Kick-Ass 2

[Thebumwhowalks]

Sigh.

I have not backtracked once and my points have been the same both times. I used the word weak both times and you misconstrued that both times to mean that I was judging these characters by a "macho" masculine/authoritarian viewpoint. I then posted replies that elaborated on what I meant to correct your confusion and then, because I reply and explain in detail what I'm saying, you claim that "you called me out" and I "admitted I was wrong and backtracked." Never happened either time. If you want to make mountains out of molehills, fine:

I think Millar went out of his way to make BD and Stars to look "weak" and "pathetic" by the simple-minded logic of might makes right. The kind of logic used by superheroes of the Frank Miller and Punisher variety. Why? Because that is a silly view for people to have, but that is one that Dave has and that's why he admires men who model themselves after Charles Bronson. He does this, because Millar (probably correctly) assumes many of his readers view the world as simply as Dave does. Thus, he gives these characters they admire deaths that are not heroic, but--by many a fanboy's standard--would be considered weak and pathetic and thereby deflating these readers' image of heroism. It's the whole Frank Miller thing about making Joker being feminine and androgynous in TDKR and doing the same with Xerxes in 300. It's this hyper-macho view of heroism and honor that Millar is sneering at as silly.

And when Clark Kent held himself to the same immature standard in Superman II, he indeed showed he was a weak character because he only values his worth by his superpowers. Peter didn't. Spider-Man 2 is better and we're back at square one.

Eh, instead of opening with a patronising 'sigh', how about not dismissing the part of my post where I, quite rightly, pointed out you were wrong in regards to your original attitude in the matter of my proposed change to the scene in Spider-man II, and how this reflected an equally wonky attitude to the scene in Superman II?

the reason I wanted the scene in Spider-man 2 changed, and thought it was a good idea, was because it did not correlate with fire rescue scene.

He walks away from the mugging, doing nothing, yet he runs into a burning building?

So, when I said it would have been a good idea to have shown him to intervene in the mugging, even if it resulted in him taking a beating, you said he would have come off as 'weak and pathetic', just like Superman.

Now, I didn't say anything about him going back to get revenge on the muggers later on with his powers did I?

So, you did in fact, feel to have the hero lose a fistfight onscreen while he was intervening in a mugging would make him look 'weak and pathetic'.

I pointed out to you that losing a fistfight was not dishonorable, and you then changed the focus of your point onto the neding of the Superman II movie, and that self depreciating line. *Not relevant* to the point I was making about the Spider-man 2 scene, which you thought my proposed change would have made 'weak and pathetic'.

and as for the 'male fantasy stupidity', eh, we are not stupid, the fans of comic books and action movies, we know these characters are idealized representations. A lot of us do in actual fact read literature and watch different types of movies that better represent the human condition in a far more realistic way.

He could have went anywhere with that character in regards to bringing a bit of reality to the situation, given the type of comic it puports to be, a mix of realism and satire, not just killing him off to make the same point he did in vol.1.
It well could have been a waste of character, there were a lot of thing she could have done to subvert the archetype.

and as for the 'might makes right' character, this can apply to all superhero types, Spider-man, whoever...no more no less. they are all idealized power fantasies.

The only thing that is stupid about enjoying the fiction of such power fantasies, with all the philosophical and moral questions being raised in the stories as a result, is the type of people who think they can present themselves like that in reality and get away with it.

I've seen it before, and recognise the signs.
In my last place of work there were a couple of people just like that, they wanted to present themselves as perfect moral human beings, but also intellectually brilliant and flawless in their thought proicesses and attitudes. Just like these power fantasy type superheroes.

But, they had a lot to hide it turned out, their obsessive way of covering up every mistake and doing everything in their power to project a perfect persona backfired on them. At first folk thought I was full of it when I eventually saw though their bs, and pointed it out, but the truth eventually came out.
They had the cheek to call me a 'monster', when in actual fact I was doing everything in my power to be able to do my job, and they were hiding the fact that they were doing everything they could to mess me up, in order to undermine aspects of my personal life, so I could not do my job properly, which in turn would make me look bad, while they looked perfect and beyond reproach.

and their tendancy to hide behind a perfect 'superhero' type persona was part of that plan.

