# Kick-Ass KICKS ASS!! **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [April 12, 2010, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kick-ass-kicks-ass/535803 "2010-04-12T02:31:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Abe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f1d935/32.png) [@Abe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Abe)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2010, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kick-ass-kicks-ass/535803/121 "2010-05-12T04:27:22Z")
> [@Tanbarkie](#): > > Depiction of an action does not constitute support of that action. Is Steven Spielberg pro-Nazi for showing atrocities committed during the Holocaust in “Schindler’s List”? Is Quentin Tarantino in favor of vigilante justice because of the events portrayed in “Kill Bill”? Is George Lucas a fascist for showing the rise of an totalitarian Empire in the Star Wars prequels? Does showing Starbuck torture a captured Cylon agent make Ron Moore pro-torture? Well, as you can probably imagine I was already aware of this, and in fact never suggested that depiction equals endorsement. My complaint is that the Hit-girl scenes were seriously disturbing. Her violence and lack of a reaction to carnage don’t make her a spoof of child super-heroes just because she wears a goofy costume. What I am seeing is a gross caricature of child soldiers. The fact that she spews “cool” one-liners and has amazing special effects and choreography to back her up does not change this, nor does it make it less disturbing. I have not read the comic book that this film is based on, but I have read a lot of comic books and comic book violence does not look anything like this. Hit-girl is like a disturbingly realistic child version of _Johnny The Homicidal Maniac_. > [@](#): > > It’s not a “satire of American media.” It’s a satire of superhero comics and cartoons, which routinely feature very young heroes beating the shit out of criminals. Imagine if The Powerpuff Girls showed what really happened if a superpowered five year old threw someone through a building. The Powerpuff girls are themselves an obvious satire and spoof, _much_ more so than Kick-Ass. It’s simply not feasible to hold them up as a model that this movie is satirizing. It is a satire of American media (or at least American dominated film and television) much more so than it is a satire about comic books. The comic book connection is there, yes, evident if rather shallow, but the fact that we have a heroine who swears like a sailor and commits carnage like no other child in the history of entertainment is a pretty large indicator that something else is prowling around here. This movie raises many more important questions beyond the facile and simplistic comic book related ones. Like, why is this kind of hideous violence and vulgarity OK, but something as harmless as a nipple is utterly taboo? Is it really appropriate to become desensitized to such graphic violence, and has it gotten so bad that we only take notice when it’s committed by a child? These sort of questions strike me as far more interesting than the ones raised by yet another comic book spoof. The movie clearly has its merits but that is not what I am discussing. I am perfectly willing to admit that this is a better movie than nonsense like The Dark Knight (which, excepting the amazing Joker, was a case study in how to make a sloppy movie). What I was curious about was why there was such limited reaction to the (disgusting) sight of a child soldier mutilating and killing rooms full of men. Even reviews in popular media (like Time magazine) kind of glossed over this aspect, but it hit me like a truck. ---
**Author:** ![Abe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f1d935/32.png) [@Abe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Abe)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2010, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kick-ass-kicks-ass/535803/122 "2010-05-12T04:47:22Z")
> [@Larry\_Mudd](#): > > Superhero comics elevate vigilantism and revenge fantasy to a sublime ideal, and are arguably a large part of the vocabulary of childhood. > > _Kick-Ass_ is in-your-face about literalizing this. The protagonist, taking his first steps down this road, is himself appropriately horrified when confronted with the Hit-Girl, a manifestation of his ideals brought to their logical conclusion. > > Of course it’s disturbing. That’s the point, right from the start: “Don’t worry, sweetie, it’s no worse than getting punched in the stomach.” “I _hate_ getting punched in the stomach.” This is not a healthy daddy-daughter exchange. I don’t think that we are meant to accept this as anything near sane or sensible. > > That doesn’t mean the movie isn’t kick-ass. I don’t disagree (and I think you have stated it extremely well). What I am saying is that this movie has scenes I found extremely disturbing, and I would have expected to see more discussion/concern about the elements I outlined. Ebert, who seems to share my reaction to these scenes and who did state his objections while praising other aspects of the film, was savaged and mocked up-thread for making valid points. ---
