Kick-Ass

Scarface and Travis B do NOT qualify as antihero fodder.
Michael Corleone....eh...even that's iffy. I'd say no.
The Punisher? A veritable definition of antihero.
Rambo? We're in more proper hero territory...
 
This is one of those grey areas where semantics break down, so any argument will never be settled, but for anti-hero to have any meaning, the word hero has to connotate some kind of positive value on its own. It's like saying you can be Christ AND the Anti-Christ. Not possible.
No come on. This is basic stuff.

Haven't you read Vogler or Campbell?

EDIT: Nevermind. You know, I think we're just talking about two different things. I don't mean Hero as in "person who saves the day and is an idol and inspires people", I mean Hero as in "The focus of the Hero's Journey story".
 
Hmmm. The classic literary anti-hero was a protagonist who's pursuing non-heroic, non-virtuous ends. The archetype would be Satan in Paradise Lost or Faust in Faust. It's about what they're trying to achieve.

So, Scarface sure would be. Michael Corleone would be.

The Punisher is harder to classify, especially as he started out after revenge, but in that he's out to punish crime, he'd be a hero who uses "bad" methodology. Similar characters are basically badass good guys.
 
Even that definition is fuzzy at best...I guess the question becomes, is Hit-Girl a hero, or an anti-hero?
 
The Punisher is harder to classify, especially as he started out after revenge, but in that he's out to punish crime, he'd be a hero who uses "bad" methodology. Similar characters are basically badass good guys.
Maybe in the movies.
Originally, that character was a Spider-man villain, whose family had been killed and he went on a revenge rampage in his backstory.
That's probably the origin portrayed in the movies.

But by the time he was fighting Spidey (when he first appeared in the comics), he was so far gone he would execute random people for just littering.
So his story is not so much about revenge as it is insanity and violence, but from his own point of view he's doing the right thing because he's punishing criminals.
 
Even that definition is fuzzy at best...I guess the question becomes, is Hit-Girl a hero, or an anti-hero?

Well, yeah, it's fuzzy, because you have to agree on what's actually a virtuous end. A story defines that on its own terms.

Robin Hood could be a hero or an anti-hero depending on who's telling the story and what's established as his goal. What isn't in doubt is that he was a thief.
 
Maybe in the movies.
Originally, that character was a Spider-man villain, whose family had been killed and he went on a revenge rampage in his backstory.
That's probably the origin portrayed in the movies.

But by the time he was fighting Spidey (when he first appeared in the comics), he was so far gone he would execute random people for just littering.
So his story is not so much about revenge as it is insanity and violence, but from his own point of view he's doing the right thing because he's punishing criminals.

That's pretty much what I said. I'm well aware of the character.
 
I see the modern (visual medium, non-literary) antihero as someone who very well may do the right thing/right a wrong/deliver justice/save the day...but for polar opposite (and ofter for more selfish) reasons/motivations than say the "White Knight", with his quiver of ideals.

In other words, he is basically good (or at least overall "not bad"). Like Blondie as a perfect example.

I see Scarface (& etc.) on the other hand, as a protagonist in a reversal/revisionist POV story.
 
Saw Kick Ass last night and while not a great film, I found it to be entertaining. I will say that I think that some of the outrage surrounding the film re: hitgirl may be overblown.

I don't recall her cursing THAT much in the film and besides I've heard worse in a few teen comedies these past few years. The body count in the film is quite high but the violence is portrayed in an over-the-top/cartoonish manner; kind of like WWF (granted, which has it's share of critics as well) but we're not talking Saving Private Ryan here or even the Saw films for that matter.

IMO they did their best to balance it out; the characters do get hurt pretty bad in the film.

I found the jokes in the film to be LOL funny and I think fans of the comic will be pleased.
 
It's falling short of it's $30M weekend est. It's now looking like a $19M weekend for it, I do think it is doing pretty well overseas though.
 
Saw it last night. It was an entertaining movie with a lot of cool moments and a couple awesome line.

I heard budget for this was 30 mil - if that's true than this is a hell of a lot of bang for the buck.
 
Possible Spoilers.






Just saw it. I thought it was entertaining. I do agree that the Hit Girl thing was a bit overblown. I have to admit she was badass. The violence was kind of cartoonish I don't see how anyone could really care about it, but that's just me.

It wasn't an amazing film but it was mindless and sometimes I need that. The microwave scene was pretty cool though and I thought Mark Strong and Nick Cage were excellent. But the whole jetpack thing was silly as hell.
 
Last edited:
I went into it with a bad attitude on the movie because a couple of my friends had seen the midnight showing and said that it was as good as The Dark Knight. To me, that's blasphemy. Anyway, I saw it and I loved it. It's by no means perfect (cough, cinematography) but I thought it was really good all around. There's some extremely powerful moments in it that literally sent shivers down my spine, and of course the action sequences were totally awesome.
 
There's some extremely powerful moments in it that literally sent shivers down my spine, and of course the action sequences were totally awesome.

I agree. I had the same sensations at times, and mainly because I cared so much for the characters.

As far as comparing it to The Dark Knight, it's apples and oranges.
 
Back
Top