I've seen it all before.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

in the comic he seemed more like a spoiled brat with hints of psychoticness. in this hes more full on psycho

Nah, he was pretty much the typical psycho gangster's son in vol.1 as well.

and that's the thing about the comic version of Red mist as compared to the movie.

The comic version is far more realistic, I grew up in a pretty rough area, and there were two families who ran all the protection rackets on the shops, sold the drugs, etc etc, their kids were brought up to be frickin monsters from day one, none of this Sopranos/KA movie bs about keeping them away from the family business and trying to bring them up like a regular law abiding citizen...they were brought up in such a way so they could take over the family business.

 

[DACrowe]

In the first comic?
He liked what he did to kick-ass, he seems like the same guy

Yeah in the comic, he enjoyed watching Dave get tortured. He even said he fantasized about it and got off to it. This is a very sick character. Then in KA2 he has a guy beaten to death while viciously mocking him and then cutting his head off to put a dog's there because it's "funny."

This is a disturbed individual. Thus he must be an avatar for Millar.

I kid, I kid.

In the movie, he has a lot more depth and is kind of a sad character. His only real friend has been KA for one day and he wants to be normal, but he he also wants to be the killer his dad imagined and he made his choices by the end of the movie.

 

[DACrowe]

Eh, instead of opening with a patronising 'sigh', how about not dismissing the part of my post where I, quite rightly, pointed out you were wrong in regards to your original attitude in the matter of my proposed change to the scene in Spider-man II, and how this reflected an equally wonky attitude to the scene in Superman II?

It was only patronizing because you repeatedly make posts (including the paragraph above) where you claim some sort of rhetorical victory over me because you "proved me wrong" or I admitted to being wrong or that I have backtracked. I never have and I've explained now several times my views which have remained consistent. You claiming to be "right" is equally condescending, hence the sigh at the beginning of last post. If you want to think that, fine. But my views remain the same. Millar wanted Stars and BD to look demoralized in their deaths to deflate his readers' anticipation. SII is not as good as SM2 for a number of reasons from story, action, romance, to--yes--the hero never losing faith in himself because he measured his worth by superpowers.

It's the same song and dance, so that's why I'm not going any further.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

You were only too happy to say that I mis-remembered the discussion on Spider-man 2/Superman II. ie The original point you made about Peter Parker looking 'weak and pathetic' if he had lost a fistfight to some muggers, as it would have been just the same as Superman losing that fight.

When I pointed out the fact of the matter, that I didn't in fact mis-remember, you just didn't bother quoting that part of the post.

So, it's not so much making a mountain out of a molehill, just a bit annyong in the way of a newspaper only being too happy to point out you were wrong when you weren't, and refusing to print a retraction when they realise you were right about the way that conversation went down.

and I did think there was a similarity in this conversation... saying a character was 'weak and pathetic', suggests you consider their actions on the book to be such, but describing them as such, in comparison to idealized superheroes, is something else entirely.

 

[DACrowe]

You were only too happy to say that I mis-remembered the discussion on Spider-man 2/Superman II. ie The original point you made about Peter Parker looking 'weak and pathetic' if he had lost a fistfight to some muggers, as it would have been just the same as Superman losing that fight.

No it was not. The reason I'm not bothering to post it is because I really don't care enough to go thread diving for a post I made however many months ago it was. My point has always been Peter came off stronger because he never lost strength of character. Clark looked weak (pathetic is your word in this case) because he judged himself by his powers after getting beat up. The message of that scene is Clark is nothing without his superpowers. SM2 says even without 'em, Peter is still the same noble, honorable person. But I'm tired of this conversation so claim your "victory" if you want, but let's move on.

and I did think there was a similarity in this conversation... saying a character was 'weak and pathetic', suggests you consider their actions on the book to be such, but describing them as such, in comparison to idealized superheroes, is something else entirely.

I think I've made very clear what I meant about Stars and only your need to intentionally misinterpret what I said at this point exists in our difference of opinion.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

edit: Ok, I will take out the parts where i am repeating what i already said, distill this down to the main point and then leave it at that...

I don't see why you couldn't have just looked at it and just said 'that's a good idea', which it was, having Pete jump in to help during the mugging and then get a bit beaten up fits better alongside the way he acts in the burning building scene.
y'know, cause i didn't say have him go back later with powers and kick their asses.
If I *had* said that, *then* you could have come in and said it was a bad idea because of how the Superman example eventually played out.

