Kick-Ass 2 (2013)

Year: 2013
Running Time: 103 minutes
Director: Jeff Wadlow
Writer: Jeff Wadlow
Cast: Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Chloe Grace Moretz, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Jim Carrey, Donald Faison

Kick Ass 2 opens in Australian cinemas on the 22nd of August 2013 and is now showing in the USA and UK.

Sequel sequel sequel. Kick-Ass 2 couldn't possibly be any more stereotypically one.

As you would expect it to be, Kick-Ass 2 is just pushing the limits of what the original was. Kick-Ass was the stuff cult classics are made of. It was not a usual film of the superhero genre by a long stretch and shocked the masses of people who thought it was appropriate to take their children to see the film. So Kick-Ass 2 tries to push the boundaries even more by making it more violent, cruder and throwing in more wannabe superheroes.

While Dave (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) is taking a break from being his superhero alter-ego, Kick-Ass, there is a whole new league of new superheroes on the street, all ordinary people wanting to make a difference. Dave decides that he wants to give it another go and calls on Mindy Macready, AKA Hit Girl (Chloe Grace Moretz) to be his partner and help him out. Mindy has her own problems at hand with trying to deal with losing her father and also the typical teenage woes that come along with starting high school. While Mindy is AWOL from the superhero world, Dave teams up with a new team of superheroes led by Colonel Stars and Stripes (Jim Carrey). In the meantime, Dave's arch nemesis, Chris D'Amico (Christopher Mintz-Plasse) is building a team of super-villains all for the purpose of bringing down Kick-Ass.

Kick-Ass 2 is just overly silly. It isn't bad to the point where you should just get up and walk out of the cinema, but it is pretty much just an unnecessary sequel. Kick-Ass worked not only because of it's shock factor, but also because it was so unlike your typical superhero genre film. While Kick-Ass 2 is not entirely a regular type of superhero film, it does start to move towards being one with how many clichés are thrown into the mix. Director and writer, Jeff Wadlow wants to say in as many ways as possible that ordinary people can do super things and that we all can be superheroes is we believe we can be. The presence of such clichés and constant reminder of them throughout the film just take the Kick-Ass franchise in genre film territory.

There is still an element of fun to this film, regardless of how ridiculous and silly it can be at times. The fighting scenes and the defining personalities of each of the characters do make the film bearable. All of the characters in the film are enjoyable to watch and they all have a great deal of development to let the audience understand who they are. However, for the main characters of Dave/ Kick-Ass, Mindy/ Hit Girl and Chris/ The Mother-F**ker (yes, that is his name in the film), their defining character moments still belong in the first film so if you haven't seen the original, you may struggle to connect with them.

While Kick-Ass was notorious for it's shock tactics throughout the film, the sequel tries to do the same, but really just takes it a little too far. While this film is violent just like the first film and therefore not as much of a shock, it is it's crude humour takes the cake as being the factor that takes it just a little too far. The lunch room scene with Mindy and the mean girls is just too much no matter what way you look at it. Everything to do with Mindy and the other girls at school is just very overdone and also just ridiculous to the point that it is just cringe-worthy. Yet, it is definitely the lunch room scene that is the most ridiculous and disgusting of the film.

Regardless of the ridiculous and over blown nature of the film, Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Chloe Grace Moretz still do well. They have wonderful onscreen chemistry and make the mot of the roles which are handed to them. They are both fine actors, and it is a credit to the two of them that when they are in such a film as this, it is still evident that the two of them have incredible talent. Jim Carrey has a much smaller role than is suspected. He does well enough in the role which he has, but it isn't quite as comical as you would want it to be.

Kick-Ass 2 isn't a complete loss, but still reinforces the fact that Kick-Ass really didn't need a sequel and nothing has really been achieved (besides the fact that Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Chloe Grace Moretz can act well in anything) by having one.

