An Accurate Look at: Hollywood's "Kick-Ass" Adaptation

When I first saw an issue of the Kick-Ass comic on the wall of my favourite comic shop (Carsley's Comics, Montreal's best-kept secret!), I couldn't help but smile. The title, art, and tagline grabbed my interest, and when I finally bought the first issue and read it, I couldn't wait for more. I read them all and really got attached to them. I guess, as a horny bespectacled geek with incredible powers of opposite sex repulsion, the comic really spoke to me. And let's be honest, you've wanted to, at one point or another, be able to do superheroics. I know I have. There, I said it.

I love the book. When I heard about the movie, I was excited. (Well, rather, read about the movie in the back of an issue.) The TV spots and trailers got me pumped. I wasn't crazy about the costume redesigns, but hey, I was sort of expecting that. As long as they didn't mess up the coming-of-age superhero story, I'd be happy.

So I get to the movie theatre and a brace myself for the ride. I mean, the comic is a straight-forward 8-issue miniseries which I read in 2 hours. How could they possibly mess up a film adaptation?

Surprise, kiddies. They messed up the film adaptation. I had no issues with the casting, and the generic superhero-ish music was good. It starts out accurately enough, but then it all falls apart. It's like the writers read the comic, picked-and-chose points they liked, threw out meaningful, important elements that should have stayed, and tossed in needless excessive action-flick content instead of the characters and story that made the book so great.

If you've read my other movie-related articles, you know I don't write spoilers. [And if you haven't read them, just browse the site for posts that begin with the tongue-in-cheek phrase of "An Accurate Look at:"] With that in mind, there really isn't anything much I can mention without spoiling the story, other than some of the most important elements of the book were omitted, making many of the characters seem either excessively flat or just too over-the-top. By reducing the comic's story to an action-packed teen comedy, the mood of the book is completely killed. It was like listening to someone try to tell someone else about something they'd heard but don't know about. Some of the details are there, but the information is just plain wrong.

While the room howled with laughter and applause, I literally exclaimed "What the f#%@?" while looking around. You know that clichéd supervillain hand gesture? Where the fingers are spread out, gripping something that isn't there? It might be easier to visualize if I use a picture:

I'm not even joking when I tell you that my hands hurt afterwards from them both being in that position due to rage. By now, I should be no stranger to Hollywood butchering my favourite comics, but that doesn't make me less annoyed each time it happens. I'm used to facepalming in movie theatres, but this is the first time I've hurt myself due to anger. Yes, something is most definitely wrong with me.

Once again, Hollywood misses the point of the source material. The book is about a young man who tries something ridiculous, and through his actions and interactions with others, learns about the world and grows as a character. It's a coming of age story about missing youths, illusions, expectations, and violence. The movie conveniently pushes all that character junk aside and focuses on the ridiculous. Sure, it's funny, and I laughed at times, but there is more to the Kick-Ass of the comic's world than just comedy. As the book shows us (graphically at times), the joke ends, and that's when reality begins.

The Kick-Ass movie entirely misses the point, mood, message, and spirit of the comic and does not do it justice. It feels like the whole flick would be one of Dave's daydreams in biology class, wearing his Kick-Ass costume under his school clothes. It's that excessive. Yes, I'm attached to the comic, but I'm able to recognize its flaws and shortcomings. Unfortunately, the unplausible elements of the comic were only made worse in the movie. Compared to the movie, the book is non-fiction. Honestly, spend the money on the trade rather than the movie ticket.

Conan the Entertainer

Late-night TV wasn't funny to me until I started watching Conan O'Brien's show years ago. The unfunny old guy and the annoying dick who jacked Bruce Campbell's chin are not entertaining in the least. (The guy from The Drew Carey Show is great, though.) Conan's damn funny. He used to write for SNL years ago and his seasons of The Simpsons are by far the pinnacle of that series (which today is put a hollow shell of what it once was). Conan's strange humour and self-deprecation made his late-night program immensely enjoyable. Nothing was taken seriously because everything was fun, even the really messed-up characters, such as Vomiting Kermit, the Insult (occasionally) Comic Dog, and the Masturbating Bear.

