|
It is an overused term when describing action movies, and usually not warranted, but the best adjective I can think of to describe this movie is "smart" and it really is. It's smart, it's funny, the action is great, the performances are swell, and the plot is actually quite intelligent, especially for action-schlock. So, what is Kingsman: The Secret Service? Kingsman is ostensibly the story of a rich secret society of spies/professional bad-asses, almost exclusively recruited from among Britain's most influential ruling families. Founded at the end of WWI by a number of heirless rich fucks, the organization is designed to avoid the red tape of government and save the world without anyone knowing they were there. The movie opens with the death of a member of the organization and Codename Galahad (Colin Firth) has to go and apologize to a grieving widow, giving her a coin that has a number on it that, if called, will allow her basically one favor--any favor she could want. She rejects the kindness, but her son is given the medal. This son grows up into Eggsy Unwin, a working-class chav who has dropped out of or failed any opportunity to advance in society he's been given. Pissing his life away on petty crime, he gets into trouble and uses the medal to get himself out of it. This attracts Galahad's attention, as the Kingsman are about to start recruiting a new member, to replace one who was killed on a botched rescue mission to snatch up Mark Hamill from the clutches of a mysterious villain. From there the story is about Eggsy's training and subsequent introduction to the Kingsman organization. Despite being low-class, a detail that is remarked upon quite a lot by pretty much every character, Eggsy's natural resilience and instincts make him a top contender in the class. While grappling with essentially siding with the upper crust, Eggsy has to learn the value of teamwork and yadda yadda blah blah. Most of the training is just there to give you cool stunts for the characters to do, while Colin Firth goes out and does super spy poo poo. You're introduced to the principle characters in the story, including Michael Caine as Arthur, the leader of the Kingsman and a smug aristocrat who doesn't care much for Eggsy's chav-like charms. The main villain's plot won't be spoilered, by Samuel L. Jackson plays a philanthropist-turned-bad with a grand scheme and grand intentions, and he's aided by a bad-rear end legless assassin named Gazelle who slices and dices with her metal foot prosthetics. The pair make for a great foil to our dapper heroes, especially Jackson, who basically plays an autistic nerd with delusions of grandeur. It's a great role for him and a nice return-to-form for Jackson, giving him a compelling villain who makes a lot of meta-commentary on the nature of spy films and the like while being himself the lynchpin of a ludicrous spy film. The movie earns its hard R with lots of blood, swearing, and some very cheeky sexual content. In fact, "cheeky" is another word that'd sum this movie up as well. It's definitely sympathetic to the working class represented by its main character, played by Taron Egerton (who doesn't get top billing even!). Egerton is a great youthful hero, managing to be cocky, cheeky and also very likable. He manages to slip back and forth between the worlds of a chav and a dapper with ease, and as a leading man he's quite good, even if he is given only a brief period to demonstrate it. The stuntwork is really great, the gadgets are fantastic, and the finale NEEDS to be seen. This movie is not afraid to push the envelope, and if/when this thread turns to discussion of spoilers, I have more than a few words to describe what happens in the later chapter of the film, but all you need to know is that this film is absolutely worth your money. It functions as a smart commentary on class warfare inside Britain and touches upon topics as far-flung as climate change, the 1%, and even the role of spy films within the culture that bred them. It's a great action film, a great performance piece, and succeeds in having characters we care about doing poo poo we want to see. The ending is truly fantastic too. It ends on a butt-loving joke, which comes completely out of nowhere but absolutely fits the tone of the film.  So what did you all think about Kingsman: The Secret Service?
