A post by Maynard
I’d heard the movie Kick-Ass had something to do with an ordinary kid who decides to fight crime by playing a super-hero. It sounded like good, clean fun, and the reviews were favorable (see Metacritic). But I hadn’t quite decided to see it until Roger Ebert labeled the film “morally reprehensible”. That sealed the deal. (It helped that it’s running at the ArcLight, which is the best theater in the world.)
I have occasional respect for Ebert’s artistic evaluations (although one should never read an Ebert review until after you’ve seen a film; he gives the entire plot away!). But I have a different sort of respect for his moral compass. When Ebert says a film about a crime fighter is morally reprehensible, he means: 1) That the good guys use violence to thwart the bad guys, and 2) That (1) is executed (so to speak) in such a manner as to be regarded as fun, at least in the primitive minds of the bitter, clingy Neanderthals who constitute, in Ebert’s view, the target audience.
And Ebert nailed it. I watched much of “Kick-Ass” with a big, goofy smile on my face, punctuated by an occasional belly laugh. (But don’t get me wrong. “Kick-Ass” is a well-done romp, but it won’t change your life.)
I admit I’d been a bit put off by seeing billboards and bus benches blaring “KICK-ASS”. I’m old enough that I wince a bit when the word “ass” is tossed out so indiscreetly. Not surprisingly, the movie earns its “R” rating with raw language and some sexually suggestive situations. The violence is excessive but cartoonish, and nobody would take it seriously except maybe Roger Ebert.
I liked it, although I was surprised to see so many small children (7-10) watching it with their parent/s. I think the little girl in the movie, Hit Girl, steals the show. I saw it alone but looking forward to watching it with my BFF when it comes out on DVD lol.
I used to really like Ebert’s reviews, but for whatever reason lost interest in him in the last few years. Out of curiosity, I wanted to see the review Ebert gave to “Green Zone”, a film which to be honest I haven’t seen, but I’ve heard described as anti-military and portraying the killing of U.S. soldiers as positive within the context of the story. Ebert gave it four stars (his highest rating). So if what I’ve heard about “Green Zone” is true, Ebert had no problem with anything being “morally reprehensible” in that film, describing it as “a thriller, not a documentary”. Yet “Kick-Ass”, which Ebert acknowledges as “satire”, is somehow held to a higher moral standard.