 

[November Rain]

spiderman 2 is a rubbish film with about a trillion loop holes in it, let it slide people....

 

[DACrowe]

SM2 is for my money among the three best superhero movies ever made (behind The Dark Knight and just above Kick-Ass). It is quite formulaic like 99% of the genre is, but it executes that formula with enough deft creativity, wit, intelligence and heart that it's better than all other attempts at it. That is why nearly ten years out it is still the measuring stick after TDK that all are compared to.

But to each their own November Rain. I will say I didn't see any holes besides Harry knowing where Ock's lair is) the size of memory forgetting kisses, magic wrapping paper emblem chests, power removing and giving machines that were supposed to be a one-way deal to begin with or the US president having the ability to surrender the entire world to three loonies because they burned down a bar in a small town in what looked to be Arizona or Nevada.

BTW I do enjoy SII for what is, but I could not resist.

 

[November Rain]

i'm not a supes 2 fan.

spidey two does have a lot of holes in itand alot of liberties taken in it are repeated in spidey three (which i'm quite surprised why people love one and hate the other).

the dark knight has a hole load of holes in it as well amd hides behind a sense of realism and gritty ness to keep its status.

even so, raimi's portrayal of parker has been wrong since the versy first sentence of the spiderman franchise, so anything we see should be taken with a pinch of salt.

measuring stick wise, i think somethign less mainstream would probably be critally seen as a benchmark, the blockbusters just aren't able to cut it, even though they can be excellentt films in their own right.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

SM2 is for my money among the three best superhero movies ever made (behind The Dark Knight and just above Kick-Ass). It is quite formulaic like 99% of the genre is, but it executes that formula with enough deft creativity, wit, intelligence and heart that it's better than all other attempts at it. That is why nearly ten years out it is still the measuring stick after TDK that all are compared to.

It is one of the better superhero movies, it's just that mugging scene that always bugged me.

But to each their own November Rain. I will say I didn't see any holes besides Harry knowing where Ock's lair is) the size of memory forgetting kisses,

Just an extension of his super-hypnotism power you could say.

magic wrapping paper emblem chests,

Just an added defence built into his costume, I never saw the big deal about that move, i have more of a problem with the laser fingers power.

power removing and giving machines that were supposed to be a one-way deal to begin with

Eh, I think we are supposed to take that as part of the lesson he learns, as Superman does when he says 'They knew...I just didn't listen to them...' meaning his 'parents' knew fate would cause something bad to happen once he gave up his responsibilities. So they tell him it's a one way trip, but leave out the part where there is a loophole, which fate usually provides for these kinds of tests/lessons(in the case of the green crystal luckily surviving to rebuild the machinery of the fortress over again), so he can feel the full benefit of the lesson.

or the US president having the ability to surrender the entire world to three loonies because they burned down a bar in a small town in what looked to be Arizona or Nevada.

The President says on his tv broadcast that he turns over power to Zod and co after being in talks with the other leaders of the world. So, as Zod and co happened to land in the US, the other world leaders accept he is the spokesperson for all of them.

and....they know the three of them have the same powers as Superman, so, know the potential threat they cause, they are hoping Superman will show up of course to take of the situation too, instead of needlessly throwing away lifes fighting a hopeless battle.
Lex Luthor is the only one who knows about Kryptonite, and he is working with them, and I guess in the Donnerverse Kryponite is difficult to get ahold of, just ask Gus Gorman, haha.

BTW I do enjoy SII for what is, but I could not resist.

It's ok, you can enjoy it a bit more now.

 

[Weedbeater]

Yeah in the comic, he enjoyed watching Dave get tortured. He even said he fantasized about it and got off to it. This is a very sick character. Then in KA2 he has a guy beaten to death while viciously mocking him and then cutting his head off to put a dog's there because it's "funny."

This is a disturbed individual. Thus he must be an avatar for Millar.

I kid, I kid.

In the movie, he has a lot more depth and is kind of a sad character. His only real friend has been KA for one day and he wants to be normal, but he he also wants to be the killer his dad imagined and he made his choices by the end of the movie.