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 21:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 04:27 |
|
|
I loved this movie. I'm a huge James Bond fan, and have been since I was a kid. I've seen all the films countless times to a point where they're pretty imbedded in my brain. This was a pretty great satire/love letter/rant to the Bond films. It towed that perfect line of commenting on how gross and hosed up they are, while also acknowledging how fun and bat poo poo insane they are. So that was nice. The Church scene has the best use of Freebird in a movie, and the finale is bonkers in the best way. A Uh, I'm not so good at this reading stuff, so the first post of this thread is going to be boring. But I loved this loving weird rear end movie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
A thoroughly good romp that I'm sure SMG would have a blast with regarding the class tensions that dictate just about every scene. Also, the OP missed a trick by not putting YOU WOT MATE in the title.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:45
|
|
|
I thought it had weirdly cheap looking sets. Aside from the wood panelled tailors (which I think was a real location), everything else looked like they'd skimped on production design. Felt to me like a cheap, slightly tonally confused British remake of Men in Black. And one that kind of fumbles the class issues: largely by fetishising the aesthetics of the aristocracy while also trying to critique it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
It's amazing how much the young bloke pretty much disappeared from the marketing after the first trailer. Poor guy, edited out of his big break.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 23:54
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:It's amazing how much the young bloke pretty much disappeared from the marketing after the first trailer. Poor guy, edited out of his big break. He's the new kid from Caddyshack who was the main character until they realized they had all the comedians on Earth on the payroll and whelp. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 00:17
|
|
|
Pretty disappointed that Roxy didn't get a single action scene throughout the movie. Especially since she seems like the only person on the Kingsman side who knew what trigger discipline was. Colin Firth and Sofia Boutella were amazing. I liked the role reversal with Michael Caine and Mark Strong. The newbies (Taron Edgerton and Sophie Cookson) were good as well. Slight pacing issues at the beginning and end, but I might just go watch it again just for the church scene.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 01:47
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:I thought it had weirdly cheap looking sets. Aside from the wood panelled tailors (which I think was a real location), everything else looked like they'd skimped on production design. If you are talking about the villain's lair, I thought they pretty much nailed the old James Bond villain-lair aesthetic, right down to the maze of carved stone tunnels with the painted concrete flooring. Totally reminds me of Enter the Dragon, or Doctor No which actually was made on a shoe-string budget.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 02:16
|
|
|
Just saw this tonight. It's possible I have never laughed harder in a theater than during the Pomp & Circumstance scene.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 03:54
|
|
|
This movie owned on a serious level. The action scenes are worth it alone and the way the movie introduces Gazelle is pretty amazing. I was really dissapointed they killed of Firth's character since he was easily my favorite in the film. ESPECIALLY after that amazing church scene. Manners Maketh Man
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 04:36
|
|
|
Speaking of trigger discipline: There's a funny gaff in the scene where Eggsy is supposed to shoot the dog: You can clearly see his finger is behind the trigger of the gun in one of the close up shots. This movie was fun. I read the comic before going to see it and I loved the changes they made and the little "if you get it" winks at the comic: In the comic the first scene at the cabin is basically the same except it's literally Mark Hamill that's been kidnapped. In the movie they just have him play the scientist. I'm also really happy that this adaptation was done a lot better than Wanted was. Same guys behind the source material but this time they got good screenwriters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 05:33
|
|
|
Crain posted:Speaking of trigger discipline: Really though, the rest of the movie was good but the church scene alone makes it worth the price of admission.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 07:22
|
|
|
Loved it. Every single second was glorious. The kids were great and really held their own with the heavyweights. Regarding the church scene: The second I heard Freebird start I knew what was going to happen, and it was awesome. One of my favorite scenes ever was the end of The Devil's Rejects, so I instantly thought of that. I'll definitely be recommending this to my friends.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 07:29
|
|
|
One thing that really stood out to me was that the movie pulled no punches, especially during the big climax. Super ending spoilers obviously: So how many of the 1 Percent did Valentine recruit into his venture? I loved that all of the American Joint Chiefs and the President (Not-Obama) were also implanted, which only goes to demonstrate that the rich ruling class is incredibly stupid. The sequence where they kill all of them with the implants was so surreal and comic that it was almost MORE horrifying than if they had just gone with blood and guts. They toed the line well though, and the sheer size of the sequence made it kind of funny again by the end. But holy poo poo they totally blew Obama's head apart AND Obama was an rear end in a top hat who got hooked into a "human Noah's arc" pyramid scheme.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 07:34
|
|
|
Mars4523 posted:Pretty disappointed that Roxy didn't get a single action scene throughout the movie. Yeah it was a bit weird that the actual Kings(wo)man initiate gets passed over to be the hero of the film because she isn't a man (quite literally, its because she can't pass as Colin Firth). Some drop out gets the job instead, saves the world, and gets all the glory. Poor Roxy gets stranded in the Arctic while the power fantasy character pops the bubbly and butt fucks a princess. The movie isn't exactly subtle in who its made for.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 08:14
|
|
|
All I have to say is the second I heard Samuel L Jackson play his character with a lisp I knew I was in for a very different kind of action movie. Kingsman is amazing, we haven't had an action-comedy film this amazing in a long time and if anyone wants to see something both funny and creative at the same time watch this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 08:21
|
|
|
why is the female character wearing a sewing machine needle on her feet?
