Skip to main content

If I was thinking about a Kick-Ass sequel, I had to get serious.

Kick-Ass 2: Balls to the Wall
(2013)

I groaned inwardly when the Kick-Ass sequel was announced; a completely unnecessary follow-up to an original that didn’t demand continuation. That Matthew Vaughn wasn’t returning as director reconfirmed this response; he brought a sense of fun and heart to a movie that could otherwise have been wholly misconceived (like the way no one else seems to have been quite able to make a great X-Men movie lately; First Class had personality, whereas the other entries since X2 has been going through the motions). Balls to the Wall, written and directed by Jeff Wadlow, isn’t actually as terrible as I’d feared, but it’s wholly redundant, roundly failing to justify revisiting these characters.


The first movie was crude, vulgar and revelled in the shock value of having a young girl mouthing obscenities while inflicting ultra-violence on unsuspecting bad guys. Now that girl is at school, attempting to fit in, and this is the plot thread of Balls to the Wall that kind of works; Mindy/Hit-Girl (Chloe Grace Moretz), having forsaken the superhero lifestyle, is thrown into a sub-Heathers inferno of teenage cruelty, while also discovering she’s attracted to boys. It isn’t terribly original, but neither is Kick-Ass/Dave (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) joining up with a gang of fellow super-heroes/vigilantes (why Dave needs to learn how to fight all over again here – twice! – is anyone’s guess) while Chris/the Motherfucker (Christopher Mintz-Plasse; only actors with three-word names take the leads in this series) decides to reinvent himself as a super villain. The result is replete with the kind of lazy comic book sequel referencing the Scream sequels supplied for horror movies (but more successfully). The pervading air is of “how can we make a sequel work?” rather than “We’ve got a great reason for continuing this story”.


Everything that was fresh now feels tired. What was shocking now seems like cheap repetition. Just the name Motherfucker evidences the level of wit on display. The dodgy superhero/villain names (Night Bitch, The Tumor etc) were more amusing in Mystery Men fifteen years ago, and Mystery Men wasn’t really very good. Wadlow (working from Mark Millar’s source material, which apparently revels in its capacity to shock the readser) finds himself laying on even the half-decent gags too thick (“You’ve got to quit with the racist stereotypes, Chris”, John Leguizamo’s Javier tells the Mother Fucker; “Archetypes” he responds). Occasionally there’s a flash of the first movie’s successful contrasts between comic book and “real” world; the Motherfucker’s insulted reaction when it is suggested he kills the dog belonging to Captain Stars and Stripes (Jim Carrey). But Wadlow’s idea of a theme is to repeat ad infinitum that there aren’t superheroes in the real world, all the while informing the viewer with the choreography, fight moves, set pieces and a generically stylised visual palette that this is a superhero world.


The violence of the first picture, where Kick-Ass takes a beating or where Hit-Girl goes to work to the accompaniment of the Banana Splits theme, is delivered dutifully but without motive, and so has an unpleasant edge. It can’t shock because it could only shock the first time. So now these scenes feature because they’re what the audience expects of a Kick-Ass movie (this isn’t as bloody as the original, but I’m still not sure how it gets away with a 15; God knows what the BBFC are thinking). Tellingly, the most effective Hit-Girl scene here isn’t one where she kicks ass but instead induces a trio of mean girls to vomit. There’s also the small factor that Hit-Girl’s language has little impact delivered by a 15-year old; four years makes all the difference. And when the best she can come up with as an insult is “Puke face” you start to wonder. The coarse language between schoolgirls is more effective, but indicative of an unpleasant undercurrent in respect of the depiction of women in the film, with references to snatch-kicking, muff munching and a would-be rape that is played for laughs on account of the assailant’s inadequacy (considerably toned down from Millar’s original scenario, but no more acceptable as a result). For a movie as schematic and manipulative as this one (Dave’s emotional journey includes an especially under-cooked development that never sufficiently pays off; we’re presumably expected to think the mere fact of its occurrence is weighty enough), such material doesn’t translate as daring or edgy; it’s merely evidencing how lucky the first effort was to have Vaughn.