**Author:** ![Martini\_Enfield](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/martini_enfield/32/11123_2.png) [@Martini\_Enfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martini_Enfield)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2010, 5:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kick-ass-kicks-ass/535803/123 "2010-05-12T05:10:39Z")
> [@Abe](#): > > I don’t disagree (and I think you have stated it extremely well). What I am saying is that this movie has scenes I found extremely disturbing, and I would have expected to see more discussion/concern about the elements I outlined. Ebert, who seems to share my reaction to these scenes and who did state his objections while praising other aspects of the film, was savaged and mocked up-thread for making valid points. I see where you’re coming from, but do you realise what a massive old fuddy-duddy you’re coming across as? _Kick-Ass_ is a satire on the entire Superhero Genre- what would happen if an average person decided to become a costumed crime fighter? They’d get their ass kicked. Repeatedly. And almost certainly knifed and probably shot, too. And if someone took the idea of becoming a superhero seriously and tried to go about it in a “realistic” way, then they _would_ end up like Big Daddy, who’s become so engrossed in his Mission To Fight Evil that he’s moulded his own daughter- a child- into an cold-blooded but completely absurd and over-the-top killer. There’s no “satire on the American media” in the film. It’s purely about why the entire superhero genre is A Bit Silly. ---
**Author:** ![starryspice](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9e8a1a/32.png) [@starryspice](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/starryspice)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2010, 6:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kick-ass-kicks-ass/535803/124 "2010-05-12T06:50:14Z")
> [@Abe](#): > > People here seem to like this movie so I was wondering if anyone was disturbed by the scenes of ultra-graphic violence committed by a pre-teen. It’s more than just killing, if you’ll allow the expression. That was not cartoon violence, it was graphic and intense. There’s people shot in the face or head at close range. Limbs are amputated, flesh is sliced graphically, and blood flows freely - it’s nearly as extreme as _Spartacus: Blood and Sand_! Spartacus at least has the decency to show us some good (adult) nudity and sex. > > They went out of their way to include graphic violence and vulgar language, but why did the Kick-Ass film makers chicken out on the last item of the R-rated trinity? Why not throw in some nudity and sex too? The satire of American media would have been complete if the 11-year old cut off arms, used vulgar language, and had sex with adults. I guess sex is still dirtier than violence, even for a movie that tries to be a satire. > > I think Ebert gave this film one star because it contained some bizarrely vulgar subject matter. Seeing a preteen gleefully and graphically murder a host of people and then be nearly killed herself by a vicious beating is pretty heavy stuff. There are serious moments in the movie, but they are all “reserved” for specific characters so that slaughter and dismemberment can continue unabated. I agree with Ebert’s objection: > > \*These men, and many others in the film, are really stone-cold dead. And the 11-year-old apparently experiences no emotions about this. \* (from his [review](http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100414/reviews/100419986)) > > The closest thing to Hit-girl is child soldiers who are trained to feel no emotion when killing, and there is nothing funny or endearing about them. I’m not knocking the movie’s other accomplishments but seeing a little girl turn into a cross between Wolverine and Reservoir Dogs was not that amusing. I’m almost with you on this, but not quite. Yes, I found the violence very disturbing. I watched the “green-band” trailers and didn’t notice the R rating (my fault). I’m not usually a blood-and-gore type of person, I hated Kill Bill, so needless to say, the violence of this movie shocked me. As you say, it’s not just a little girl killing a man in a given scene, it’s grotesque slicing, blood-spurting, limb-amputating badness. But I also think that’s the point. What I took away from the movie is that superheroes are actually quite bad people, to put it simplistically. We watch superhero movies all the time and fantasize about vigilante justice, but this movie seems to show just how horribly wrong that can go. I also think you have a point with violence being more acceptable than sex in American media…but the way to fix that is not to have the 11-year-old have sex. That’s just wrong, and if that doesn’t disturb you just as much as the violence, then I don’t really get where you’re coming from. As a last note, I do want to say that I actually did think this movie was quite good. I think it was well-crafted, had excellent characters, and a rare message. Had I not had a panic attack because of the violence, I might have enjoyed it. With distance, I am able to appreciate it more than I did while watching it. (I definitely wouldn’t go see it again though.) ---
