Originally posted by seanD
View Post
Let me see if I can break down what I thought you were saying, and what I was replying to.
1.) You believe the creators of Kick-Ass, like much of Hollywood, is left leaning.
2.) Though you believe the creators of Kick-Ass are likely left-leaning, the film they created was largely derivative, the characters had few redeeming characteristics, and was NOT left-leaning, rather it was hypocritically anti-Politically Correct (hypocritically for those who lean left anyways).
A.) I agree with you that much of Hollywood is left leaning.
B.) Even though I agree with you that much of Hollywood is left leaning, not every movie in Hollywood necessarily needs to lean left, or be PC. Sometimes left (or right) leaning artists create fantasy that doesn't align with whatever political/social values they hold. So I see nothing inherently hypocritical about left-leaning movie creators creating films that are, for all intents and purposes, non-PC, and not particularly left-leaning.
Does that clarify things a bit for you?
Originally posted by seanD
View Post
Anyways, the film belongs in a side-genre of superhero film that asks the question, "What if comic book superheroes were real? What if they lived in the real world?" Other films in this side-genre include Watchmen, Super, Special, Hancock, and maybe, to a degree, Unbreakable and, on a more comedic take, Mystery Men. With that in mind, I think the film asks some interesting questions, and, though it's been a long time since I've seen it, I do remember a character arc where the main protagonist goes from wimp who idolizes the concept of superheroes, decides against all odds, and rationality to become one, struggles through it, finds that it can be accomplished, but in the end sort of outgrows it. It's a typical coming of age story.
Comment