Kick-Ass 2 (2013)

"The costumed high-school hero Kick-Ass joins with a group of normal citizens who have been inspired to fight crime in costume. Meanwhile, the Red Mist plots an act of revenge that will affect everyone Kick-Ass knows."

I'm writing this while still buzzing from the post-movie adrenaline rush—and a can of green apple Rockstar Supersours—so this is not going to be a review as much as gushing fanboy-ish praise for a much darker and more adult sequel than I ever imagined "Kick-Ass 2" could be.

Having barely registered the first "Kick-Ass" (2010) as anything more than a quasi-hipsterish hack job meant for teenagers, the change of director and screenwriter has allowed levels of ultra-violence to rival something which Tarantino would be proud of. "Kick-Ass 2" has lots of bloodshed, multiple murders, and even an attempted rape! It's nearly as ridiculous as an exploitation movie, and I love it!

The cinematography is very good with only a few fight scenes where quick cuts make it hard to tell what's happening. It's not as bad as "The Dark Knight Rises" or "Iron Man 3", so be grateful. The effects are decent throughout, and some of the kills are extremely brutal. Although even more blood and gore would have made me ecstatic, there's enough for an R-rated movie, and it's guaranteed to upset some people. Jim Carrey refused to promote "Kick-Ass 2" because of the violence, but that's his problem. It's doubtful, but I hope there will eventually be an "Unrated Version" which will add more meanspiritedness.

Of course, "Kick-Ass 2" is aimed primarily at the now three-years-older teenage crowd who enjoyed the first movie more than I did, so there are some kiddified comedy bits which are mostly based around Hit-Girl's attempts at fitting into high school. As a fully grown adult of another gender and country, I can't relate to any of that, but I can acknowledge that the "gross-out" puking and defecating scenes are amusingly over-the-top. One thing is for certain, "Kick-Ass 2" is definitely not aimed at little kids, prudes, or comicbook-reading manchildren. Apparently, the latter really hate this movie, as do the mainstream "critics", but that's because they have no taste anyway. Anybody over the age of 12 years old who reads "Spider-Man" and "Batman" comics regularly obviously suffers from some kind of mental retardation, so I couldn't care less what those people have to say about anything.

Unlike the comicbook fantards, I can't find anything wrong with "Kick-Ass 2". As an action movie, it all works, but I suppose you do need to have seen the original for everything to make sense. There are minor attempts to bring a new audience up to speed with who is who, but "Kick-Ass 2" is a faster-paced sequel rather than a standalone story. Given the time that's passed, it's probably better if you don't watch the two movies back-to-back because of the change in tone.

Yes, that is Jim Carrey on the left!

Acting-wise, Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Christopher Mintz-Plasse are much the same as before, but "McLovin" is maybe more comedic than strictly necessary as a supervillain. Jim Carrey is completely unrecognisable in a role which proves that he can genuinely act when/if he wants to, and Chloë Grace Moretz steals the show yet again. She overuses her cute, wide-eyed expressions, but she's absolutely fantastic for a 16-year-old. I'm almost looking forward to seeing her in the "Carrie" remake now.

John Leguizamo has an important supporting role and continues to talk out of the side of his mouth like a champ, Iain Glen has a nice cameo as a mafia boss, Olga Kurkulina is fearsome as Mother Russia, and Morris Chestnut (aka Luke from the first "American Horror Story") replaces Omari Hardwick as Detective Marcus Williams. In another cast change, Todd is now played by Augustus Prew instead of Evan Peters. I can't say that I noticed the difference. I was too busy ogling Lindy Booth as Night Bitch, Lyndsy Fonseca as Katie Deauxma, and Claudia Lee as Brooke the bitchy popular girl. Oh yes, there's a lot of lovely eyecandy here!