I guess you could say that but Millar has this version is going to be sicker than the first comic and that's the way i'm seeing it. Millar has state that the mother****er is like three people:
Charles Manson
Alex from a Clockwork Orange
and The Joker
To me, that sounds a lot more psychotic than some mobster's spoiled psycho brat

 

[DACrowe]

i'm not a supes 2 fan.

spidey two does have a lot of holes in itand alot of liberties taken in it are repeated in spidey three (which i'm quite surprised why people love one and hate the other).

the dark knight has a hole load of holes in it as well amd hides behind a sense of realism and gritty ness to keep its status.

even so, raimi's portrayal of parker has been wrong since the versy first sentence of the spiderman franchise, so anything we see should be taken with a pinch of salt.

measuring stick wise, i think somethign less mainstream would probably be critally seen as a benchmark, the blockbusters just aren't able to cut it, even though they can be excellentt films in their own right.

I like Raimi/Maguire's Peter. It's not perfect, but I'd give it like a B+ for adapting the Lee/Ditko iteration. However, I'd like to see more the Romitas' Peter and a more social one.

Their Spidey left a lot to be desired, but visually they captured the way he moved swung and fought brilliantly. Most of all though, SM1 was a pretty good movie but SM2 was a great movie (SM3....meh). And I value them greater by quality than faithfulness. TIH is more faithful to ocmics than SM2, but I think the latter is much better.

 

[DACrowe]

It is one of the better superhero movies, it's just that mugging scene that always bugged me.



Just an extension of his super-hypnotism power you could say.



Just an added defence built into his costume, I never saw the big deal about that move, i have more of a problem with the laser fingers power.



Eh, I think we are supposed to take that as part of the lesson he learns, as Superman does when he says 'They knew...I just didn't listen to them...' meaning his 'parents' knew fate would cause something bad to happen once he gave up his responsibilities. So they tell him it's a one way trip, but leave out the part where there is a loophole, which fate usually provides for these kinds of tests/lessons(in the case of the green crystal luckily surviving to rebuild the machinery of the fortress over again), so he can feel the full benefit of the lesson.



The President says on his tv broadcast that he turns over power to Zod and co after being in talks with the other leaders of the world. So, as Zod and co happened to land in the US, the other world leaders accept he is the spokesperson for all of them.

and....they know the three of them have the same powers as Superman, so, know the potential threat they cause, they are hoping Superman will show up of course to take of the situation too, instead of needlessly throwing away lifes fighting a hopeless battle.
Lex Luthor is the only one who knows about Kryptonite, and he is working with them, and I guess in the Donnerverse Kryponite is difficult to get ahold of, just ask Gus Gorman, haha.



It's ok, you can enjoy it a bit more now.

Touché.

Though to quibble psychological stress causing a form of impotence is more believable than to me than memory-reducing kisses and the Soviet union pluss the other 180-some nations of the world taking the POTUS's word for it that they must all surrender national sovereignty. Just saying.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

the Soviet union pluss the other 180-some nations of the world taking the POTUS's word for it that they must all surrender national sovereignty. Just saying.

I think there is enough logic for them to use artistic licence in only showing one country's futile resistance to the villans.

It's not so much taking the president's word for it, rather that they know the exent of Superman's powers, that the US army were already roundly defeated, and that they are all agreeing to this in the meantime, while waiting on Superman's return.

So, you can apply the logic of 'what leader would want to lose the support of his people and military, by sending them up against a nuclear bomb?' Which is essentially what they would be doing against these guys.

and the fact that while reading out the terms of our surrender on tv, the Prez shouts out for Superman to take care of them.

So, the leaders obviously think Supes is off in space, or devising some plan in secret to take the villans down, and are just awaiting his return, you can take it that the convo in the oval office(when they are watching the trio decimate mount rushmore) to be fairly representative of convos going on around the world.

Even the craziest of world leaders fear either their military and/or people turning against them in a coup, or a more powerful force taking over and ousting them from office.

See, the villans don't need to show their might *that* much, besides the fact that everyone already knows the extent of supes' powers, all they have to do is show they can walk right into the main offcie of the most powerful leader in the world and oust him.

Sure, in real life you might have had some other defiant countries saying 'no!' rightaway, and the villans would quickly swoop in and oust those leaders too, but in order for the structure of the movie to flow better, we can be satisfied with one country being shown opposing in this manner, and apply the logic of this artistic licence to the rest.

edit: and you can also apply the logic that if Superman doesn't show up to take care of the villans, then the countries of the world will take soem action, maybe trying to get their scientists to come up with some way of defeating them, if they haven't already in case Superman tunrs on them, which would be logical, maybe Lex Luthor being the only one so far who has figured out the Kryptonite equation.

