Manners Maketh Man. Do you know what that means?
Then let me teach you a lesson.
The Plot
Based on Mark Millar and Dave Gibbons' comic: The Kingsman are an international independent intelligence agency operating at the highest order of discretion. They are the modern day Knights of the Roundtable. When their Lancelot agent (Jack Davenport) is slain, Arthur (Michael Caine) charges the other Kingsmen agents into choosing a new potential candidate to claim the title of Lancelot. Agent Harry Hart (Colin Firth), codename: Galahad, decides to choose an unlikely candidate for the high class position. Enter Eggsy (Taron Egerton) who is the son of a previous candidate for the title of Lancelot but was killed in action. Harry reveals to Eggsy his father's legacy and a chance to become a member of not only high class society, but a gentleman knight in saving the world from evil. Unfortunately for them, a powerful evil is also in the rise in the form of tech mogul Richmond Valentine (Samuel L. Jackson) and his henchwoman, Gazelle (Sofia Boutella).
Review
Matthew Vaughn is quickly solidifying himself as probably one of my favorite directors. There has never been a single movie of his that I didn't like or even love, and this one is no exception. Which is why I have to state immediately right now that if by any chance you don't like any of the following movies: L4yer Cake, Stardust, Kick-Ass and X-Men First Class; then chances are you're not going to like or appreciate this movie. Especially if you don't like Kick-Ass and X-Men First Class. But if you do, or if you have an open mind, then here are my thoughts on the film:
I love this film. I really do. But don't get me wrong. I love Man of Steel, but that movie has a ton of flaws that I'm fully aware exist. And this movie has some VERY major flaws. But before I get to the flaws, here's a rundown of what I love about this movie.
Colin Firth. The mostly dramatic and romantic comedy typecasted actor finally gets a chance to play a role he describes as, "the reason I wanted to become an actor." Firth gives an incredible standout performance as Harry Hart, the epitome of what the Kingsman represent. He is very much a throwback to not just the Roger Moore James Bond but also a slight mix of John Steed and Harry Palmer thrown in for extra class. It also helps that the man who played Harry Palmer, Michael Caine, is in this movie as the King Arthur of the Kingsmen Intelligence Agency. With the support of Mark Strong, playing a good guy for once in his mainstream career, as Merlin, all three of them are absolute delights as throwbacks to the classic spy movies of old.
In direct opposition to these High Class Old Fashion English types is a modern age twisted American Billionaire named Richmond Valentine, played by Samuel L. Jackson. He's a combination of many different American billionaires, with the most obvious ones being Russell Simmons, Steve Jobs, and Mark Zuckerberg. Yet Jackson plays Valentine as a success story gone wrong in terms of he is definitely a good person, but his methods of achieving what he believes to be a better world are completely insane. Which is perfectly suited for making him a throwback to the over the top Bond villains of the classic era of spy movies. He even comes fully equipped with his own standout henchman, or in this case henchwoman named Gazelle, played by Sofia Boutella. She's the sword (haha get it? Cause her feet are swords) that deals with the more violent aspects of Valentine's dealings, mainly because Valentine hates blood and violence. Yes, it is meant to be ironic. And it works perfectly.
But most importantly, someone who is not really a standout but proves to be a promising talent is none other than the leading man of this film and relative newcomer: Taron Egerton. His role of Eggsy is a rather cliche one in being the stereotypical rags to riches character. Yet Egerton is so convincing as someone who grew up as a street kid who learns to become a gentleman spy. This role could've easily have been given to an anxious newcomer and played obnoxiously, but Egerton is so likable as the lead that although he isn't a standout as Firth or Jackson, he felt right and is very capable of working side by side with the big leaguers. I look forward to seeing him in a much more meatier role, because I can already tell this guy is going to be an actor we'll be seeing in many movies in the future. But for what we got from him, he was good.
