Please continue pre-release discussion here.

Movie:
"Kick-Ass 2" (Starring: Chloλ Grace Moretz, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Lyndsy Fonseca, Jim Carrey, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, John Leguizamo, Donald Faison)

Release Date:
8/16/2013

Rating:
R (for strong violence, pervasive language, crude and sexual content, and brief nudity throughout.)

Running Time:
103min. (1h. 43m.)

Budget:
$xx million (estimated)

IMDb Synopsis:


IMDb Info and Rating:
7.5 (3,603 votes as of 8/16/13)

Rotten Tomatoes:
Fresh:30 Rotten:81 (27% as of 8/16/13)

Metacritic:
42 metascore ('Mixed or average reviews' as of 8/16/13)

Trailer:
<object width="720" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.traileraddict.com/emd/71508"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.traileraddict.com/emd/71508" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" wmode="transparent" allowfullscreen="true" width="720" height="344"></embed></object>

Poster Art:

reviews are dropping like a whore who saw a nickel...

Rotten Tomatoes:
Fresh:09 Rotten:11 (45% as of 8/14/13)

Metacritic:
43 metascore ('Generally favorable reviews' as of 8/14/13)

While I do intend to see this, I knew any sequel would be a blatant cash grab.

One can argue ANY movie is a blatant cash grab unless it is shown in theaters for free. Hell, any JOB is a blatant cash grab.

How is this a cash grab? The first was far from a runaway hit. I still don't know anybody besides me that's ever even seen it. I'm even surprised they made a sequel.

The source material is crap so it's not surprising the movie is getting bad reviews. The first one was good despite the rubbish source material from a shit comic book writer.

The first one was an indie flick that was in the can for like 2 years before it found distribution. It didn't meet box office expectations, but is a cult hit.

Never read the source material, because I'm not a Millar fan.

I loved the first. I later leafed through the comic and was not a fan. Not surprised since Millar's other comic, Wanted, was utter trash. Nothing I read about the Kick-Ass 2 comic compelled me to read the actual series.

The sequel looks fun in the ads and I'm glad to read that at least Hit-Girl remains the best thing about the sequel. She and Big Daddy were my favorite characters in the first movie.

I liked the first comic better then the movie, although I still liked the movie too

I wasn't as big of a fan of the second comic, but i'm still in for this.

Hit Girl was fucking hilarious in the first movie. The Banana Splits sequence was absolutely incredible.

I loved the first movie but have no intention of seeing this in theaters.

dropped to 36% on RT - i knew Wadlow was a shitty choice. this has gone from a "might see with some friends in the theater" to a "i'll wait for redbox"

Looks fucking terrible. Who the hell is this guy? He directed "Never Back Down"? Seriously? Seriously? Are you fucking seriously serious?

I thought the original was absolute, utter swill. This trailers for this one, on the other hand, piqued my interest... but the reviews aren't exactly glowing. Definite wait for me.

Yeah, despite the positive reviews, I really didn't like the first one. Not saying it was horrible, it just made no connection with me at all.

Everybody on this board seems to have seen it. And did so when it came out. I remember a lot of praise heaped on it here back then.

I liked KA1 for the most part. It was a good movie. I'm kind of iffy on seeing a sequel to it though. Something about it just doesn't attract me like the original did.

So you've seen Kick-Ass 2 but are iffy about Kick-Ass 3? When the hell was the third one announced?

Goddamnit.

Loved KA1. Mark Millar's a hack. No interest in this. Pizza.

One could argue that, I suppose, but one would be wrong. "Cash grab" (particularly with the adjective "blatant" before it) doesn't just mean "anything that's supposed to earn one money" - rather, it implies something that's done solely for the purpose of making money, and the people involved have no other reason for making the film (or whatever else) besides a desire for the cash it will bring them.

While money will always play an important part in a collaborative art form like filmmaking* - there are some directors, screenwriters, cinematographers, actors, etc. who don't do what they do solely for the money their jobs earn them. Heck, there are some artists - in the filmmaking community and elsewhere - who keep on doing what they love, even when their work consistently fails to make them any money (many of them take side jobs just to get the money to create more films, which are only ever shown at a few film festivals or a handful of theaters in New York and LA.)

Of course, I don't know enough about Kick-Ass 2 to speculate as to whether or not it qualifies as a "blatant cash grab."

*Believe it or not, though, there are actually some commercially distributed films - particularly some art films sponsored by various cultural/governmental institutions - that aren't really expected to ever turn a profit. Matters of artistry are actually, sometimes, taken into consideration.

I guess I am one of those who doesn't have a problem with a blatant cash grab. Movies employ a lot of people and those people will get a paycheck.

Exactly TomOpus.

Who gives a shit if it's a "Cash Grab"? It's called the Movie BUSINESS...the Movie INDUSTRY.

ALL films are "Cash Grabs".

As long as you're not being forced to give up your cash...whether or not a film is a cash grab is just some more stupid shit to bitch about.

have the free ticket from some Blu-ray, but think i am going to use it next week for The World's End...shhhhh!

KA 1 worked because Vaughn managed to eliminate the most vile aspects of the source material; by all accounts, this not only keeps the even more vile moments of KA 2 intact, but jokingly revels in it.