... Yes, Roger Ebert, you're a square.

Shall I have feelings, or should I pretend to be cool? Will I seem hopelessly square if I find “Kick-Ass” morally reprehensible and will I appear to have missed the point?... A movie camera makes a record of whatever is placed in front of it, and in this case, it shows deadly carnage dished out by an 11-year-old girl, after which an adult man brutally hammers her to within an inch of her life. Blood everywhere. 
          - Roger Ebert's Review of 'Kick Ass'

Ebert used to be my go-to guy for movie reviews. Unfortunately for me (alright, alright... more so for him), he had a stroke, and now he's about as reliable as that mood ring I purchased at Afterthoughts in the mall circa 1993.  While he's never been much for appreciating the element of surprise, often relying on revealing entirely too much about the plot in his reviews, I can almost always find something we both agree upon. In this case, he points out in his scathing review that the movie has untapped potential. I wholeheartedly agree, but it's where that potential lies that Rog and I disagree.

'Kick Ass' flip-flopped a bit too much for me. It's like it couldn't quite decide what kind of movie it was. Am I watching a satire on comic books? Or on comic-book-inspired movies? An homage? A farce? Forgiving myself for not being familiar with the original material, I ignored these questions and just decided to roll with it. But they kept popping up. There's a scene when our heroes are in dire straits and the familiar voice of the protagonist narrates that the audience member is probably reassuring himself that everything is going to be okay... but that he should stop expecting a happy ending. Besides, hadn't we seen 'Sin City'? This voice-over made the wannabe-cinephile in me wish there was more of this kind of material, crafted towards those in the audience who were "in the know." But that's been done... sort of... (The best example I can think of is 'Hot Fuzz' for action movies... I'm having a hard time thinking of a comic-book-specific example... if one exists.)

And while the dark humor of the movie (i.e. the way we're introduced to Big Daddy and Hit Girl, involving some father-daughter target practice) might point to making fun of the genre, I never really felt like that's what director Matthew Vaughn was trying to convey. So, let's just assume the ludicrousness of it all is supposed to lead to its inherent awesomeness. I can dig that. (But then again, other parts of the movie seem to be throwing reality in the face of the typical comic book plots: Our hero's first attempt at fighting crime almost sends him home in a body bag.)  As one article states, "Yes, it’s transgressive to have a young female character portrayed as a non-stop killing machine, but no more so than it is absurd, and therein lies the zest of the comedy."

The early scenes give promise of an entirely different comedy. Aaron Johnson has a certain anti-charm, his problems in high school are engaging, and so on. ... Say what you will about her character, but Chloe Grace Moretz has presence and appeal. Then the movie moved into dark, dark territory, and I grew sad. 

Yet again, Strokey McStrokerton is back to his old tricks. Don't be sad, Roger! That "dark, dark territory" redeems the entire movie! Maybe I'm cynical, or trying too hard to be one of the cool kids, or maybe it's because the back of my drivers license reads "Firearm Safety" because of that course I took in 6th grade (age 11, for the record). But speaking for myself, I could have done with less mediocre teen comedy and more shoot-outs and martial arts scenes.

That's literally my only complaint about the movie.  It seemed a bit disjointed: one minute we're chuckling at the awkward teenager jerking off to droopy boobs, the next minute we're watching a guy explode in an industrial-sized lumber microwave. I realize movies need to set up the characters, but come on, it's rated R! Maybe it was a pacing problem. Once I caught a glimpse of an 11-year-old going all "Bride on the Crazy 88's" and saving Kick Ass's ass in that apartment, I thought we had left the land of slightly funny coming-of-age B.S.; I was ready to buckle my seatbelt for the rest of the movie. Sadly, I had to wait until the very end for the climactic shoot-out scenes to be fully satisfied. 

But oh, what a climax. I wish I could fulfill the prophecy that is the name of this blog and give it all away, but that goes against my principles. :) The first time I'd ever seen a shoot-out sequence filmed in pitch black was in 'Equilibrium' and I was blown away then, too. The addition of a maniacal Nic Cage and the shooter being prepubescent made it all the more epic. Roger Ebert would probably call me a bloodthirsty sociopath for thinking there needed to be more of this kind of thing in 'Kick Ass' -- but at least I remain a safe distance aware from "square," because that's obviously what it's all about for us crazy kids.