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 09:25
|
|
|
I really enjoyed the "Looking good/Feeling Good" joke, especially considering that Eggsy hadn't seen Trading Places. I felt it was a pretty solid homage to Bond while nicely tearing it down. The aforementioned Church scene is enough to get me to see it again.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 09:50
|
|
|
I loved the Church scene but for the wrong reasons? I felt like it was a "you shouldn't be enjoying this" scene and I've never seen anything like it. The Westboro stand-ins are obviously bad people but they're (mostly) unarmed and get slaughtered wholesale. I loved the choreography and it was definitely the stand-out scene in the film but at the time it felt wrong to be revelling in the bloodbath, and for me that felt like the point, but apparently I'm wrong as I've not seen anyone else say that...
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 13:16
|
|
|
Catman Begins posted:I loved the Church scene but for the wrong reasons? I felt like it was a "you shouldn't be enjoying this" scene and I've never seen anything like it. The Westboro stand-ins are obviously bad people but they're (mostly) unarmed and get slaughtered wholesale. I loved the choreography and it was definitely the stand-out scene in the film but at the time it felt wrong to be revelling in the bloodbath, and for me that felt like the point, but apparently I'm wrong as I've not seen anyone else say that... I felt a bit uncomfortable too. As much I wanted to enjoy it, telling myself that the villain's non-consensual brainwashing was precisely the same as the consensual programming they're receiving from the preacher, the glee the film took in their deaths was a bit much.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 13:22
|
|
|
I thought the church scene was interestingly placed right after Eggsy failing to shoot his dog. Both are basically examples of brainwashing people into being willing to kill innocents for "the greater good", but Eggsy believes that even if it's the "good guys" in control of this then they must not really be the good guys.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 13:48
|
|
|
Martman posted:I thought the church scene was interestingly placed right after Eggsy failing to shoot his dog. Both are basically examples of brainwashing people into being willing to kill innocents for "the greater good", but Eggsy believes that even if it's the "good guys" in control of this then they must not really be the good guys. That reminds me of the scene where Harry shows Eggsy his stuffed dog and reveals the gun was filled with blanks. It's a great little switcheroo and you can tell in the delivery that Firth is loving it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 13:54
|
|
|
Catman Begins posted:That reminds me of the scene where Harry shows Eggsy his stuffed dog and reveals the gun was filled with blanks. It's a great little switcheroo and you can tell in the delivery that Firth is loving it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 13:56
|
|
|
I was wondering when someone was going to make a thread about this film. Was it released this week in the US? I got to see it a week or so ago in the UK and thoroughly enjoyed it for what it was and the 'cheap' set design is so obviously a nod to Bond sets. Also it was nice to see Sam Jackson playing a part that wasn't an angry shouty black fella... And I was the only person in the entire cinema to laugh at what the Swedish(?!) lady said to the main character about what she'd do when she asked him about saving the world.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 14:44
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:And one that kind of fumbles the class issues: largely by fetishising the aesthetics of the aristocracy while also trying to critique it. I felt as though they had a decent showing of it: on the one hand, they appear to lock themselves away in their areas of comfort for most of the time (the tailor's or the secret base), and on the other hand, Arthur (and presumably the rest of the Kingsmen, seeing as how they don't appear for the remainder of the film) selling out to Valentine's plan illustrates that they'll never be satisfied with what they have.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 16:09
|
|
|
Catman Begins posted:I loved the Church scene but for the wrong reasons? I felt like it was a "you shouldn't be enjoying this" scene and I've never seen anything like it. The Westboro stand-ins are obviously bad people but they're (mostly) unarmed and get slaughtered wholesale. I loved the choreography and it was definitely the stand-out scene in the film but at the time it felt wrong to be revelling in the bloodbath, and for me that felt like the point, but apparently I'm wrong as I've not seen anyone else say that... I thought it was a very relevant scene in the narrative. It's a sort of teenage liberal fantasy played out, i.e. "why don't they just kill all the racists and homophobes etc.? Then everything would be alright!" train of thought, but ultimately all we end up with is just a pile of dead bodies of people, and no tangible solution to what makes people turn out so nasty in the first place. Curiously though, we're not shown much of the world after the upper echelons do get killed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 16:17
|
|
|