**Author:** ![Abe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f1d935/32.png) [@Abe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Abe)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2010, 9:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kick-ass-kicks-ass/535803/125 "2010-05-12T09:46:28Z")
> [@Martini\_Enfield](#): > > I see where you’re coming from, but do you realise what a massive old fuddy-duddy you’re coming across as? Really now, I am fuddy duddy because I am disturbed by images of ultra-graphic ultra-violence by and to a preteen? I submit I am not the one with the problem here. > [@](#): > > _Kick-Ass_ is a satire on the entire Superhero Genre- what would happen if an average person decided to become a costumed crime fighter? They’d get their ass kicked. Repeatedly. And almost certainly knifed and probably shot, too. And if someone took the idea of becoming a superhero seriously and tried to go about it in a “realistic” way, then they _would_ end up like Big Daddy, who’s become so engrossed in his Mission To Fight Evil that he’s moulded his own daughter- a child- into an cold-blooded but completely absurd and over-the-top killer. > > There’s no “satire on the American media” in the film. It’s purely about why the entire superhero genre is A Bit Silly. On the contrary, this film is rather more than that. You appear to have considered it at face value only. At face value yes, this is a superhero satire, but that’s not all it is. To me this is also a glaring commentary on pop culture media and its biases - American film and TV as I suggested earlier. Kick-ass is not anything new. Superheroes have been satirized just as ably if not better in films like _Mystery Men_. There is no shortage of movies in which kids kick ass, like _Home Alone_ or those ridiculous kiddie ninja films. What Kick-ass does is present us with new combinations of kiddie violence and vulgarity in a comedy. I am as disturbed by these depictions as I would be if I saw a film in which a pre-teen gets raped graphically and explicitly for the sake of comedy. If you think Kick-Ass delivers an excess of violence and vulgarity merely to satirize the superhero genre, then I think you are missing out on other important discussions (suggested previously). > [@Starryspice](#): > > I also think you have a point with violence being more acceptable than sex in American media…but the way to fix that is not to have the 11-year-old have sex. That’s just wrong, and if that doesn’t disturb you just as much as the violence, then I don’t really get where you’re coming from. Obviously I am not calling on little Chloe to perform sexual acts. I was trying to point out that we would consider preteen nudity and sex in such context completely unacceptable, yet we have much less trouble with graphic violence and profanity under identical circumstances. The public greedily gobbles up media containing extreme violence and profanity even when it is (covertly) marketed to children, but anything involving a female nipple is considered dangerous and harmful. This is rather concerning. I too think this movie has value. I appreciated that it was a LOT deeper than just a superhero spoof and that it made me (if not everyone, clearly) question my reactions to what I was seeing. Nonetheless, this film employs brutal shock tactics and I was surprised to hear so little discussion about them specifically. That’s all. ---
**Author:** ![Martini\_Enfield](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/martini_enfield/32/11123_2.png) [@Martini\_Enfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martini_Enfield)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2010, 10:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kick-ass-kicks-ass/535803/126 "2010-05-12T10:21:06Z")
> [@Abe](#): > > Really now, I am fuddy duddy because I am disturbed by images of ultra-graphic ultra-violence by and to a preteen? Yes, you are, IMHO. Because you miss the point of having a preteen committing said ultra-graphic ultraviolence _in a comedy_. It’s not a serious movie. It’s Silly and Absurd. It is Silly and Absurd for an 11 year old girl to be dual-wielding 9mm handguns, busting out the Wire-Fu, and single-handedly wiping out an army of Bad Guys. It’s not real. It _can’t_ be real. It’s a live action cartoon. Similarities have been noted with the Adam West _Batman_ series, which I think are warranted. Respectfully, I think you’re reading far too much into the film. > [@](#): > > On the contrary, this film is rather more than that. […] If you think Kick-Ass delivers an excess of violence and vulgarity merely to satirize the superhero genre, then I think you are missing out on other important discussions (suggested previously). Honestly, I think you’re reading way, way too much into it. Not everything has to be Deep & Meaningful With Hidden Complexity no matter how much people want it to be sometimes. > [@](#): > > The public greedily gobbles up media containing extreme violence and profanity even when it is (covertly) marketed to children, but anything involving a female nipple is considered dangerous and harmful. This is rather concerning. Here’s the thing: Profanity is harmless. We might not like hearing kids calling each other “Motherfucker” but at the end of the day it’s meaningless. And as for violence: The first full-length feature movie (or something approching it) was _The Story Of The Kelly Gang_, in 1906. And it involved people shooting each other. Before that, there were plays involving swordfights and murders and other acts of violence. In other words: Violence in entertainment dates back to… well, I bet there was a Neanderthal version of _Ow! My Balls!