... History repeats itself in 'An Education'

This past Wednesday night I met my mom at the Edina 4 theater to see An Education, followed by dinner at one of my favorite Twin Cities restaurants, Salut.  Both the movie and the dinner were, as predicted, very enjoyable and are thus highly recommended to my readers.  

Newcomer and Oscar nominee Carey Mulligan gives a strong and memorable performance in the lead as 16/17 year old "Jenny," a bright, overachieving prep-school student working her way towards Oxford in a London suburb. She's smarter than your average bear -- or in this case, her female classmates -- yet she's very sheltered by her controlling father and clueless mother, who breathe down her neck making sure she's studying her Latin (after all she's only getting a B) and not daydreaming about Paris listening to French records.

Yet being savvy and wise for her age still doesn't make her worldly, and it doesn't take much effort from the flirtatious Peter Sarsgaard as "David," whose charm and lifestyle quickly prove irresistible on a young lass roughly half his age.  Culturally stifled Jenny jumps at the chance to experience new adventures with an older, sophisticated crowd -- especially when they're paying. One would think this movie could be quite predictable; young student falls for older man and proceeds to get her heart broken, while learning something on the way.  And that’s exactly what happens, but if you couldn’t figure that out from the trailer, well you’re probably the type of person who be into this movie anyway. :)

It’s a quiet movie, artfully shot and more or less a period piece (set in 1961). But what stands out here is the acting: Sarsgaard, as the Rolling Stone review puts it, “is shockingly good at walking the line between charming opportunist and sexual predator.”  24-year old Mulligan is believable and especially endearing as Jenny. The audience knows bad news is coming her way the entirety of the movie, yet while what exactly that will be remains a mystery to the audience, at least we have the upper hand on Jenny; we're mature enough to know when something is too good to be true. The heartbreaking thing to watch is that her character is smart enough to know something isn’t 100% kosher with David; yet, in the end she proves too immature to foresee that his lies and charms aren't only fooling her parents.   

My favorite performance was actually from the supporting character “Helen”: presented falsely as chaperone “Aunt Helen” to Jenny’s parents, in reality she’s a ditzy blond who’s along for the ride (literally). Unable to follow conversation about art, music, and literature with David and his culturally impressive posse (Jenny at 16 doesn’t miss a beat), Helen is only here for the clothes and jewelry. Yet the great thing about her character is she doesn’t become a caricature of herself.  Instead of being comic relief through “dumb blond” remarks, it’s all in her facial expressions. Her eyes plead for a dance with a likeness of an impatient puppy waiting to be picked up. They tell you she’s on another planet at an orchestral concert. Disgust at the tour of Oxford. And so on.  Another highlight of the movie for me was the jaw-dropping disbelief at a suggestion David’s character makes about a banana. That’s all I’ll say about that.

... I don't pick Avatar to win.

There's big news this morning, and it doesn't have to do with a shadow in Pennsylvania.

The nominees for the 82nd Academy Awards were just made public.  One thing you might notice is instead of the typical five noms for Best Picture, this year Oscar opens his arms and welcomes ten films into the race. This gives several films a chance for that coveted statue that, had they been released a year earlier, would have surely been brushed over. Not to say the winner will be A Serious Man or even Pixar's animated Up, but with the Best Picture nomination comes a great deal of... well, I don't know what, but it's kind of a big deal.  Best Picture nominees are: Avatar, The Blind Side, District 9, An Education, The Hurt Locker, Inglorious Basterds, Precious, A Serious Man, Up, & Up In The Air. The Academy passes on Crazy Heart, A Single Man, Invictus, and a handful of other movies that many had predicted might be thrown into the pool of ten nominees; but, overall, the nominations don't come with too many surprises.

My picks? It's hard to say when I've yet to see An Education, The Blind Side, Precious, and Up. My favorite movie from 2009 was District 9, but I wouldn't have guessed it would make it into Oscar territory. A Serious Man was another top pick for me, but, again, I don't see another statue in the Coens' future. I suppose I'll vote for The Hurt Locker or maybe Inglorious Basterds for Best Picture. If Avatar wins, I might just boycott next year.

On kind of a silly note, check out the Razzie nominations, which honor this year's (and this decade's) worst performances on the silver screen. Sandra Bullock could possibly take home an Oscar for The Blind Side and a Razzie for All About Steve.