I am not a fan of Ashton Kutcher.

I’ll admit it: I’m one of those people who has a hard time getting past first impressions. I have a great sense of humor, and I laugh all the time (the weed helps).

And even though I have fond memories of watching old episodes of That ’70s Show, I have to say I hated the Kelso character. A lot. A whole lot. More than you know. (And the weed doesn’t help.)

That being said, I was not exactly looking forward to viewing Mr. Kutcher’s new film, Killers. So much seemed wrong with the idea for the film.

The first bad idea I noticed was the inclusion of Ashton Kutcher in the film. I knew from the beginning what this would mean: Kutcher would more than likely be on the poster, too. Also, he would have lines in the script, would be required to be in front of the camera, and no doubt he would be trying to entertain us. How does ANY of this add up to good?

But, boy, was I wrong!!

No, I wasn’t. I’m awful.

Killers had all the stench I recognize from a movie the studio has no faith in. First off, no critics were given advance screenings. This way, there were no advance “spoilers” so the audience that Mr. Kutcher appeals to catch on to any … shall we say, weaknesses in the film. And Kutcher’s appeal is broader than you might imagine.

OK. Maybe only more than I imagine.

In my mind, I see a cross-section of his audience as people who walked into the wrong theater, the odd species of fruit bat, and his mom. ’Cuz, see, the thing is…

I hate Ashton Kutcher! I’m sorry. I know I’m really beating a point to death here, but that Kelso thing just killed it for me.

To this day, when I hear the voice of “Kelso,” I want to kick babies. And I’m a stoner, man. The only thing I EVER wanna kick is “back” — just put on Adult Swim and soak up some bud. Kutcher’s voice alone harshes my mellow in much the same way that Oswald bummed out JFK.

There are a few things of note that I should relay. The vivacious and energetic Katherine Heigl is costarring in the film. For me, she brings a breath of fresh air to the proceedings. She plays the wife of Kutcher’s character, and she is comically stunned to find out that Kutcher had been an assassin prior to his married life.

As for comic presence, Heigl is a delight. She really sells the “Gee, isn’t it funny how we’re coping with this TOTALLY implausible situation?” vibe, and she gets laughs out of jokes that you can see coming a mile away. That is the mark of a great actress.

If I had to offer a complaint it would be…

ASHTON KUTCHER! Look, I don’t want to say I hate the man.

Yes, I do. I’m awful.

I can’t get why people watch this man. It’s just that every time I see him I feel a hate coming on named Hatey McHateful, fresh from Hateville, TN, home of the “Fightin’ Haties,” and the pride of coach Hateful Haterman, who was born in Haiti. And sometimes, my reaction to Kutcher is not quite so understated.

But, hey! This article is not all about my hatred of Ashton Kutcher!

Yes, it is. I’m awful.

But since this is a supposed “movie review,” let me at least give you the premise of the film.

Ashton Kutcher (hate) is an assassin who marries Katherine Heigl (last name pronounced like you are saying hello to your friend Gilligan: “Hi, Gil!”), and he gives up “the life” for a shot at marital bliss. Only three years later, we find out someone has put out a hit on Kutcher (of hate fame), and the couple must stay alive while they try to figure out who is trying to kill him (everyone).

The film is propped up nicely by veteran actors Tom Selleck and the godlike Catherine O’Hara.

Selleck again displays the comic timing he thrilled us with on Friends and is superb.

For those people who are only coming to see Killers because they love That ’70s Show, Friends was that OTHER TV ensemble cast of great-looking people AND it was a far superior show, unmarred by Kutcher or any hint of “Fez-ness.”

Catherine O’Hara is always a delight (and I wasn’t even on weed that night!), and as always, she delivers here and is a fine foil for Selleck.

But I do admit to bias here discussing O’Hara. I have loved her since Beetle Juice and would watch her read the phone book — especially if my other choice is to watch her with Ashton Kutcher. Or if she read the numbers of the town Kutcher lives in. Those people are doomed, and I try to avoid sad movies.

There a few questions you might have. I presume one of those questions is not “So, how ya’ feel about Ashton Kutcher?” But if I had to wager, I guess your questions might be something like these:

“Hey — this sounds A LOT like Mr. and Mrs. Smith! Is it?”

Good call! The only difference is that, unlike in Smith, the couple in Killers are not trying to kill one another. But in fairness, who could blame Heigl if she did? In real life, I mean.

“Hey — how does this bit of fluffery compare to the incredible Grosse Pointe Blank? THAT movie managed to deal with the complexities of being a hit man who wants to change his life and regain his love. Plus it did not pull any punches in the cold reality of murder. How does this stack up?”

Well, dudes, this film is basically the chick-flick version of Grosse Pointe. A light romance with a little darn murder-poo to “liven” it up, to use a term that is surely the definition of irony. However, I did hope that John Cusack would be in the film, because Cusack is a can-do sort of guy, and I was REALLY hoping to see him kill…

KATHERINE HEIGL! Thought I was gonna say Ashton Kutcher, didn’t you? But no!

I’ve sound reasoning for this, despite my praise of Heigl. I liked Heigl’s character. She made me smile. But in this film, Kutcher is madly in love with her, and if she were killed, Kutcher would be brokenhearted and suffer … and Kutcher suffering … now that’s worth the price of my ticket!

Plus, then we could watch Kutcher (still hatin’!) try to inject some actual drama while he chases Cusack down and tries to kill him. Notice I said “tries.” That just screams “funny” to me.

As for what I think your last question is:

“Killers? THAT is the name? Was THAT the best they could come up with? That’s like writing a script about some characters and calling it Characters! What’s up with that?”

Well, I wondered about that, too, but I think I have it figured out.

See, I believe Killers is a sly in-joke referring to the screenwriters, the producers, and the acting ability of the lead. It is my theory that this movie was green-lit in an attempt to strangle the life out of modern-day comedy as we know it. Sadly, it is also the funniest thing about this entire movie.

I guess you can go see it if you want. Especially if it’s a date — a guy’s gotta get laid. But if your date can demonstrate her ability to count without stamping her foot, you might want to find something better. Which would be anything.

In short: This movie sucks; Kutcher’s parents should be drug into the street and beaten; my dealer has been dry for three weeks; and Kutcher is still banging Demi Moore.

TOKIN: 0

KUTCHER: SEVERAL THOUSAND

So, ’til next month, smoke ’em if ya’ got ’em! And if ya’ got ’em, please, please, please give me a call.