Kick-Ass Spoiler
I saw Kick-Ass and was dissapointed.
It's a good movie, love the soundtrack, love Nic Cage's Adam West impersonation (more on that in the cut below), love the stylish fight sequences; I liked alot of it.
But the adaptation is fascinating and dissapointing. Three words will probably change your intepretation of the film - not about whether it's bad or good, but because the process of adapation creates a gap that fascinates.
Big Daddy lied.
The book's "gotya" is the idea that Hit-Girl is who she is because she is the one person not living in reality, because of the unconscionable bit of her father's lie. Her father was an accountant, who was bored, and hated his life, and didn't want his daughter to grow up "normal" like him. He stole her from his wife, and made up the story and the quest to give himself meaning. He reveals this to the mobsters after Hit-Girl is shot, and right after they blow his brains out. Hit-Girl returns and is unaware of the lie; she knows her Big Daddy is dead, a hero to her, but we and Kick-Ass knows that she is a victim.
Her delusion is thorough, in the elevator leading up to the last battle, she takes "a super secret chemical compound designed by scientists"; Kick-Ass calls it cocaine, and she says no it's not - my daddy gave it to me cause he says it makes her have the strenght of ten men. She then goes on a rampage and kills everyone singlehandely. At the end, she does cry about her daddy being dead, and you see the little girl inside the monster. (and she is a monster - she is a vicious man-destroying force of nature.)
And she is awesome. And you want her to exist and be potent and powerful. And then the suckerpunch, shes a little girl trapped in a lie, the pawn of men who desire power and strength.In the end, she goes to her mother, who is alive but not aware of her past. The book does hint that she has no trouble defending herself from bully, but we see her smile, wicked and mean. And she exists, a monster pretending to be a little girl.
Kick-Ass remains a loser, without a girl (Katie actually makes his life a living hell after his reveal), falling down lucky that his good intentions didnt get him killed...although he survives only because there are real heroes in the world - heroes that are monsters.
The movie plays with this a bit - Nic Cage's Adam West impersonation is brilliant because, viewed via the prism of the book, he's playacting just the same as Kick-Ass, just with better hardware. He does very little fighting in the book; Hit-Girl is his weapon.
The issue is that "Kick-Ass" the book, is an attempt at a serious exploration of an idea. I don't want to argue over whether it is "literature" but it tries to be literate, to be engaging, to be interesting about a subject of interest. It's a success at that, I think. The movie is a revenge-fantasy-action flick - with solid underpinnings and some great moments, but without that brain-teasing heft. It's bread and cheese and sauce with no meat. Compared to the book, I got nothing to chew on when I watch the movie. This is a problem only because more people will know about the movie than read the book, and so perception will remain that there are no interesting thought provoking stories in comics. They are, they just get sanitized when movies are made.
Mark Millar, the writer, has had this bit - he doesn't deconstruct so much as pivots stories to engage the reader. Here in Kick-Ass, he uses the humor and the fantasy of being a superhero, to reveal that all superhero stories are tragedies at heart. He makes us cheer, and then turns the table on us, focusing us on why we cheer and how what we want is horrible to others. That to be a superhero, something trully horrible has to happen to you, in a way that irrevocably changes you. You have to become a monster, as in that you can't just be a normal person.
The movie is problematic from a feminist standpoint - although Hit-Girl is strong and in charge, she can be seen as weapon pointed by her father. The movie provides her with motivation, but she very clearly follows the path led by her father - seeking his pride and validation. The book is even more problematic - with the little girl as weapon of man mixed in with the constant attack on male genitals, and several occasions of men being challenged that "they don't have the balls." The force of nature that is Hit-Girl is less a feminist force, so much as a wild-card, created and let loose. In a sense, the book provides her with more power, irrational and uncontrollable, but denies her the agency or rationale to express it articulately.
In that sense its "thank heaven for little girls...because they'll rip your heart out."