And of course, in a spy movie that's a throwback to classic James Bond films, you want good action. And this movie definitely has a good action. Not as much as other critics and reviewers have claimed, but when the action scenes do happen they're fantastic. Though I have to say, I was expecting something a little bit more extreme, but this is extreme for this type of movie. The action scenes are pretty much more bloodier versions of Jackie Chan actions sequences, which makes sense since Chan's stunt team was responsible for making the action in the movie. It is also very commendable that Firth and Egerton did 90% of their own stunts, which is incredible to look at. But both of them are still second fiddle compared to Boutella as the sword legged Gazelle. Being a dancer, her action sequences are obviously a lot more refined, and has to be since her character is the best fighter in the movie. Which kind of segues me to one of my negatives of the film.
The female characters are pretty underdeveloped. Other than Gazelle, none of them are interesting. Which is saying a lot, because Gazelle's actions are definitely interesting but as a character she isn't. Then there's Roxy played by newcomer Sophie Cookson. In interviews with Cookson she gives this impression that there is a lot more depth to her character and that it was a big deal for her character to become a Kingsman because a woman has never succeeded. In the film the idea of her being the underdog because she's a woman is never brought up or how important it is for her to become a Kingsman. Which is sad because it seemed like a lot of stuff that revolves around her has been removed for the sake of focusing on Eggsy and Agent Hart. Which it's suppose to, but she was set up as someone important, and she plays a key part in the big finale, but she comes off as not really needed. At least she's not a love interest, I'll give the writers credit for that. And there's also Eggsy's mother played by Samantha Womack who could've been flushed out a little bit better as to why her life went through a downhill spiral, but it doesn't. Now, I usually don't complain about whether a female character is underdeveloped in a spy movie because they're usually just eye candy anyway, but in this film at least two of them were set up to be a lot more than just eye candy. Notice how I'm not asking for development of the Swedish Princess? Eye Candy.
But in the end my major problem with the film is the all around predictability of it. Now, this is a bad thing and a good thing. Mainly because the reason why it is predictable is because it is making fun of how most spy movies are predictable. What makes it feel unpredictable are the dialogue and the execution. But that still doesn't prevent it from being predictable. And yes, there are some people who might argue that the film starts out looking like a children's film that evolves into an adult film halfway through the movie, but it's really all about not having the 150 or 200 million dollar budgets that a standard blockbuster should have. So in other words, they had to make do with what they can and save their money carefully for the more spectacular things and a big finale.
Final Thoughts
Despite being overly predictable and looking very cheaply made for the first act, the movie succeeds by being a genuinely entertaining experience. This movie will make you crave for a more over the top James Bond movie with crazy gadgets and megalomaniac villains over the dark and serious Daniel Craig Bond movies. Not saying Craig's Bond movies are bad because they are dark and serious, it is just nice to see someone bringing back the crazy spy movies in a modern way. This movie is here to entertain and it even tells you it is here to entertain. If you're a fan of Matthew Vaughn's film, Mark Millar's comic books and Roger Moore James Bond movies with a Rated R twist, then this is definitely the movie for you!
SCORE: 8/10 - An enjoyable throwback to the classic Roger Moore James Bond Era
In direct opposition to these High Class Old Fashion English types is a modern age twisted American Billionaire named Richmond Valentine, played by Samuel L. Jackson. He's a combination of many different American billionaires, with the most obvious ones being Russell Simmons, Steve Jobs, and Mark Zuckerberg. Yet Jackson plays Valentine as a success story gone wrong in terms of he is definitely a good person, but his methods of achieving what he believes to be a better world are completely insane. Which is perfectly suited for making him a throwback to the over the top Bond villains of the classic era of spy movies. He even comes fully equipped with his own standout henchman, or in this case henchwoman named Gazelle, played by Sofia Boutella. She's the sword (haha get it? Cause her feet are swords) that deals with the more violent aspects of Valentine's dealings, mainly because Valentine hates blood and violence. Yes, it is meant to be ironic. And it works perfectly.