_ or _The Glorious Retelling Of How We Kicked The Asses Of Those Guys In The Next Valley_. Also, it’s only really American culture that has a major problem with nudity in the media. They show nipples on free to air TV here after about 8:30pm, and both _Oz_ and _The Pacific_ have been broadcast here on free to air TV with full-frontal male nudity. And all the swearing. > [@](#): > > I too think this movie has value. I appreciated that it was a LOT deeper than just a superhero spoof and that it made me (if not everyone, clearly) question my reactions to what I was seeing. Nonetheless, this film employs brutal shock tactics and I was surprised to hear so little discussion about them specifically. That’s all. That’s because most of the film’s target audience plays computer games and are used to people getting shot or graphically blown up. The violence in the film is and was no more “real” than shooting a Nazi soldier in a WWII game. Are you familiar with the _Civilisation_ or _Defcon_ games? You can deploy nuclear weapons to wipe out entire cities and kill tens of millions of civilians in those games. No-one has a problem with them. Personally I’d be more worried about people being OK with virtually killing tens of millions of civilians for being in a city that’s unfortunately in the way than a silly comedic movie which pushed the envelope in some respects. ---
**Author:** ![Abe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f1d935/32.png) [@Abe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Abe)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2010, 11:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kick-ass-kicks-ass/535803/127 "2010-05-12T11:59:38Z")
> [@Martini\_Enfield](#): > > Honestly, I think you’re reading way, way too much into it. Not everything has to be Deep & Meaningful With Hidden Complexity no matter how much people want it to be sometimes. So you maintain, but there is a lot more going on here than just a silly parody or satire. A parody - even one that explodes a concept to utterly illogical extremes - does not need to include this level of explicit language and violence. The mere fact that the film makers put these elements in the film and **kept them in the film in the face of stern opposition** suggests so. > [@](#): > > Here’s the thing: Profanity is harmless. We might not like hearing kids calling each other “Motherfucker” but at the end of the day it’s meaningless. And as for violence: The first full-length feature movie (or something approching it) was _The Story Of The Kelly Gang_, in 1906. And it involved people shooting each other. _[etc]_ You seem to be greatly expanding the argument. Why are you trying to justify violence and profanity? I never argued against them. Violence and conflict are integral parts of narrative tradition. > [@](#): > > Also, it’s only really American culture that has a major problem with nudity in the media. They show nipples on free to air TV here after about 8:30pm, and both _Oz_ and _The Pacific_ have been broadcast here on free to air TV with full-frontal male nudity. And all the swearing. I’m not really sure where “here” is, but yes, this is a hangup common in some parts of the world, not everywhere. > [@](#): > > That’s because most of the film’s target audience plays computer games and are used to people getting shot or graphically blown up. The violence in the film is and was no more “real” than shooting a Nazi soldier in a WWII game. Are you familiar with the _Civilisation_ or _Defcon_ games? You can deploy nuclear weapons to wipe out entire cities and kill tens of millions of civilians in those games. > > No-one has a problem with them. That is [not true](http://insidetech.monster.com/news/articles/8001-switzerland-bans-violent-video-games) [anywhere](http://presspausetoreflect.blogspot.com/2010/04/violent-video-games-and-supreme-court.html). And some video games are indeed pretty disturbing. But, anyway, how many videogames do you know of that are like _Kick-ass_, mixing graphic gory violence and preteen action? I have been playing games for decades and don’t recall ever seeing one. Even offenders like \*Manhunt \* or _Postal_ can’t keep up with Hit Girl. GTA? That’s like a Hello Kitty game compared to Kick-Ass! > [@](#): > > Personally I’d be more worried about people being OK with virtually killing tens of millions of civilians for being in a city that’s unfortunately in the way than a silly comedic movie which pushed the