Aside: This is my issue with Wanted; there is a similar adaptation done, moving the focus of the story away from the element that gives it depth and interest. In the book, the hero is the son of an assassin, but not an assassin, but THE Assassin - a high-ranking member of a supervillain crew that rules North America. There are other "families" of villains, each controlling a part of the world. 20 years ago, they had ganged up and killed all the superheroes of the world, brainwashing the world to believe they never existed. In the book, the hero is trained to follow in his father's footsteps, to become a villain. At the end, there is a moment where, this character, which we deeply invest in, makes a choice to stay a villain, to live in a word where Evil triumphs and Good is weak, where the strong dominate the weak. And the book ends with the heroes exulting face saying "this is my face as I fuck you up the ass."
You might hate the book "Wanted", but it is provocative in its journey through deconstructing the hero genre (by showing the origin tale of a villain), by exposing the brainwashed sheep nature of humanity as a populace, by showing that petty desires are as common as altruistic motives, and that we enjoy the story either way. The 'Fuck You" in the end, is the writer announcing that this story is not of good triumping over evil, but you read it anyway and you'll probably just put it down and buy another story to keep you occupied until you die.
I was expected dissapointed in 'Wanted' with the character of Foxy. Foxy is the Angelina Jolie character, and she is somewhat eviscerated in the movie. In the book, she is part of the larger plan. She is a sexual force of nature. She fucks everything and anything because she wants to; she had a relationship with the hero's father that is important and respected, but she isn't owned by it. She uses her sexuality as often as her guns; she is definitely in control. In the movie, the character is a wounded girl; hurt by tragedy in her past that makes her a guarded woman. A damsel in distress hiding in wolf clothing, who is unmade by the hero's pretty soulful eyes and revealed as a softie underneath.
The Foxy in the book 'Wanted" would have carved Angelina Jolie's face and laughed at it, and then probably would have used it in a sex act later in a scene where she previously raped an animal.
This is what Millar does, and I think he does it well enough to make people interest in his movies, but clearly, movies have no interest in his stories, just his premises. It's a shame. Adapatation does not have to be faithful or sincere; its about translating for a different language. There will always be two different products that are not interchangeable. This is a good thing - the book and movie of The Color Purple are both great and awesome things, but they are different and remain so. Notwithstanding that, it's a shame that the element that makes Mark Millar stories stand out the most, is the element that, somehow, film-makers deign un-filmable.
It's a good movie, love the soundtrack, love Nic Cage's Adam West impersonation (more on that in the cut below), love the stylish fight sequences; I liked alot of it.
But the adaptation is fascinating and dissapointing. Three words will probably change your intepretation of the film - not about whether it's bad or good, but because the process of adapation creates a gap that fascinates.
Big Daddy lied.
The book's "gotya" is the idea that Hit-Girl is who she is because she is the one person not living in reality, because of the unconscionable bit of her father's lie. Her father was an accountant, who was bored, and hated his life, and didn't want his daughter to grow up "normal" like him. He stole her from his wife, and made up the story and the quest to give himself meaning. He reveals this to the mobsters after Hit-Girl is shot, and right after they blow his brains out. Hit-Girl returns and is unaware of the lie; she knows her Big Daddy is dead, a hero to her, but we and Kick-Ass knows that she is a victim.
Her delusion is thorough, in the elevator leading up to the last battle, she takes "a super secret chemical compound designed by scientists"; Kick-Ass calls it cocaine, and she says no it's not - my daddy gave it to me cause he says it makes her have the strenght of ten men. She then goes on a rampage and kills everyone singlehandely. At the end, she does cry about her daddy being dead, and you see the little girl inside the monster. (and she is a monster - she is a vicious man-destroying force of nature.)
And she is awesome. And you want her to exist and be potent and powerful. And then the suckerpunch, shes a little girl trapped in a lie, the pawn of men who desire power and strength.In the end, she goes to her mother, who is alive but not aware of her past. The book does hint that she has no trouble defending herself from bully, but we see her smile, wicked and mean. And she exists, a monster pretending to be a little girl.
Kick-Ass remains a loser, without a girl (Katie actually makes his life a living hell after his reveal), falling down lucky that his good intentions didnt get him killed...although he survives only because there are real heroes in the world - heroes that are monsters.
The movie plays with this a bit - Nic Cage's Adam West impersonation is brilliant because, viewed via the prism of the book, he's playacting just the same as Kick-Ass, just with better hardware. He does very little fighting in the book; Hit-Girl is his weapon.
