Image from Wikimedia
* * * * * (out of 6)
I’m no fanboy, and as such I’ve never submitted to hype. Alas, “Kick-Ass,” surely one of the future sensations of 2010, has probably suffered from just a little too much hype. If I have one encouragement overall, it is that no one should watch any trailers or clips, which feature the best action sequences and a good selection of the best lines. Otherwise there are many flashes of brilliance in the writing and performing, but it never departs from the superhero norms in which it so proudly ensconces itself. I gave this film 5 stars, but this review is more an explanation about why it doesn’t get 5 1/2 stars, much less 6.
“Kick-Ass” starts with the question that most readers of superhero comic books have asked themselves: what if an ordinary person, without Superman’s powers or Batman’s wealth, decided to go out on their own and fight crime? Dave Lizewski (Aaron Johnson, “Nowhere Boy”), a typical New York teen, asks this question and goes one step further by trying it out. With the help of a scuba suit and a pair of clubs, he creates the identity of Kick-Ass and after much blood and tears becomes an internet sensation. As a result of his efforts he attracts the attention of several parties, including a father-daughter pair of brutal caped vigilantes (Nicholas Cage and Chloe Moretz), as well as a father-son pair of brutal crime lords (Mark Strong and Christopher “McLovin” Mintz-Plasse). While the caped crusaders are sympathetic to Kick-Ass, if doubtful of his abilities, the crime boss realizes the danger to his outfit and commissions his son as another superhero, Red Mist, to lure Kick-Ass to his destruction.
The first problem comes from its fundamental concept, what real-world superheroes would be like. “Kick-Ass” gives absolutely no insight besides what we can already guess, that it would really, really, really hurt. These days, the discussion of cinematic violence has ended. Unless filmmakers can show violence in an even more extreme manner than Gaspar Noé or Lars Von Trier, no one can make the act of violence shocking or revelatory. Stylistically, the violence in “Kick-Ass” borrows mostly from a combination of Sin City and Sam Peckinpah. Furthermore, the whole reason that comic book superheroes aren’t real people is that real people, as in those who don’t have any powers or motivation to become superheroes in the first place, are boring. Dave in Clark Kent/Peter Parker/Bruce Wayne mode is pretty boring, and admits as much in the very beginning. As a main character, he’s uncompelling, and doesn’t do too much to change that. I’m not faulting Johnson, for he puts as much charisma as the script allows; after all, he’s no John Lennon.
Perhaps the problem is a matter of focus. I wrote in my review of Atom Egoyan’s “Chloe” that the film would have been better had the film actually been about Chloe rather than the annoying mild-mannered housewife. “Kick-Ass” could have benefited from a similar change, mostly because all the other superheroes are more interesting than Kick-Ass. The idea of a real person trying to be a superhero is an intriguing concept (and somewhat explored in “The Dark Knight”), but would be more interesting as a side character who alters the balance of a good vs. evil battle between superheroes and criminals. Of course, this is what “Kick-Ass” is about, but with a different perspective. In other words, I wanted more of Big Daddy and Hit Girl, because they’re great. Not only are they the best characters in their own right in the film, they also have the best interpersonal dynamic. With the help of such great roles, Cage and Moretz knock it out of the park. Cage uses his bat-crazy acting style to evoke Adam West, and Moretz, who was 11 when she filmed this, is as charismatic and gutsy as any superhero I’ve ever seen, young or old. I guess the best insult I can give this film is that I want more of them rather than Kick-Ass.
There are lots of other good things as well. Despite Dave’s boring character, his home and school life are very well presented, particularly scenes with his friends and the obligatory romance. The writers do a good job of not only making these scenes relevant, but integral to the story. Also, the use of the Internet as a plot device is very clever and genuine. The performances are also very well done.
The rest is just nitpicking. You’re going to inevitably hear that this is the greatest film of all time, or of the year, or whatever. It’s not. In fact, I’ve reviewed a better movie this week. Just see this as a fun butt-kicking flick, and you’ll have a great time. Oh, and the controversy this film has attracted is ridiculous, but saying more would give the controversy more credit.