envelope in some respects. That’s not comparable. If as a result of dropping your bombs in a videogame you were to see (for example) children burning to death, their clothing melting on to their skin, their eyeballs running out of their sockets, the flesh carbonizing as they writhe in pain, their charred stumps waving feebly about, then yes I would say this hypothetical game contains extremely disturbing images. Would you not agree? There is also an important difference when you see a representation or icon of something versus a hyper-realistic depiction of it. Playing chess does not make you a psychopath - even if you are the type who likes to sacrifice pieces - because the conflict is representational. You can apply this argument to all games. Even games from the last 10 years - the advent of realistic graphics - almost always have non-realistic portrayals of violence. Cartoon violence is representational. That includes Tom and Jerry, Home Alone, the Powerpuff Girls, etc. The violence in Kick-Ass is definitely not representational, it is very graphic and very extreme. If the film is merely and only a satire, it could easily have done without the violence and profanity. The fact that Kick-Ass does contain this material informs us that it is most likely there for a more interesting reason than gratuity. ---
**Author:** ![Martini\_Enfield](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/martini_enfield/32/11123_2.png) [@Martini\_Enfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martini_Enfield)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2010, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kick-ass-kicks-ass/535803/128 "2010-05-12T12:52:40Z")
I had an extensive rebuttal to your points made up, but I’ve realise that we’re never going to agree on this. I honestly feel your point of view is incorrect and wrong, and it’s probably best we leave it at and agree to disagree. I will, however, point out that there’s a huge difference between _Civilisation_ and _Defcon_ (which no-one sensible considers “violent”) and GTA or _Hitman_, and that I was referring specifically to the Civ/Defcon games earlier, not “violent videogames in general”. ---
**Author:** ![quixotic78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/3ab097/32.png) [@quixotic78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/quixotic78)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2010, 1:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kick-ass-kicks-ass/535803/129 "2010-05-12T13:04:29Z")
When I was a kid, I saw one of the Robocop sequels (I forget which) that has an evil 10 year old boy who shoots people. It scarred my young self a great deal, because you know what, somewhere – many somewheres, in fact – there are 10 year old kids who do take pistols to people’s heads and pull the trigger. It was a Hollywoody scene, but with enough realism to resonate. Had I seen Kick-Ass when I was younger, I don’t believe it would have scarred me nearly as much, because there is absolutely no element of reality. No 11 year old girl is going to be able to slice-and-dice that much. It was just silly (and actually, I didn’t like it for that reason. What’s the point of having a movie about superheroes being average Joes with no powers if you’re going to have a physics-defying 11 year old figuratively gutting that message?). Kick-Ass didn’t shock me because it was just too silly. It’s the difference between watching a dogfight and watching Tom and Jerry. Even if the former are “only” biting at each other, whereas the latter are stuffing each other with dynamite and incinerating one another, the former is clearly worse because it’s real. The latter is fodder for a kid’s cartoon. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2010, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kick-ass-kicks-ass/535803/130 "2010-05-12T16:53:05Z")
> [@Abe](#): > > Really now, I am fuddy duddy because I am disturbed by images of ultra-graphic ultra-violence by and to a preteen? I submit I am not the one with the problem here. > > … > > What Kick-ass does is present us with new combinations of kiddie violence and vulgarity in a comedy. I am as disturbed by these depictions as I would be if I saw a film in which a pre-teen gets raped graphically and explicitly for the sake of comedy. If you think Kick-Ass delivers an excess of violence and vulgarity merely to satirize the superhero genre, then I think you are missing out on other important discussions (suggested previously). Really Abe? Is that really so bad? I enjoyed the movie. I’m not going to stand here and make an impassioned speech about how the movie was or wasn’t satire. Honestly, it just entertained the hell out of me. Kids killing people in a comedy? Hilarious! An 11 year old saying cunt? Shockingly amusing! Why not push new combinations of kiddie violence and vulgarity in a comedy? Humans get habituated to things. We need more all the time, more extreme, more shocking, louder, flashier, faster. I’m happy if this film opens the door to children doing things on screen that have been generally reserved for adults. Why should the only depiction of child violence or sex or vulgarity happen in those art house independent films? Why can’t we have a Terminator who’s a kid and shoots up a police station? ---