Johnson, Moretz and Mintz-Plasse return to their characters fairly effortlessly, but the latter is utterly typecast as the nerd du jour at this point; I’m slightly surprised he’s gone on as long as he has (what, eight years?) Jim Carrey, who famously disassociated himself from the movie, is solid if unspectacular as Stars and Stripes; his physical transformation is impressive, and he never drops the character to indulge in his usual schtick, but the Captain isn’t a terribly interesting character. Barely anything is made of his Born Again disposition, for example. Lindy Booth is memorable as Night Bitch, and a smattering of British thesps appear in small roles; Benedict Wong, Iain Glen, Steven Mackintosh, Monica Dolan.


Balls to the Wall is very cheap looking. Tim Maurice-Jones cinematography is unpersuasive, and there’s a pretty awful fight sequence atop a speeding van complete with horribly obvious green screen work. In general, the tone is one of straight-to-video cash-in whose stars should have known better. Even the score sounds recycled, the really rather great four composer-led work on the original now limited to Henry Jackman redoing the (admittedly great) main theme from the first with Matthew Margeson.


I don’t think anyone really expected there to be a Kick-Ass sequel apart from the reliably self -promoting Mark Millar. Kick-Ass didn’t make enough ($96m worldwide) for it to be a forgone conclusion, so someone obviously did a sum based on the home entertainment market. Since this one cost about the same but made a third less, and wasn’t very well received I expect there’ll be even less clamour for another. I’ll be happy to forget about it, while holding up the first movie as a genuinely great little surprise. Maybe in 20 years, when studios are dusting off old properties that have a lot of nostalgia value (as they always are), a return of Kick-Ass and Hit-Girl might have some merit, but for now they should just leave it alone. No matter how much Millar talks them up.


**1/2

Popular posts from this blog

The Illumi-what-i?

Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022) (SPOILERS) In which Sam Raimi proves that he can stand proudly with the best – or worst – of them as a good little foot soldier of the woke apocalypse. You’d expect the wilfully anarchic – and Republican – Raimi to choke on the woke, but instead, he’s sucked it up, grinned and bore it. Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness is so slavishly a production-line Marvel movie, both in plotting and character, and in nu-Feige progressive sensibilities, there was no chance of Sam staggering out from beneath its suffocating demands with anything more than a few scraps of stylistic flourish intact.

Ziggy smokes a lot of weed.

Moonfall (2022) (SPOILERS) For a while there, it looked as if Moonfall , the latest and least-welcomed – so it seems – piece of apocalyptic programming from Roland Emmerich, might be sending mixed messages. Fortunately, we need not have feared, as it turns out to be the same pedigree of disaster porn we’ve come to expect from the director, one of the Elite’s most dutiful mass-entertainment stooges, even if his lustre has rather dimmed since the glory days of 2012.

What’s so bad about being small? You’re not going to be small forever.

Innerspace (1987) There’s no doubt that Innerspace is a flawed movie. Joe Dante finds himself pulling in different directions, his instincts for comic subversion tempered by the need to play the romance plot straight. He tacitly acknowledges this on the DVD commentary for the film, where he notes Pauline Kael’s criticism that he was attempting to make a mainstream movie; and he was. But, as ever with Dante, it never quite turns out that way. Whereas his kids’ movies treat their protagonists earnestly, this doesn’t come so naturally with adults. I’m a bona fide devotee of Innerspace , but I can’t help but be conscious of its problems. For the most part Dante papers over the cracks; the movie hits certain keynotes of standard Hollywood prescription scripting. But his sensibility inevitably suffuses it. That, and human cartoon Martin Short (an ideal “leading man” for the director) ensure what is, at first glance just another “ Steven Spielberg Presents ” sci-fi/fantas

All I saw was an old man with a funky hand, that’s all I saw.