Flash forward a few years. Conan gets to take over The Tonight Show, which is a huge deal. I watched the first episode, laughed like hell, and loved it. It was great to see Conan with Max and the band at an earlier time doing the same kind of gags they usually do. The bits about Conan dicking around in the studio backlot were hilarious - pretending to do an exorcism on cohost/sidekick Andy Richter as the studio tour bus drove by, turning his desk into a go-kart and drag racing a forklift operator, and taking a tour group out on the town, to name just a few moments. Don't forget his other escapades: going guitar-hunting thanks to Craig's List with his buddy Slash in tow, and pimping around LA in his green '90s Ford Escort, getting girls pregnant by just looking at them and making Fabio himself feel jealous.

Remember the BIG events outside his studio? The human cannonballs? The Grave Digger monster truck leaping over a ramp to stomp a giant pumpkin? The "Conan, Please Blow Up My Car" contest in which they actually blew up the winner's old clunker? (Don't feel bad. The winner received a brand new car as a prize.)

Well, all that's over. You know what's been going on. And it's not funny.

Last night was Conan's final episode on The Tonight Show before it will return to the humourless drivel it was prior to his arrival. Conan had a few jokes about what will become of their new studio, suggesting they leave it empty as a metaphor for NBC programming. How fitting.

His guests included Steve Carrell as an NBC bureaucrat, followed by a tired, nostalgic Tom Hanks, who emerged from backstage with round sunglasses and two glasses of scotch - one for Conan and one for himself. Sidekick Andy Richter, of course, carries a flask in his breast pocket. Tom Hanks and Conan spoke about the good old days, when Hanks hosted SNL and Conan, "the Irish kid," would write sketches for him.

The musical number was an incredible performance by Neil Young. Yes, the Neil Young. When he heard the news about the NBC late-night fiasco, he was the first to offer Conan support.

The closing act of the show featured Max and the band and guest Will Ferrell performing Free Bird, with Conan on guitar. While Ferrell's overall unfunniness and inability to sing ruined what should have been a powerful finale to Conan's stint on The Tonight Show, the most powerful moments of the episode was the montage of various unforgettable moments from the seven months Conan hosted (including some of the clips mentioned earlier), Conan's farewell speech, and the audience's unstoppable roaring applause. I've never cried watching late-night talk shows, but if any episode ever gave me a reason to, it would be this one.

Farewell, Conan. Thanks for the laughs and the good times. Best of luck in the future. I can't wait to see you on my TV screen again.

Longbox Blues: Deadpool #15-16, #900

I'm gonna come right out and say it: I'm a Deadpool fan.

I know, I know. Deadpool is the new Wolverine. An overused, annoying, whored-out character that isn't funny but brings in mucho $ for the House of Ideas.

It wasn't always this way. I should mention that I'm a fan of oldschool Deadpool, from the Joe Kelly era. That's right, back when the character had character, when there was depth to the Merc with a Mouth. When he was actually funny. Joe Kelly's Deadpool run actually made me laugh out loud at times, something that really doesn't happen when I read comics. Heck, I'm such a fan of that period of Deadpool history that I even dressed up as him for Halloween. (And yes, that post was written in character.)

I decided to check out Deadpool's new story: him joining the X-Men. Wait, didn't that already happen before, and didn't he get a way better costume than this new ugly yellow one?


The issues began with a "Previously in Deadpool" page, which reminded me of the recap pages from Kelly-era Deadpool. That felt nice. Then I read the recap page and literally wondered "WTF."

Apparently, Wade got himself a crapload of money, bought a nuclear sub, sank it, used a tugboat to pull it, turned the tugboat into a pirate ship, tried to free the people of some island, and the sub exploded.

Since when did Deadpool become a rejected Family Guy sketch?

#15 started off strong. Stranded at sea, Wade starts to lose it. Or rather, continues to lose it. I couldn't help but think of Tales of the Black Freighter and the oldschool SNL "Land Shark" sketches (which Joe Kelly made a reference to back in '97), but that's probably just me.

He eventually gets back to shore, and the book climaxes in a very nonsensical scene that wasn't funny at all. #16 picks up soon afterwards, with Wade on the X-Men's island, applying to the team.