**Author:** ![Abe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f1d935/32.png) [@Abe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Abe)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2010, 11:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kick-ass-kicks-ass/535803/131 "2010-05-13T11:47:50Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > Really Abe? Is that really so bad? I enjoyed the movie. I’m not going to stand here and make an impassioned speech about how the movie was or wasn’t satire. Honestly, it just entertained the hell out of me. Kids killing people in a comedy? Hilarious! An 11 year old saying cunt? Shockingly amusing! Well, Kids killing people in violently graphic and explicit ways is not something I find amusing. There’s nothing funny about it, or about kids cutting off the arms and legs of other people. It is ridiculous, it is well done, and the choreography can even be described as humorous and entertaining, but the act is not funny nor is the concept (to me, anyway). The swearing is, I agree, more amusing. But as someone pointed out earlier, no one gets hurt when a 10 year old swears. Kids say the darnest things after all. What, really, is amusing about a little girl getting beaten nearly to death - in a comedy? To me these images are vicious and unpleasant. In spite of this unpleasantness I am not saying it’s a bad movie. The director could be pandering to a pretty low common denominator by including this gruesome violence just for laffs, but there is probably a much better reason why it was retained, when film studios were turning down the film because of it. And this is unquestionably a smart movie, hence my thinking there’s more here than mere face value. > [@](#): > > Why not push new combinations of kiddie violence and vulgarity in a comedy? Humans get habituated to things. We need more all the time, more extreme, more shocking, louder, flashier, faster. I’m happy if this film opens the door to children doing things on screen that have been generally reserved for adults. Why should the only depiction of child violence or sex or vulgarity happen in those art house independent films? Why can’t we have a Terminator who’s a kid and shoots up a police station? Graphic sex, vulgarity, and violence are not things I associate or would like to associate with preteens. When they do happen, I consider them highly unfortunate (like seeing diseased or starving children). If your argument is that people become desensitized to anything they see in entertainment, so they need increasingly harder and bigger doses of shocking material, you are describing a form of addiction - which is not considered healthy by anyone. So that would be one answer to your question, but honestly, this is a huge topic. I don’t have ANY problem with violence or sex or profanity generally, and I believe children should be better educated on every single topic (especially sex but definitely violence and its consequences), so please do not assume this is a prudish reaction. I did want to point out one thing, and that is the stretching required of the phrase “cartoon violence” to describe _Kick-Ass_. Cartoon violence is “Violent actions involving cartoon-like situations and characters. May include violence where a character is unharmed after the action has been inflicted” (that is the [ESRB definition](http://static.tigerdirect.com/html/glossary_ESRB%20Rating%20Symbols.html)) _Kick-Ass_ has graphic and realistic depictions of real people being slaughtered, dismembered, or otherwise abused and killed. Of course nothing in this movie is meant to be taken seriously, but that does not make these depictions cartoonish. If this really were cartoon violence (a la _Home Alone_, or even Jackie Chan films) I doubt it would have been remarked by anyone. ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2010, 10:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kick-ass-kicks-ass/535803/132 "2010-12-27T10:57:12Z")
Somewhat late to the Kick Ass party, but I wanted to say that: 1. All I knew about this movie was a single still of Kick Ass in costume, and that it was about some dweeb who wants to be a superhero. Nothing else - not even a trailer. 2. The only review I’ve ever seen was the title of this thread. 3. I don’t like comics. 4. I dislike the superhero genre. 5. I watched it under some duress. 6. I absolutely fucking loved it. It was pure unadulterated pleasure from start to finish, and it totally took me by surprise. Awesome, awesome film. ---
**Author:** ![Illuminatiprimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/illuminatiprimus/32/11520_2.png) [@Illuminatiprimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Illuminatiprimus)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2010, 11:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kick-ass-kicks-ass/535803/133 "2010-12-27T11:05:26Z")
We did try to tell you. 🙂 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kick-ass-kicks-ass/535803.md?page=6)