The Blob (1988) (SPOILERS) The 1980s effects-laden remake of a ’50s B-movie that couldn’t. That is, couldn’t persuade an audience to see it and couldn’t muster critical acclaim. The Fly was a hit. The Thing wasn’t, but its reputation has since soared. Like Invaders from Mars , no such fate awaited The Blob , despite effects that, in many respects, are comparable in quality to the John Carpenter classic – and are certainly indebted to Rob Bottin for bodily grue – and surehanded direction from Chuck Russell. I suspect the reason is simply this: it lacks that extra layer that would ensure longevity.

Are you telling me that I should take my daughter to a witch doctor?

The Exorcist (1973) (SPOILERS) Vast swathes have been written on The Exorcist , duly reflective of its cultural impact. In a significant respect, it’s the first blockbuster – forget Jaws – and also the first of a new kind of special-effects movie. It provoked controversy across all levels of the socio-political spectrum, for explicit content and religious content, both hailed and denounced for the same. William Friedkin, director of William Peter Blatty’s screenplay based on Blatty’s 1971 novel, would have us believe The Exorcist is “ a film about the mystery of faith ”, but it’s evidently much more – and less – than that. There’s a strong argument to be made that movies having the kind of seismic shock on the landscape this one did aren’t simply designed to provoke rumination (or exultation); they’re there to profoundly influence society, even if largely by osmosis, and when one looks at this picture’s architects, such an assessment only gains in credibility.

That, my lad, was a dragon.

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013) (SPOILERS) It’s alarming how quickly Peter Jackson sabotaged all the goodwill he amassed in the wake of The Lord of the Rings trilogy. A guy who started out directing deliciously deranged homemade horror movies ended up taking home the Oscar for a fantasy movie, of all genres. And then he blew it. He went from a filmmaker whose naysayers were the exception to one whose remaining cheerleaders are considered slightly maladjusted. The Desolation of Smaug recovers some of the territory Jackson has lost over the last decade, but he may be too far-gone to ever regain his crown. Perhaps in years to come The Lord of the Rings trilogy will be seen as an aberration in his filmography. There’s a cartoonishness to the gleeful, twisted anarchy on display in his earlierr work that may be more attuned to the less verimilitudinous aspects of King Kong and The Hobbit s. The exceptions are his female-centric character dramas, Heavenly Creat

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

This risotto is shmackin’, dude.

Stranger Things Season 4: Part I (SPOILERS) I haven’t had cause, or the urge, to revisit earlier seasons of Stranger Things , but I’m fairly certain my (relatively) positive takes on the first two sequel seasons would adjust down somewhat if I did (a Soviet base under Hawkins? DUMB soft disclosure or not, it’s pretty dumb). In my Season Three review, I called the show “ Netflix’s best-packaged junk food. It knows not to outstay its welcome, doesn’t cause bloat and is disposable in mostly good ways ” I fairly certain the Duffer’s weren’t reading, but it’s as if they decided, as a rebuke, that bloat was the only way to go for Season Four. Hence episodes approaching (or exceeding) twice the standard length. So while the other points – that it wouldn’t stray from its cosy identity and seasons tend to merge in the memory – hold fast, you can feel the ambition of an expansive canvas faltering at the hurdle of Stranger Things ’ essential, curated, nostalgia-appeal inconsequentiality.

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the

Gizmo caca!

Gremlins (1984) I didn’t get to see Gremlins at the cinema. I wanted to, as I had worked myself into a state of great anticipation. There was a six-month gap between its (unseasonal) US release and arrival in the UK, so I had plenty of time to devour clips of cute Gizmo on Film ’84 (the only reason ever to catch Barry Norman was a tantalising glimpse of a much awaited movie, rather than his drab, colourless, reviews) and Gremlins trading cards that came with bubble gum attached (or was it the other way round?). But Gremlins ’ immediate fate for many an eager youngster in Britain was sealed when, after much deliberation, the BBFC granted it a 15 certificate. I had just turned 12, and at that time an attempt to sneak in to see it wouldn’t even have crossed my mind. I’d just have to wait for the video. I didn’t realise it then (because I didn’t know who he was as a filmmaker), but Joe Dante’s irrepressible anarchic wit would have a far stronger effect on me than the un