Saw this a couple of weekends ago; liked it quite a bit more than I thought I would. Matt Vaughn and screenplay writer Jane Goldman weren't quite enough to exorcise all of Millar's demons (there are still some uncomfortable politics concerning the feminization of the evil Other in the bad guy and his plan, not to mention some anti-environmentalism, and as mentioned, the church scene, while cathartic, is disturbing when seen in retrospect), but it's a really fun time at the movies, all in all. A lot of the young folks were given a chance to shine along with the old-timers; Taron Egerton really nailed his part, and Sophie Cookson wasn't too shabby either. While I would have appreciated an action scene with her in it, I do appreciate that her character straight up beats Eggsy for the position of Lancelot, and this is largely unchallenged by everybody. When we see Eggsy at the end of the film, he has another Kingsman position, presumably Galahad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
Chocolate Teapot posted:I thought it was a very relevant scene in the narrative. It's a sort of teenage liberal fantasy played out, i.e. "why don't they just kill all the racists and homophobes etc.? Then everything would be alright!" train of thought, but ultimately all we end up with is just a pile of dead bodies of people, and no tangible solution to what makes people turn out so nasty in the first place. Curiously though, we're not shown much of the world after the upper echelons do get killed. Yes, but that doesn't mean it wasn't amazingly cathartic to watch.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
Soonmot posted:Yes, but that doesn't mean it wasn't amazingly cathartic to watch. The Freebird scene was so much more well done and more cathartic than the entirety of "God Bless America". The best part about all of the action scenes is the fact that they were gory, and they really went out of their way to display the force behind every hit. Every punch looked like it was thrown by Mike Tyson with a rocket attached to his arm. The best example is, yet again, from the Freebird scene where Galahad grabs some dude by the collar and belt and just battering rams him into the wall and his whole body just collapses like an accordion. I can't wait for this to come out for home enjoyment cause it's the only way I'm getting my friends to watch it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
resurgam40 posted:While I would have appreciated an action scene with her in it, I do appreciate that her character straight up beats Eggsy for the position of Lancelot, and this is largely unchallenged by everybody. When we see Eggsy at the end of the film, he has another Kingsman position, presumably Galahad. It felt like that scene was a fix, to make sure that Eggsy wouldn't win; whilst Roxy is willing to follow orders and do whatever is asked of her to complete the mission (before being given almost nothing to do for the rest of the movie), Eggsy is very uncomfortable with taking what is effectively a lower-class species, and hence the lower classes. It's foreshadowed immediately before when Arthur begrudgingly accepts Eggsy's capability.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 18:31
|
|
|
The church scene actually made me feel uncomfrotable (as I'm sure it's meant to). It's cool to see the "gun-kata" violence against the armed assassins, but then you shoot it the exact same way against a bunch of "civilians", and it becomes almost like a statement. Imgaine some of the cool gun scenes in John Wick if they then had happened against random people in a shopping mall. It actually made me think a little bit. Also, I couldn't see how they get away without killing him after that from a Plot point of view. LorneReams fucked around with this message at 18:58 on Feb 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 18:56
|
|
|
resurgam40 posted:not to mention some anti-environmentalism About a week before I went to see Kingsman I remember seeing a hand-wringing editorial in the Guardian that said Kingsman had a climate change activist as a villain, and was a deeply Conservative (and therefore bad) film. So when I actually saw the film I found it interesting that the veracity of climate change was completely sidestepped - Eggsy doesn't stumble on a hidden room where Valentine's been fabricating ice floe data or anything, and when his population-reducing plan is denounced it's with "and you decide who lives and dies?" not "climate change isn't real". When you look at what Valentine's plan actually does, as opposed to his rhetoric, it reads as a caricature of wealthy Westerners who think climate change doesn't require them to change their habits at all - we can keep the party going as long as India and China and all the developing nations remain in poverty (or, preferably, die off a bit). And as with Valentine's plan, the flaw is that the wealthy are the real problem, and depend on the poor far more than they'd like to admit. I don't think this is in any way intentional, as anything based on Millar's work is going to have utterly nutso politics, but it nicely reinforces the class war themes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
Valentine's plan as a critique of the climate change movement is undercut by the fact that the mass extinction level event that he tried to engineer would inevitably cause more damage to the environment than just keeping the status quo would. He's just a lunatic. That nobody got to question him on the specifics of what exactly happens afterwards suggests that we're not supposed to think too hard about it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