Cyclops later sends Domino to find Deadpool and to speak to him. Those two go way back. If I'm not mistaken, they both first appeared in New Mutants #98. The fight scene was supposed to be entertaining, but ultimately fell very, very flat. Pun NOT intended.

The jokes were lame, the story didn't make sense, and Wade looks like a freakin' burn victim rather than the disfigured monster he's supposed to be. I won't be writing about the rest of the arc because I'm not going to be reading it.

I also decided to pick up Deadpool #900. I figured that if any modern Deadpool book could be good, it would be a super-sized collection of short Deadpool stories by different people. Hell, Joe Kelly was even writing one!

#900 is a series of unrelated, uninteresting, and unoriginal short stories featuring Deadpool. Modern "lol, i has 2 vioces in mah hed" Deadpool. One of the tales was an homage to Deadpool #42, "Silent But Deadly Interlude," which in turn was an homage to G.I. Joe #21, "Silent Interlude." That one was OK. Watching Wade noiselessly fight mimes was strange in a good way, but the plot made little sense. Another featured Deadpool and a shrink. It was very bizarre, and I can honestly say that it was the only story in the book that I actually liked. The Joe Kelly story, unfortunately, was drawn by [shudder] Rob Liefeld. I know that it's only fair, since he DID co-create the character, but seriously, that man should not be allowed near pencils or any other stationary paraphernalia. The story itself wasn't good, nor funny, though it did give readers a glimpse into Wade's childhood, and into Deadpool's mysterious pouches. And the final story is a reprint of Deadpool Team-Up #1, which was awful and really felt like something out of a Wolverine story.

It's hard to be a Deadpool fan. I was disappointed by all of those books and I really don't like what they've done with/to the character. I'll go hug my Classic Deadpool trades and cry myself to sleep, I guess.

An Accurate Look At: "G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra"

Have you ever had to listen to someone speak of something they know nothing about? Or had to listen to someone explain something they know nothing about to other people? If you answered "no," your answer will change if you are unfortunate enough to end up at a screening of G.I. Joke: The Return of Sigma 6.

The movie takes place in the "not-so-distant future." What does that mean? To put it simply, it means that they can introduce crap that neither makes sense nor is plausible in the Joe-verse for the sake of it: things like "pulse" energy weapons, active camo pyjamas, solid hologram projectors, vehicles/weapons/armour that belong in a bad sci-fi B-movie, and, of course, the "nanomites." This is the sort of crap you'd expect from that godawful '80s GI. Joe cartoon, which is even worse than this Hollywood attempt at G.I. Joe.

If you asked, "What are 'nanomites'?" I'll be more than glad to answer your question. In this generic action movie, "nanomites" are tiny little robots that can pretty much do anything because of the lazy writing. These silver plot-devices somehow turn green and can be used as weapon and/or medicine and/or brain controlling device. Open palm, insert face.

Haven't you heard? This is the TECHNOFUTURE where crap doesn't have to make sense!

And what terrible Hollywood movie would be complete without unlikeable characters? First, there's "Duke," who looks and sounds even more like a douchebag than the Duke we already know and loathe. His black comic-relief sidekick is a Wayans brother. I don't think I need to say anthing else.

But I will. There is little to no characterization for most of the important characters, besides for the occasional "oh gnoes, I has emotions" moments. There is not much to say about the acting, since there's hardly are there. I have literally "seen better actin' in fast-actin' Tenactin."

The characters are very underdeveloped. You meet them, they fight, stuff blows up, hurray. But you know nothing about them, and honestly, you don't have any reason to care about them. "Okay, she has a crossbow. That guy talks funny. That guy doesn't talk. Hurm. Is that it?" And as for the characters that DO have backstories which they bother to reveal, whoo boy. All of the storytelling is done by flashbacks which either feel very over-the-top and excessively dramatic, or not serious at all. So kids fight, and some douchebags want to get married. Who cares?

And speaking of the characters, the writers really went out of their way to make it feel like a soap opera. It seems like every character somehow knows each other from something they did in the distant past -- CUE FLASHBACK SEQUENCE!

