Post a Reply
Back to the Forum
Think I might go and see that this weekend.. looks interesting.
Posted: 22:37 Mar 29 2010
Kick-Ass
So, anyone else see this yet?
I saw this last night and it was hilarious. There were some changes from the original comic, but as always this was to be expected and most (with one notable exception) were well within the spirit of the original, all said I thoroughly approved.
Thoughts?
I saw this last night and it was hilarious. There were some changes from the original comic, but as always this was to be expected and most (with one notable exception) were well within the spirit of the original, all said I thoroughly approved.
Thoughts?
4 Replies and 21171 Views in Total.
This is one Ill probably catch on DVD as Im pretty out of the habit ofgoing to the cinema unless its a must see.
The trailers certainly seem provocative. So long as its a step up from Wanted, which I found pretty lacking.
The trailers certainly seem provocative. So long as its a step up from Wanted, which I found pretty lacking.
Posted: 01:18 Mar 30 2010 
To be fair, being a step up from Wanted isn't difficult.
And it was, in terms of both execution and general respect for the original text. I generally regard a film with a heavy hype quotient as trying to over-compensate for something, so it was a pleasant surprised when I genuinely enjoyed myself.
I'm already typing up some thoughts to post somewhere else. I'll put them here when I'm done.
(Edited by Samanfur 30/03/2010 16:37)
And it was, in terms of both execution and general respect for the original text. I generally regard a film with a heavy hype quotient as trying to over-compensate for something, so it was a pleasant surprised when I genuinely enjoyed myself.
I'm already typing up some thoughts to post somewhere else. I'll put them here when I'm done.
(Edited by Samanfur 30/03/2010 16:37)
Posted: 16:36 Mar 30 2010
I wasn't sure what I was going to make of it. As I think I've said before: I tend to view films with a heavy marketing campaign with suspicion, because it makes me wonder what the advertisers're compensating for something and my enjoyment is generally inverse to the advertising budget.
And I freely admit that I was wondering if it was going to be a lowest common denominator splat-fest that spent too much on fake blood when it should've been paying its writers.
I hadn't read the original story at that point. With hindsight, I should've had more faith in the writer.
I actually enjoyed it.
The core cast of largely relative unknowns and rookies was more competent than I expected. Then again, the writing helped in the respect that for me, this was one of those rare films that had the courage to nail itself to a particular time and place.
Between the mise en scene and the language, you could tell exactly when and where the narrative was. And in terms of drawing the audience in - in my case anyway - it worked. The concept was that someone was doing something extraordinary in ordinary circumstances, and it really helped with that.
How many in-jokes and references did the other comic readers here spot?
Nic Cage is playing his role firmly dialled up to eleven. Without knowing if you've read the original story, I won't go into detail about how much I'd have liked to've seen him playing the character in its original form, with a few more layers and an interesting reversal attached. But it's the closest he'll ever get to playing Batman and he appears to revel in it.
The actor that genuinely surprised me was the kid playing Hit-Girl. Even with that script, a kid with the wrong degree of presence or skill could've easily fallen into moppetry - and especially with that script, she could've really been shown up as a weak spot if that'd happened.
She could've easily been just a foil whose role was mainly played by her stunt doubles - and for the first half, it could easily've gone that way.
And then, in the second half, they started giving her more to do.
I don't know if you've seen the film yet, so I won't mention any spoilers (let me know if you have - I wouldn't mind going into a bit more detail). But for me, she was really nailing it. I'm genuinely interested in when and where she'll pop up next, because if that's an indication of what she can turn out now, the potential is going to be worth the wait.
There's blatant sequel fodder in both the book and the movie, but with the movie having pulled such a major reversal of the original plot, I'm wondering quite what they're going to do with both.
Given that the conculsion of the book was delayed because the writer and artist were both asked to work on the movie, there was flexibility there. Given the early comments on the sequel being much darker, I'm wondering whether the writer's talking purely in terms of volume two or whether or not the missing plot point's going to pop up later.
And yes, it's a 15. Five years ago, it wouldn't have been. But under current BBFC regulations, there's nothing there that pushes it to the extreme of what can be publicly realeased. Even Hit-Girl's infamous dialogue's permitted under the fact that you can use extreme language sparingly.
Again, if you've read the original, I'd like to know what you thought of the differences.
(Edited by Samanfur 25/04/2010 00:24)
And I freely admit that I was wondering if it was going to be a lowest common denominator splat-fest that spent too much on fake blood when it should've been paying its writers.
I hadn't read the original story at that point. With hindsight, I should've had more faith in the writer.
I actually enjoyed it.
The core cast of largely relative unknowns and rookies was more competent than I expected. Then again, the writing helped in the respect that for me, this was one of those rare films that had the courage to nail itself to a particular time and place.
Between the mise en scene and the language, you could tell exactly when and where the narrative was. And in terms of drawing the audience in - in my case anyway - it worked. The concept was that someone was doing something extraordinary in ordinary circumstances, and it really helped with that.
How many in-jokes and references did the other comic readers here spot?
Nic Cage is playing his role firmly dialled up to eleven. Without knowing if you've read the original story, I won't go into detail about how much I'd have liked to've seen him playing the character in its original form, with a few more layers and an interesting reversal attached. But it's the closest he'll ever get to playing Batman and he appears to revel in it.
The actor that genuinely surprised me was the kid playing Hit-Girl. Even with that script, a kid with the wrong degree of presence or skill could've easily fallen into moppetry - and especially with that script, she could've really been shown up as a weak spot if that'd happened.
She could've easily been just a foil whose role was mainly played by her stunt doubles - and for the first half, it could easily've gone that way.
And then, in the second half, they started giving her more to do.
I don't know if you've seen the film yet, so I won't mention any spoilers (let me know if you have - I wouldn't mind going into a bit more detail). But for me, she was really nailing it. I'm genuinely interested in when and where she'll pop up next, because if that's an indication of what she can turn out now, the potential is going to be worth the wait.
There's blatant sequel fodder in both the book and the movie, but with the movie having pulled such a major reversal of the original plot, I'm wondering quite what they're going to do with both.
Given that the conculsion of the book was delayed because the writer and artist were both asked to work on the movie, there was flexibility there. Given the early comments on the sequel being much darker, I'm wondering whether the writer's talking purely in terms of volume two or whether or not the missing plot point's going to pop up later.
And yes, it's a 15. Five years ago, it wouldn't have been. But under current BBFC regulations, there's nothing there that pushes it to the extreme of what can be publicly realeased. Even Hit-Girl's infamous dialogue's permitted under the fact that you can use extreme language sparingly.
Again, if you've read the original, I'd like to know what you thought of the differences.
(Edited by Samanfur 25/04/2010 00:24)
Posted: 00:24 Apr 25 2010