 

[Thundarr]

I just read the first three issues on Kick-Ass 2, and I have to say that I'm mighty impressed. It showed the real life of a costumed superhero. Most of the time, they were just patrolling, or handing out blankets and food to the homeless, or serving food at soupkitchens. It also shows the danger of becoming a RLSH, with the ex-mafia guy and his dog being murdered in the Justice Forever "secret" headquarters.

I'm curious to find out who the traitor in JF is. The suggestions earlier in this thread, that it might be Bug-Man or Mega-B**ch (is that her name?) are interesting. I guess we'll see if they're right. Can't wait for issue #4.

As for the KA2 movie debate? I think there probably will be one. They might recast Hit Girl. Unless they start filming the movie while the comics are still being published I don't see how they'll be able to use the same actress for the role in both movies.

 

[November Rain]

they'll keep her, just work out her being older as part of a story angle, she was a massive draw, recasting her could be criminal

 

[Drz]

Kick-Ass 2 #4 Preview!

 

[Drz]

Bryan Hitch's #5 Kick-Ass Variant Cover:

 

[Colossal Spoons]

Nice to see Hit Girl back

 

[Drz]

KICK-ASS 2 #5
Written by mark millar
Pencils & Cover by john romita jr.
For Dave Lizewski and the self-made superheroes of NYC, ***** just got really real. The Red Mist, now known as the Mother****er, has assembled his own team of Toxic Mega-***** and they're striking the heroes where they're most vulnerable: Their loved ones. If Kick-Ass wants to put a stop to the supervillain rampage, he's going to need the help of Mindy McCready, the one and only Hit-Girl.
32 PGS./Mature …$2.99
NOT FINAL COVER
ORDER USING THIS CODE: JUL118192

KICK-ASS 2 #6
Written by mark millar
Pencils & Cover by john romita jr.
The Mother****er and his team of Toxic Mega-***** are running rampant through New York City. With his life in shatters and his allies dead or locked away in prison, it falls to Kick-Ass to strike back against the supervillain uprising, with a little help from everyone's favorite pint-size death-dealer: Hit-Girl. The fight to save NYC from the Mother****er's masterplan beings here!
32 PGS./Mature …$2.99
NOT FINAL COVER

Pew Pew! Decemebr Comics.

 

[Kitsune]

And this is Marvel related how?

 

[Drz]

Marvel owns ICON. Just like DC owns Vertigo.

 

[DACrowe]

So was I the only one who picked up KA2 #4 today?

I thought it was actually surprisingly good overall. The last two chapters had been extremely lackluster and kind of dull, IMO. I still think between the two of them could have been one issue that was just padded to fill out an 8-issue run. But now the storyline is finally moving and the wheels are turning. The complete delusion of Dave and his team meeting in a diner is hilarious and contrasted with the complete evilness of Red Mist.

Last month did I say that Millar's Red Mist is an irredeemable, unlikable *****ebag? Well, this month he goes way further than that and starts crossing that line into "Nemesis" territory. His awful killing spree that began with children in Queens with biting pop culture-satirizing lines was horrific, but Millar's tone gets away with it, but when they reach Katie's house and [blackout]gang rape[/blackout] her, Millar crossed that line from the bad taste he loves playing in to being just repulsively awful.

Still, overall the book had the plot move and for the first time since the first issue, Kick-Ass 2's had a cliffhanger where I actually didn't want it to end and cannot wait until the next issue....which won't be until November--and that's if it's on time! Given #4 was on-time, I find that unlikely.

Lastly though, Mindy's monologue about Red Mist and his crew was hilarious.

P.S. The issue ends with hinting that Kick-Ass 2 (the movie) is happening! I get online and see Millar in an interview said it may happen (which means it probably won't) but it will happen without Matthew Vaughn and Jane Goldman....the creative energy that made the first movie so fun. What a letdown, in my opinion.

 

[DACrowe]

So did nobody pick this up or are they just so offended by what's in the book?

I can understand why some people are taking offense on the Interwebs to it. I do think Millar crossed the line for shock value, but the way the narrative finally moved and did so in a way to register a strong reaction...if he can reel it back in next month, it will work. It has the potential to become another Nemesis train wreck, but right now I think he is walking that line very carefully.