But most importantly, someone who is not really a standout but proves to be a promising talent is none other than the leading man of this film and relative newcomer: Taron Egerton. His role of Eggsy is a rather cliche one in being the stereotypical rags to riches character. Yet Egerton is so convincing as someone who grew up as a street kid who learns to become a gentleman spy. This role could've easily have been given to an anxious newcomer and played obnoxiously, but Egerton is so likable as the lead that although he isn't a standout as Firth or Jackson, he felt right and is very capable of working side by side with the big leaguers. I look forward to seeing him in a much more meatier role, because I can already tell this guy is going to be an actor we'll be seeing in many movies in the future. But for what we got from him, he was good.
And of course, in a spy movie that's a throwback to classic James Bond films, you want good action. And this movie definitely has a good action. Not as much as other critics and reviewers have claimed, but when the action scenes do happen they're fantastic. Though I have to say, I was expecting something a little bit more extreme, but this is extreme for this type of movie. The action scenes are pretty much more bloodier versions of Jackie Chan actions sequences, which makes sense since Chan's stunt team was responsible for making the action in the movie. It is also very commendable that Firth and Egerton did 90% of their own stunts, which is incredible to look at. But both of them are still second fiddle compared to Boutella as the sword legged Gazelle. Being a dancer, her action sequences are obviously a lot more refined, and has to be since her character is the best fighter in the movie. Which kind of segues me to one of my negatives of the film.
The female characters are pretty underdeveloped. Other than Gazelle, none of them are interesting. Which is saying a lot, because Gazelle's actions are definitely interesting but as a character she isn't. Then there's Roxy played by newcomer Sophie Cookson. In interviews with Cookson she gives this impression that there is a lot more depth to her character and that it was a big deal for her character to become a Kingsman because a woman has never succeeded. In the film the idea of her being the underdog because she's a woman is never brought up or how important it is for her to become a Kingsman. Which is sad because it seemed like a lot of stuff that revolves around her has been removed for the sake of focusing on Eggsy and Agent Hart. Which it's suppose to, but she was set up as someone important, and she plays a key part in the big finale, but she comes off as not really needed. At least she's not a love interest, I'll give the writers credit for that. And there's also Eggsy's mother played by Samantha Womack who could've been flushed out a little bit better as to why her life went through a downhill spiral, but it doesn't. Now, I usually don't complain about whether a female character is underdeveloped in a spy movie because they're usually just eye candy anyway, but in this film at least two of them were set up to be a lot more than just eye candy. Notice how I'm not asking for development of the Swedish Princess? Eye Candy.
But in the end my major problem with the film is the all around predictability of it. Now, this is a bad thing and a good thing. Mainly because the reason why it is predictable is because it is making fun of how most spy movies are predictable. What makes it feel unpredictable are the dialogue and the execution. But that still doesn't prevent it from being predictable. And yes, there are some people who might argue that the film starts out looking like a children's film that evolves into an adult film halfway through the movie, but it's really all about not having the 150 or 200 million dollar budgets that a standard blockbuster should have. So in other words, they had to make do with what they can and save their money carefully for the more spectacular things and a big finale.
Final Thoughts
Despite being overly predictable and looking very cheaply made for the first act, the movie succeeds by being a genuinely entertaining experience. This movie will make you crave for a more over the top James Bond movie with crazy gadgets and megalomaniac villains over the dark and serious Daniel Craig Bond movies. Not saying Craig's Bond movies are bad because they are dark and serious, it is just nice to see someone bringing back the crazy spy movies in a modern way. This movie is here to entertain and it even tells you it is here to entertain. If you're a fan of Matthew Vaughn's film, Mark Millar's comic books and Roger Moore James Bond movies with a Rated R twist, then this is definitely the movie for you!
SCORE: 8/10 - An enjoyable throwback to the classic Roger Moore James Bond Era
No comments:
Post a Comment