Christopher_Reid

I think I've only seen Kick-Ass once. I remember liking it quite a bit and I probably should rewatch it. I was excited for the sequel but then saw reviews and trailers and lost interest. I decided to casually put it on in the background just to see. Like several movies from this era, Kick-Ass 2 feels unnecessarily violent and really superficial and pointless. A bit like the Deadpool sequels.

Part of the appeal of the first movie was its twist on superhero movies, kind of treating it as serious or real. How insanely dangerous it is, how easy it is to be stabbed, shot, burnt, etc. That it's actually completely crazy to try to dress up and stop bad guys. Police get killed quite often - it's not fun and games. And yet, it was also funny and offbeat, and pretty hopeful overall.

Kick-Ass 2 just feels mean and angry. Like your friend you haven't seen for a while, but now they have tattoos and do drugs regularly and have changed in other ways. You see it in their eyes. Just this empty nastiness. It's hard to describe. Some movies have a lot of swearing and violence but are fun. The Thing comes to mind, Taratino's movies. Nolan's movies are hard-hitting and impactful but have practically no blood.

Tone matters a lot. I remember almost no lines from Kick-Ass 2. It's thoroughly forgettable. At best, some of it was mildly entertaining. But it was formulaic and empty. The irony of a cute young girl being a superhero is lost. Every character feels the same and equally likely to swear. It's a poor substitute for wit or personality.

Some of the action was okay - some brief moments of fun with fighting and chase scenes. Some of the dramatic moments were okay as well. But not enough to save the movie. I didn't like the style either. Too dark, miserable and violent, but also fake. It reminded me of 300 and the DC movies (Zack Snyder I guess), a style I've never liked.

Whatever, a disappointing movie I was right to skip. The kind of movie that makes me depressed for movies. To spend so much money, to have so much potential and end up being so boring and unwatchable.

Get Out was pretty good. Whenever there's a new director on the block, and they make a good first movie, the question arises - is this a Shyamalan or a Spielberg? A one hit wonder, or an impressive new talent? Well, Jordan Peele is clearly a Shyamalan. Very talented as a comedian on Key and Peele, but much less consistent or interesting as a director.

It's ironic I suppose. Because Us is not great, it makes me focus more on the weaknesses of Get Out. Whereas with great directors, you want to go back to their earlier films and see the strengths already there, with mediocre directors, you see the staleness already there in their first movie.

The concept of Us is okay. And some of the tension and violence works. There's some humour which didn't completely land for me, some of it feels a bit "black", as in, a more specific sense of humour targeted at black people rather than the entire audience. The line "like some Home Alone type stuff" feels like an example. I suppose the reference itself is meant to be funny but it just feels a bit forced and awkward.

Ultimately, this movie is a bit too slow and negative, hinging too much on revelations or twists which end up being underwhelming or nonsensical. Like many mediocre movies, it takes our attention for granted rather than earning it and being grateful for it. It lacks urgency, style and purpose.

The acting varies but is mostly bad. I think the dad's acting is okay, but most of the cast are overacting most of the time. And I don't particularly like their characters or find them compelling. While the movie achieves plenty of "creepy" moments, those moments are shallow because they make no sense. Anyone can act creepy - it's not impressive. It has to fit into a coherent story. Or it has to be larger than life, let's say with someone like Michael Myers.

Some of the visuals are okay, but they're still too miserable and take too long. Lots of people just standing and staring. Maybe tears running down their face. No tears on my face, no smile, just eyes rolling and a mouth yawning.

I have to mention this: one of the main actresses does this really weird annoying breathy talking thing. It sounds like she's being choked or something. It's very off-putting and adds practically nothing. Some people seem to think that being intense, talking weird, crying, staring and being creepy somehow count as good acting. My goodness. Al Pacino sitting in a chair saying nothing in The Godfather: Part II often conveyed far more emotion and thought than anything in Us. It's what's under the surface that matters and Us has nothing under the surface.

I don't think it's a spoiler to say the movie references the Hands Across America charity event. You'll see how. I don't remember it making much sense. Reading about that event is hilarious. Trying to create an unbroken chain of hands across America. What a useless gimmick. They didn't even succeed, meaning there were breaks in the chain.

While they raised $15 million, it was much less than they'd hoped for. $36 million was the total collected, meaning it costed $21 million (you could also call that profits - I guarantee you some people profited from it). This was in May 1986 and they didn't even pay any of the charities until 1987, 6 months later. A massive waste of time and money for a gimmick. A gimmick!

From Wikipedia, {Live Aid organizer Bob Geldof announced in October 1985 that he would step back from charity work, saying that "compassion fatigue has very much set in"}. Absolutely hilarious. Maybe everyone should go back to just working and being a decent person in their own life.

Anyway, like Hands Across America, Us is a mess, a patronising, muddled effort which is quite miserable and pointless. It had potential but shows that Peele is a flash in the pan. And someone seemingly obsessed with race and class. Not surprising that he seems to vote Democrat. The Dark Knight Rises is a vastly better movie with themes of class and uprising (and the common issues with that).