The issue is that "Kick-Ass" the book, is an attempt at a serious exploration of an idea. I don't want to argue over whether it is "literature" but it tries to be literate, to be engaging, to be interesting about a subject of interest. It's a success at that, I think. The movie is a revenge-fantasy-action flick - with solid underpinnings and some great moments, but without that brain-teasing heft. It's bread and cheese and sauce with no meat. Compared to the book, I got nothing to chew on when I watch the movie. This is a problem only because more people will know about the movie than read the book, and so perception will remain that there are no interesting thought provoking stories in comics. They are, they just get sanitized when movies are made.
Mark Millar, the writer, has had this bit - he doesn't deconstruct so much as pivots stories to engage the reader. Here in Kick-Ass, he uses the humor and the fantasy of being a superhero, to reveal that all superhero stories are tragedies at heart. He makes us cheer, and then turns the table on us, focusing us on why we cheer and how what we want is horrible to others. That to be a superhero, something trully horrible has to happen to you, in a way that irrevocably changes you. You have to become a monster, as in that you can't just be a normal person.
The movie is problematic from a feminist standpoint - although Hit-Girl is strong and in charge, she can be seen as weapon pointed by her father. The movie provides her with motivation, but she very clearly follows the path led by her father - seeking his pride and validation. The book is even more problematic - with the little girl as weapon of man mixed in with the constant attack on male genitals, and several occasions of men being challenged that "they don't have the balls." The force of nature that is Hit-Girl is less a feminist force, so much as a wild-card, created and let loose. In a sense, the book provides her with more power, irrational and uncontrollable, but denies her the agency or rationale to express it articulately.
In that sense its "thank heaven for little girls...because they'll rip your heart out."
Aside: This is my issue with Wanted; there is a similar adaptation done, moving the focus of the story away from the element that gives it depth and interest. In the book, the hero is the son of an assassin, but not an assassin, but THE Assassin - a high-ranking member of a supervillain crew that rules North America. There are other "families" of villains, each controlling a part of the world. 20 years ago, they had ganged up and killed all the superheroes of the world, brainwashing the world to believe they never existed. In the book, the hero is trained to follow in his father's footsteps, to become a villain. At the end, there is a moment where, this character, which we deeply invest in, makes a choice to stay a villain, to live in a word where Evil triumphs and Good is weak, where the strong dominate the weak. And the book ends with the heroes exulting face saying "this is my face as I fuck you up the ass."
You might hate the book "Wanted", but it is provocative in its journey through deconstructing the hero genre (by showing the origin tale of a villain), by exposing the brainwashed sheep nature of humanity as a populace, by showing that petty desires are as common as altruistic motives, and that we enjoy the story either way. The 'Fuck You" in the end, is the writer announcing that this story is not of good triumping over evil, but you read it anyway and you'll probably just put it down and buy another story to keep you occupied until you die.
I was expected dissapointed in 'Wanted' with the character of Foxy. Foxy is the Angelina Jolie character, and she is somewhat eviscerated in the movie. In the book, she is part of the larger plan. She is a sexual force of nature. She fucks everything and anything because she wants to; she had a relationship with the hero's father that is important and respected, but she isn't owned by it. She uses her sexuality as often as her guns; she is definitely in control. In the movie, the character is a wounded girl; hurt by tragedy in her past that makes her a guarded woman. A damsel in distress hiding in wolf clothing, who is unmade by the hero's pretty soulful eyes and revealed as a softie underneath.
The Foxy in the book 'Wanted" would have carved Angelina Jolie's face and laughed at it, and then probably would have used it in a sex act later in a scene where she previously raped an animal.
This is what Millar does, and I think he does it well enough to make people interest in his movies, but clearly, movies have no interest in his stories, just his premises. It's a shame. Adapatation does not have to be faithful or sincere; its about translating for a different language. There will always be two different products that are not interchangeable. This is a good thing - the book and movie of The Color Purple are both great and awesome things, but they are different and remain so. Notwithstanding that, it's a shame that the element that makes Mark Millar stories stand out the most, is the element that, somehow, film-makers deign un-filmable.