While "Kick-Ass" is a semi-parody of more famous superheroes, "Kick-Ass 2" continues that idea although only pays lip-service to a few of them. "Batman" gets a couple of explicit mentions, not because Big Daddy's oft-shown empty costume looks just like Batman's but due to a minor character using his backstory. The nerdy Marvel homages and in-jokes are mostly part of the plot itself rather than shout-outs, yet it's easy to spot them all. If you're inclined to see the whole thing as a rip-off or a clone, it won't disappoint you in its lack of originality. You could also criticise "Mystery Men" (1999) for the same reasons and the things which both films share. Superhero movies are all the same anyway.

Despite the dangers of vigilantism being more of a contrivance and a satirical afterthought than in "Mystery Men" or "Kick-Ass", there's a bigger message here about being what you are meant to be and doing the right thing no matter what the rest of society thinks. Thankfully, that message doesn't extend to encouraging the lameness which cosplayers indulge in though, and their childish "dressing-up for Hallowe'en everyday" bullshit continues to be ridiculed throughout.

As a massive snark about cosplayers, geeks, nerds, teenagers, pop-culture, and American society in general, "Kick-Ass 2" surpasses all expectations. No wonder they had to film it in Toronto instead of New York! Since infantilisation, pussification, entitlement, selfishness, lies and injustice have now become the American way, "Kick-Ass 2" has a counter-culture message which will be hated by its lampooned targets and is subversive enough for me to wholeheartedly support.

I'm not going to deconstruct or spoil anything else for you because you need to see this movie for yourself. I don't often recommend non-horror movies, so just watch it, okay?

Kick-Ass 2 kicks the original Kick-Ass' ass!

Painless (2012)

(AKA Insensibles)



"Set in Catalonia, Painless weaves two stories: in one, starting during the Spanish Civil War and running through to the '60s, an asylum attempts to rehabilitate children who feel no pain, by teaching them physical suffering. In the second, in the present time, a brilliant neurosurgeon who needs a bone marrow transplant, discovers this dark past when he searches for his biological parents."

Since American horror is as dead as a zombie that's just been shot in the head, incinerated, and ground-up into ink to be used to print more articles from Lianne Spiderbaby in Fangoria, I've decided to return my attention to the European offerings as I continue my quest to find something horrific again. Sadly, for all of its beautiful camerawork and moments of brilliance, "Painless" was not what I was looking for.

Ostensibly a drama about congenital analgesia, "Painless" has much the same look and atmosphere as "American Horror Story: Asylum" but without the silly bits. It's pretty dour stuff all the way through since that's exactly what anyone should expect from a story set mostly during the various civil wars in Spain. If you've ever seen "The Devil's Backbone" (2001) or "Pan's Labyrinth" (2006), they have a similar socio-political commentary in the background. You can tell that director Juan Carlos Medina (actually an American by birth) fancies himself as the new Guillermo del Toro, but employing Luis Berdejo Arribas, the weaker writer from the "[REC]" series, hasn't helped his cause.

While the acting is to the same high standard as any of the big name Spanish movies from the last 10 years, the script leaves the characters begging to be more than two-dimensional. The highlight is seeing a now totally unrecognisable Derek de Lint from "Poltergeist: The Legacy" playing a German doctor who speaks Spanish. Minor as it is, he's the only one allowed to have any development.

"Domi-nique -nique -nique s'en allait tout simplement, routier, pauvre et chantant."

Other than the modern half of the story being a lot less interesting than the first hour of period set scenes, "Painless" becomes very rushed and contrived in its last third. Even if I had a thorough knowledge of Spanish political history, I doubt that it would make a great deal of sense, plus there are enormous plotholes.

Yes, there are real, physical plotholes rather than continuity errors or small lapses in logic that can be reasoned away. For one thing, I would love to know what the inmates of the hospital, especially Berkano (Tómas Lemarquis), get to eat during their incarceration. I know the kids are supposed to have supernatural abilities along with their inability to feel pain, but a couple of spoonfuls of soup, in one important case, couldn't keep a mouse alive! Cannibalism is suggested later on, but for five years with only one rotting corpse to feed on? Not likely, is it?

"We wants it, we needs it. Must have the precious!"