4.5/10


You may have also seen Aaron Taylor-Johnson in......
Kick-Ass as Dave/Kick-Ass
Nowhere Boy as John Lennon

Aaron Taylor-Johnson was also our Movie Critical Rising Star of the Month in April 2010

You may have also seen Chloe Grace Moretz in......
Kick-Ass as Mindy/Hit Girl
Hugo as Isabelle

Chloe Grace Moretz was also our Movie Critical Rising Star of the Month in July 2012

Mr Popper's Penguins

Mr Popper’s Penguins

Year: 2011

Director:  Mark Waters

Cast: Jim Carrey, Carla Gugino, Angela Lansbury

In My Own Words

                I feel like Jim Carrey was the comedian I grew up with. It’s hard to believe that it has been 17 years since Ace Ventura: Pet Detective was released. I was quite young when it came out so I didn’t get a lot of the jokes in it, yet I always loved Carrey’s impersonation of the Miami Dolphins mascot which he was trying to track down. Then came The Mask and Carrey secured his status as a superstar. I loved The Mask, still do actually. I love the comedic timing in the film. As the loser Stanley Ipkiss, he is absolutely endearing and you hate how much he gets kicked around. Put on his mask and he is a chauvinist, but absolutely hysterical.

                Since 2004 he has an impressive portfolio of comedy films, as well as a dabble in dramatic films such as the critically acclaimed Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind. He has slowed down with his films in the past few years, so when he appears in a film, he is such a crowd drawer. So many of my friends were over the moon when Yes Man was released in 2008…including me! It was like our old Jim Carrey back. I only wish in 2011 he could have done the same.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review

Mr Popper’s Penguins is a good entertaining holiday movie. However, if we remove the fact that this film was a film released during the school holidays, it would be neither good nor entertaining. It is a good movie for the time in which it has been released. Mr Popper’s Penguins is “G” rated so it is a good family film for those parents looking to keep their children occupied for at least an hour and a half of their holidays. Otherwise, it is good for little else really.

                Tom Popper (Jim Carrey) is a high flying New York businessman who fills his life up with work to avoid thinking about the painful past. He is divorced, but still has feelings for his ex wife Amanda (Carla Gugino) and his children, Janie (Madeline Carroll) and Billy (Maxwell Perry Cotton) naturally expect him to let them down. When he inherits six penguins from his deceased father, Popper’s life is turned upside down. His work life suffers, but he starts to become the father he always should have been…..to both his children and the penguins.

                You can clearly tell that Mr Popper’s Penguins is supposed to be a cute and funny film. One would think with six penguins that it would be a cute and fluffy film. Yet, there are very few cute moments. There is more penguin toilet humour than anything else, which may be your sense of humour but penguin toilet humour hasn’t been too successful in the past as this film will back up. There are some cute moments far and in between, but not many moment where you feel like you want to pick up and cuddle the penguins.

                The script is just very weak and besides the penguins doing their business everywhere and their fluctuations, the jokes are very old, transparent and predictable. Perhaps the best thing about the script is picking up on all the old Hollywood references such as that of the penguins watching Charlie Chaplin, Mr Popper being likened to Howard Hughes and Mr Popper’s imitation of James Stewart. It may be the presence of Angela Lansbury, who was a star of the golden age of Hollywood herself that prompted these references.  On the other hand, this may be the film’s way of keeping the adult audience happy as well as the young, and some people still may not get these references.

                The main thing you have to say about Jim Carrey in this film is that it isn’t vintage Carrey material. There are so many Carrey facial expressions and comedic material that are used in this film which are not relevant at all and are only included because that is what Carrey has always done in better films. It isn’t his worst acting in a film, but light years from his best.

                Truth be told, there isn’t really any stand out performances in this film. Angela Lansbury is perhaps the only performance worth mentioning in a positive light, but her character isn’t given anywhere near as much screen time as is warranted.