Random question: At what point do we stop using spoiler tags? I know it's only been out for 10 days or so but just in general is there a rule of thumb? Mars4523 posted:Valentine's plan as a critique of the climate change movement is undercut by the fact that the mass extinction level event that he tried to engineer would inevitably cause more damage to the environment than just keeping the status quo would. He's just a lunatic. In the comics the whole point is literally just "less people means we use less stuff = less global fever so we get to live". The point is gotten across better in the comic where the villain is literally just  embodied in a rich dude. He hears about the Gaia theory and just basically goes "Hey that's a great idea, I'll just pick and choose my favorite people and live the high life without all these losers to get in the way." In the comics it isn't even his idea initially the climatologist who came up with the Gaia theory states that we can only support like at mist 1 billion and that it should be held to less than 100 million to be safe. The villain just likes the idea because he get's to be the big head honcho and hang out with celebrities. That's the other big change. The villain doesn't kidnap world leaders, he just goes after his favorite movie stars and filmmakers. I assume his plan was to just make movies after the end of the world and nerd out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
Chocolate Teapot posted:I thought it was a very relevant scene in the narrative. It's a sort of teenage liberal fantasy played out, i.e. "why don't they just kill all the racists and homophobes etc.? Then everything would be alright!" train of thought, but ultimately all we end up with is just a pile of dead bodies of people, and no tangible solution to what makes people turn out so nasty in the first place. Curiously though, we're not shown much of the world after the upper echelons do get killed. I really think this is what the movie was going for too, that kind of feeling for that scene. In general it sort of plays with your expectations in regards to the film's politics. It's openly sympathetic to the working man, but presents a lot of "liberal" ideologies as motivations for the villain and a lot of villainous things, especially the Church scene, which is absolutely supposed to be seen as a Pretty Bad Thing To Do. It sort of has a moderate tone, taking the best aspects of each political group (the aesthetics and strict codes of conduct of the rich, the honesty and hard-working attitude of the poor, the stoic grace of conservatism and the madcap spontaneity of liberalism) and managing to marry them all together pretty well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
I enjoyed this film a lot, but really did think it was pretty dumb at parts and required quite the suspension of disbelief. That doesn't really bother me though - it's the kind of film that knows what it is and runs with it. One thing that did bother me a bit for some reason though was that I sort of doubt you'd find that many rich/influental people in the world willing to kill off most of the world's population to stop climate change. Also, I really couldn't shake the feeling that the Evil Plot echoes that of Deus Ex: Human Revolution, though they are thematically different. In Deus Ex: Human Revolution, you've got a rich billionaire philanthropist, Hugh Darrow (noble-prize winning inventor of modern cybernetic augmentation) who in fact was very concerned with climate change (and indeed was working to halt it with Panchea, a geoengineering facility where the game's final act takes place) and who, via a free, publicly-distributed 'biochip' update/patch, subsequently uses a worldwide satellite signal to drive augmented people into an insane killing frenzy - which the protagonist needs to stop. Soul Reaver fucked around with this message at 00:19 on Feb 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 23:52
|
|
|
I absolutely loved the movie and I am probably going to go see it again sooner than later. The church scene was a favorite of mine, especially the line Firth gives the woman who asks what his problem was. As soon as he started with "I am a catholic whore...," I was dying laughing in the theater, because that's exactly the sort of poo poo I tell evangelicals when they don't get the hint to leave me alone. Either way, that was just a fun movie to watch.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 03:56
|
|
|
This movie was awesome when I was 13 years old and like jokes about people who had lisps like what the gently caress why did he have a lisp for that one joke? Also the movie ends with the hero sodomizing a princess. Like what the gently caress? The action sequences were brilliant the actual story was loving terrible and the jokes were boring immature and terrible. Mathew Vaughns a legitimately good director so I enjoyed it but man it was like Awesome Awesome Awesome, complete poo poo , Awesome Awesome Awesome Awesome, Complete poo poo, Awesome Awesome, Complete poo poo. Through out the film.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 04:20
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:This movie was awesome when I was 13 years old and like jokes about people who had lisps like what the gently caress why did he have a lisp for that one joke? The lisp wasn't there for one joke, it was there to reinforce the idea that Valentine was like Eggy. An outsider who forced their way into the company of the aristocracy/rich. However unlike Eggy, Valentine thought he was part of the rich/aristocracy/powerful instead of an interloper tolerated despite the objections of the rest. The McDonalds and expensive wine scene was similar. Both additionally worked to support the idea that Valentine was a nerdy dork manchild. quote:Also the movie ends with the hero sodomizing a princess. Like what the gently caress? It was pretty clearly a joke on how James Bond always ends the movie loving the Bond Girl. And with Gazzelle and Roxy out of the area, the only person left other than the Princess was Iggy Azalea.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 14:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 04:27 |
|
|
Gyges posted:It was pretty clearly a joke on how James Bond always ends the movie loving the Bond Girl. And with Gazzelle and Roxy out of the area, the only person left other than the Princess was Iggy Azalea. Iggy would have been missing a head (unless I missed an obvious joke).
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 14:35
|
|