For a reasonably well-funded movie, the production values are excellent. The cinematography is competent with only a few moments where things are too dark, the sound is good, and the location covers a multitude of sins. Unfortunately, "Painless" lacks spectacle after promising so much with its admittedly CGI-enhanced opening scene.

Plodding rather than thrilling, "Painless" is worth a rental, but it's visually better than the story it delivers.

A Serbian Film (2010)

"A former porn star accepts a role of a lifetime, not realizing that the director has murderous intentions."

Sometimes you have to be careful what you wish for because you may just get it. Only a couple of days ago, I was ranting on this very blog about wanting to see a real ADULT horror movie and now director Srdjan Spasojevic has given me one with "A Serbian Film".

If you haven't heard the rumours about this uber brutal "torture porn" (never has the term been more appropriate!) then I'm not going to spoil it for you. I have deliberately not posted the trailer either though I'm sure you'll find it yourselves on YouTube without too much trouble.

But if you do know what I'm talking about then rest assured that "A Serbian Film" is everything you think it is and more. It's one of the most well made horror films that I have ever seen and makes even "Martyrs" look tame. If you are easily offended by ANYTHING then don't watch it... EVER!

The funny thing is, as a hardcore horror buff, I was able to sit through this and enjoy it without feeling the slightest twinge or any compassion for the characters whatsoever. Perhaps it's because I know that "IT'S ONLY A MOVIE!" and anything on screen is only as real as you want it to be. But maybe, just maybe, what I watched was distancing enough for me to not even care. Technically it was superb. Emotionally? Well, I didn't find it sick, scary or anything but I'm sure other people probably will.

I have noticed on various horror forums that there are so-called horror fans protesting that they are never going to watch "A Serbian Film" because it's so "disgusting". What a bunch of hypocritical wimps! They moan continuously that there is nothing new in the genre and when something does come out that will possibly "horrify" them, they all want to boycott it. What do they want? Another "Nightmare on Elm Street" remake? If you love horror then you absolutely have to see this film!

The last taboos of the torture porn subgenre have finally been broken and this is the result. In fact EVERY taboo gets broken in this movie apart from cruelty to animals and nobody wants to ever see that anyway. Even bestiality gets "an honourable mention"! I actually have a kind of empty anti-climactic feeling that now there is nowhere left to go. "A Serbian Film" has finally fulfilled every true horror fan's dream and killed it stone dead at the same time.

What next? What could possibly top this? Maybe it's time to get back into the more supernatural storylines again and away from these physical and realistic looking shocks. There's nothing to think about with movies like this. You just sit back and enjoy the ride. On the highest levels, I can see what Srdjan Spasojevic was getting at and understand the political message of Vukmir's "film within a film" but I just don't care about it. I liked it for what it was at its most superficial level and I also don't even care about how that makes me look.

I even liked the characters in this yet strangely felt not one iota of sympathy for any of them apart from almost a moment with Lejla, the porn actress who brought Milos to Vukmir in the first place. Did she get what she deserved I wonder? Yes, I think she did. There are no innocents in this film but there are some damn fine actors.

Is this the most perverse exploitation film I've ever watched though? I've seen them all - "Mum & Dad", "Salo", "Irreversible", "Murder Set Pieces", the list could go on and on right back to "I Spit on your Grave" or the banned video nasties of the 1980s. I'd say it was actually on a level with "Baise-Moi" but slicker even though the subject matter went into a much darker place. It's not the most disturbing thing I've ever seen either. "The Cook, The Thief, His Wife and Her Lover" or the end of "Last Exit to Brooklyn" affected me much more than anything here. Not that anything I ever see on screen affects me at all once the end credits come up.

I really did enjoy "A Serbian Film". The story was good, the camerawork was good, and even the techno music pumping through it was good. I used the same word a lot there but that's the only way to describe the 104 minutes that I spent watching realistic yet still completely fake special effects, blood, gore, screaming, violence, murder, rape, paedophilia, incest, necrophilia, brutal rough sex and death. It was GOOD!