                The problem with the characters in this film is that there is no chemistry or emotion between any of them. Carrey and Carla Gugino just look awkward and mismatched on the screen at all times  and there is only talk of the fatherly love he starts top show towards both his children and the penguins, but no actual proof in the performances. However, Madeline Carroll does show a hint of potential in this film for the future.

                Mr Popper’s Penguins doesn’t achieve anything it sets out to. The only thing it succeeds in doing is filling up an hour and a half of summer break in the northern hemisphere and a winter’s day in the southern.  Still, clean family fun.

3.5/10

A Christmas Carol

A Christmas Carol
Year: 2009
Director: Robert Zemekis
Cast: Jim Carrey, Gary Oldman, Colin Firth, Robyn Wright-Penn

My Own Words
Welcome to Christmas! That’s what I saw this movie as representing. The start of the Christmas media season. I’m actually surprised it wasn’t released at the beginning of December rather than the beginning of November.

Anyway, I was very excited about seeing this movie. I love the story of “A Christmas Carol”, although, sadly, I have never read the book. I really should get around to that one day. There have been over 35 films based on Charles Dickens novel. However, I have only seen two of them. Those being “Mickey’s Christmas Carol” and “The Muppets Christmas Carol”, both of which I love. This version which I saw tonight, was a very different interpretation. In saying that though, I did really enjoy it and thought it was a great movie.

The one thing I have to say about this movie and is a bit of a warning to parents out there or people who were contemplating taking children to see this, it is not as child friendly as it appears. There are some pretty frightening parts in it for children. One of my friends took her three year old to see it the other day and as she was buying the tickets, the attendant told her that if the movie gets too scary for Bailey, feel free to bring him back out and she will refund her money. Apparently this had been the case with quite a few small children. But little Bailey soldiered on. He apparently got scared in a few bits, but was happy to stay until the end. In other words, “A Christmas Carol” is more of an adult animation. There were even bits I thought were a bit too full on!

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
The latest interpretation of Charles Dicken’s masterpiece, “A Christmas Carol” comes at the hand of Robert Zemekis. The new, animated version of the timeless classic is beautifully made and is an extremely unique interpretation that still remains true to the original story. It exhibits how much computer generated animation can now achieve and is truly impressive.

For those that don’t know the story, Ebenezer Scrooge( Jim Carrey) lives a lonely life consumed by his wealth and greed. On Christmas Eve, he is visited by his past and long dead business partner who informs him that tonight he will be visited by three ghosts, the Ghost of Christmas Past, the Ghost of Christmas Present and the Ghost of Christmases Yet To Come. This version is quite dark and at times, can be disturbing. Although it is by the Disney company and looks harmless enough, it is definitely not a children’s movie. There are several images that would not seem out of place in a horror movie in terms of their fright factor, especially those of Jacob Marley.

However, the images, gruesome or not in some parts, are amazing. This film is definitely a credit to Zemekis and his direction. It is clearly obvious on screen who Jim Carrey is, as well as Gary Oldman in his portrayal of Bob Cratchit and Colin Firth as Scrooge’s nephew, Fred. Carrey’s Scrooge is extremely well constructed as it shows his sadistic and pessimistic nature right down to the tiniest detail, and the changes throughout the movie to the character are well portrayed. Even though it is animation, it is still very easy to pickup on Carrey’s mannerisms and facial expressions. Credit must be paid to him for portraying an old man so successfully, even if it is in animation!

The only criticism with “A Christmas Carol” is that it can feel in some sequences that Zemekis is trying to show off the amazing things that animation is able to do these days. This can lead to some sequences being longer than they have to be. However, in saying this, these sequences are still beautiful and it is indeed amazing what animation of this kind can do nowadays. Otherwise, it is extremely hard to find another criticism for this movie. It is a movie that everyone should see before Christmas and is likely to get you in the Christmas spirit. Just don’t expect it to be light and fluffy because it is clearly not a happy Christmas movie for the majority of the film. The film is dark, but it is still incredibly beautiful and a great version of a classic using modern technology.

8.5/10