The characters have been "internationalized." Rather than Fort Wadsworth's motor pool housing America's finest, this new international Pit has people from all over the world. G.I. Joe is once again Action Force, this time an Action Force made by the combined power of multiple governments. Probably easier to market the flick internationally this way.

Yet, despite the "internationalization" of the characters, the one they mess up the worse is the one best known for BEING from a foreign land. How ironic that this new reimagined Baroness is simply some American broad with badly dyed hair. That's it. No accent. Just some random white girl in a slutty costume. Hooray for plot devices. Way to go, Hollywood! Other characters just look really, really stupid - take for example "The Doctor" or the "Vipers" with ugly helmets with huge eyes and metal grins. These characters look like badly-designed comic-book villains. Unfortunately, the comic book they're from is NOT G.I. Joe.

Despite the movie taking place in the "not-so-distant future," the civilian ground vehicles are from the present day. Wait, what? How can there be airships and VTOL carriers out of Star Trek or Ghost In The Shell, but the ground vehicles remain the same? Did the governments of the world decide to ban new cars and instead invest that money into developing shuttlecrafts and bizarre submarines? Nah, it's just product placement. They can call it a "Steel Crusher APV" if they want, but it's just a lame-ass Hummer.

And speaking of "not-so-distant future," let's briefly talk about the Joes' equipment, shall we? Crossbows with self-navigating shells? Arm-mounted hologram projectors? Fancy suits of mechanical armour? What the crap? Does G.I. Joe buy gear from Stark Industries? If not, Tony should sue them for blatantly ripping off his armour. That shot of the ankles sealing up was more than just an "homage."

Honestly, though, "Delta-6 Accelerator Suit"? Come the hell on. Here I was thinking S.N.A.K.E. Armour was lame, and then they pull THIS out of their ass. Of all of the Joe eras to include in the flick, Sigma 6? WHY? If you don't believe that they intentionally tipped their hats to Sigma 6, stay 'til the end of the movie. If you can.

Like most recent generic Hollywood action flicks, this one features gimmickry such as shakycam, too much slow-motion, and plenty of sparks/explosions to get in the way of seeing whatever is supposed to be on the screen. The fight scenes aren't that entertaining and the chase scenes aren't much better. Stuff's moving, camera's shaking, can't see what's happening, some sort of explosion, a flip or two, some slow-motion, repeat. Again. And again. And again. Truly groundbreaking filmmaking.

There is some good among this sea of mediocrity. Dr. Who plays Destro and they did a good job with his character. They also explained a bit about one of his ancestors in what was probably the best scene of the movie - not that that's saying much. The new take on Zartan is fantastic. Much more plausible than the shape-shifting hologram-using ab-revealing Aussie biker gang leader.

There are several references which older Joe fans will pick up on. Don't be fooled by a few lines, an alternate costume, something to chew on, or a red helmet. Just because you might have chuckled at a line doesn't mean you didn't facepalm a few scenes back, and in no way begins to make up for the flick's numerous flaws.

The story is terrible, the acting is just awful, the music is generic, the gags aren't funny, the action is uninteresting, and the plot twists are foreseeable. Do yourself a favour - buy some Joe comics or a figure instead.

An Accurate Look At: "Transformers: Revenge of The Fallen"

In the first Great Depression, Hollywood managed to survive by spewing out terrible, generic cut-rate movies. People would flock to theatres, forget about their woes for a few hours, and Tinseltown would rake it all in.

Sound familiar? It should.

Generic Hollywood Robots II: Return of the Product Placement is a two-and-a-half-hour orgy of mediocrity. Remember the 1998 Godzilla re-imagining? The needlessly radical redesign, the overly large cast of uninteresting humans, and the plot which seemed to have been added as an afterthought between explosions?

Sound familiar? It should.

The team who reduced the Transformers to nothing more than a brainless teen comedy have returned to once again reduce the Transformers to nothing more than a brainless teen comedy.

