

OK - We saw this on Sunday afternoon. Wow... In answer to the OP: No - not the best movie ever. But a darn good one. The controversy really is warranted as there is a 12 year-old sociopathic girl who steals a lot of the scenes, and the movie as reference to the source material or as a message on violence, really does get lost. But as a tongue-in-cheek, over-the-top comedy/action/thriller, it is very satisfying. I thoroughly enjoyed the show.

[rtm223]

The controversy really is warranted as there is a 12 year-old sociopathic girl who steals a lot of the scenes

Meh, I don't really see a problem with it. I mean, Hit Girl has nothing on sociopathic vigilante characters like Rorschach and The Comedian from The Watchmen and TBH, I don't see her age as being a significant issue. The fact that the writers/directors/actors managed to pull off the character, that could so easily have been completely cringeworthy, and do it well is something to applaud, not condemn. I'm sure that plenty of people would disagree with me, but the "Child+violence+'bad' language = BAD" reaction seems like a bit of a knee-jerk thing here. What exactly is it people are afraid of here?

the movie as reference to the source material or as a message on violence, really does get lost..

Was it supposed to have a message? IDK, I haven't read the comics, but surely they are pretty similar, what with the comics / screen play being written together. Actually, has anyone here read the comics? And if so, what are they like?

[v0rtex•]

Meh, I don't really see a problem with it. I mean, Hit Girl has nothing on sociopathic vigilante characters like Rorschach and The Comedian from The Watchmen and TBH, I don't see her age as being a significant issue. The fact that the writers/directors/actors managed to pull off the character, that could so easily have been completely cringeworthy, and do it well is something to applaud, not condemn. I'm sure that plenty of people would disagree with me, but the "Child+violence+'bad' language = BAD" reaction seems like a bit of a knee-jerk thing here. What exactly is it people are afraid of here?

No, I agree with you here - so perhaps "warranted" was the wrong choice of word. My point is that those who would criticize the movie for it's gratuitous violence will further be fueled (and presume themselves justified) by the character's age and gender. But I'm not siding with the knee-jerk reactionists.

Was it supposed to have a message? IDK, I haven't read the comics, but surely they are pretty similar, what with the comics / screen play being written together. Actually, has anyone here read the comics? And if so, what are they like?

yeah, I don't really know either. This remark was based on several reviews that I read.

[Teebonesy]

I haven't read the comics either, but this is something that was interesting to me watching it. Undoubtedly, especially early on, there's a pretty clear point of view. "bad *** comic book violence" is not just unrealistic, but dangerously unrealistic. And as far as the point of view of the comic book, there is this cover:

Now I can say pretty clearly that the heavy dosage of anti-schadenfreude satire on display here is WAY watered down in the movie, and by the end of it completely dissolved into another gloriously violent comic book action flick. If the comic book revels in the violence later, as the movie does, is there a clearer condemnation of it, as there is on this issue's cover? Beats the crap out of me! But it was NOWHERE NEAR the movie I saw. A fun action flick it may have been, but nuance was not part of the equation.