If you thought that the character development was bad in the 2007 flick, guess again. It's even worse this time around, with more characters who have less screentime than ever before. Think of the Redshirts from Star Trek. Only this time, they've given them names and even action figures. If you're only going to give a character one line and 30 seconds of screentime, you probably shouldn't have bothered to have put them in at all. Why would a character come to Earth just to drive through a few buildings, not even get a full robot mode, and ultimately get blown up?

And speaking of the 'robot modes,' have you ever crumpled up a ball of aluminum foil? Congratulations, you've made an accurate replica of a movie 'Transformer.' What's that? Your replica has no limbs and can't even turn into anything? Well, why not put it on a wheel? Feet are SO 1980s.

Seriously. A construction vehicle that turns into what looks like the robot equivalent of an abortion? A head between two wheels and arms? Where is the torso? Where are the legs? What the hell IS that thing? And don't get me started on the motorcycle triplets. Three motorcycles who don't have a robot mode between them. Picture a jack-in-the-box, with the head on the end of the extended spring. Now put that jack-in-the-box on top of a unicycle. According to Hollywood, you have a robot. Are they trying to make a Beast Machines reference, or just make their designers look lazy? And speaking of terrible designs, the main villain, a bastardization of one of the more memorable Transformers villains (and the ONLY character in this movie who should have had flames) looks like Makuta from Bionicle, and doesn't even turn into anything.

There are many 'robots' in this flick. Too many, in fact, with more literally leaping out of nowhere. Can drones tunnel their way across oceans, and just happen to be in the right area of the right country during an important battle? Do Constructicons reproduce asexually? Do they have Multiple Man's abilities? Sure seems that way because they can be everywhere at once, despite being combined into some kind of gorilla-like Shop-Vac.

Also, way to misunderstand Cybertronians. Megatron calls no one 'master.' Transformers do not cry. They do not have green blood. They do not speak like inner-city thugs. They have their own lexicon of slang and curses and need not borrow the humans'.

But don't worry. The robots aren't the only characters who are awful. The humans are, too. Forget about acting and characterization. Oh no, you can rely on stereotypes to instantly understand everything about a particular character. Paranoid geekboy? Check. "OMG, it's my destiny" guy? Check. Airheaded women? Check! People with learning disabilities? Minorities? Double check!

Why? Why must they make two of the robots who get the most screen time turn into awful-looking Chevrolets with repulsive paint jobs? And why must those cars turn into slang-talking stereotypical gangstas? The Retardicon twins (Hurp and Durp) have huge ears, gold teeth, oversized eyes, speak in human slang, and can't read. Of all the characters to give screen time to, it had to be these two. Primus, why? It was like watching a pair of mentally deficient wannabe rappers having a seizure.

Along with the awful characters came other staples of this kind of movie-making: too much gimmicry, too much special effects, too much frat boy/douchebag/unfunny humour (wrecking ball testicles? Dog buttsex? What kind of 12-year-old wrote that into the script?), and of course, airheaded/airbrushed women who are only cast for two reasons. And their reasons are on their chests.

At one point, Megan Fox's character is seen airbrushing what looks like some trashy tattoo onto a motorcycle. How very appropriate.

This flick is incredibly difficult to watch. And not just for the foreseeable plot twists (I use the term 'plot' very, very loosely), the excessive amount of uninteresting/undeveloped characters, the excessive special effects, a story structured almost as badly as this write-up, and the incredibly forgettable generic soundtrack (which, come to think of it, seems highly fitting). For some reason, this hack of a director loves gimmicks such as shaky-cam, lens flare, motion blur, and slow-motion - and combinations of any of the above. Not only do these 'techniques' feel overdone and tacky, but they really make the movie literally unwatchable. What's going on? What just happened? I don't know, because the camera wouldn't hold still while the sun blocked everything on screen while everything moved around really quickly. If you expect people to pay damn near twenty dollars to watch your drivel in Imax, show some courtesy and let them see the movie.

The best way to describe this flick is to compare it to a 90s comic book - 24 pages of over-the-top 'toughguyness' and badassery for no reason (to the point that characters act out of character), characters no one has any reason to care about, excessive fighting and violence for the sake of excessive fighting and violence, whenches, and bad stories, complete with a holographic cover, a collector card, plastic bag, and whole lot of ads.