› ›

Kingsman: The Great Game (2019)

1…1011131516…35

Comments

  • SarkSark Guangdong, PRC
    Posts: 1,138
    thelivingroyale wrote: »
    Sark wrote: »
    Whether chavs exist isn't really the issue is it?

    I think you're in the minority thinking that Eggsy can carry a movie himself. Many of the critics and general public thought the film slowed greatly after
    the death of Colin Firths character.
    .

    Could you point out some of these reviews for me? Not saying you're wrong, it's just I'm curious because nothing I've read seems to indicate that.

    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/kingsman_the_secret_service/

    You can read a few of the reviews there.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Whether or not he is a layered character his accent and family are very chavesque, which is part of the overall character. I personally dislike this type of leading character...they belong in a 'kitchen sink' drama such as Eastenders.

    I like Layercake by the way though.....a slick well made british gangster film.

    Have you ever seen "Green Street Hooligans "http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0385002/combined ? Great movie. Certainly not kitchen-sink soap, but realistic drama. The recent hooliganism of Dutch football club Feyenoord in Rome actually proofs it. It's realistic enough, and for me it was a reason that Eggsy stood out. These people really do exist you know? It's not that they are only created on the writing tables of "Eastenders".

    Yes I've Green Street, which is a poor version of the far superior 'Football Factory' or 'ID'. I couldn't get over one of the lead actors (who is American) fake British Cockney accent (the guy who plays opposite Frodo).
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    edited March 2015 Posts: 5,767
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    I wanted the film to be good. But it wasn't. I wasn't upset that Harry Hard died, just the fact that he was the only decent character in the film. Not feeling the 'chav' hero!

    I find that not true. IMO Eggsy was quite a multi-layered character. He certainly has quite the background, amidst those London's East End hooligans. He grew up in a flawed family, and gets the chance to improve his live....to fully use his talents that he never used before.

    Sorry, with the character Eggsy, I think "Kingsman" really distinguishes itself from James Bond. Because it's a character you'll never see in a Bond film. Period. It's also quite a typical Matthew Vaughn-character, and reminds me about "Layer Cake".
    Excuse me, but where is there supposed to be any resemblance to a Bond film? The quip about recent Bond films being to serious wasn´t bad at all, but I´d prefer the most serious Bond film to this.
    The clothing may have been stylish, but that was about the only stylish thing. Story telling, camera work, music, nothing stylish there.
    I wasn´t expecting a Bond film, but after one viewing, I tend to agree to the mess part in @timmer´s review above.
    Having seen Layer Cake, Stardust, Kickass, and Kingsman, I can´t help but feel as if Vaughn´s films get worse rather than better. But maybe I just don´t catch the drift.

  • AlexanderWaverlyAlexanderWaverly
    edited March 2015 Posts: 2,115
    delfloria wrote: »
    Are there any fan sites for Kingsman?

    Out of curiosity, I did a quick check.

    There's Taron Egerton Online (not Kingsman per se)

    http://taron-egerton.com/

    A Facebook page:

    https://www.facebook.com/groups/kingsmanmoviefans/

  • delfloriadelfloria
    Posts: 1,859
    boldfinger wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    I wanted the film to be good. But it wasn't. I wasn't upset that Harry Hard died, just the fact that he was the only decent character in the film. Not feeling the 'chav' hero!

    I find that not true. IMO Eggsy was quite a multi-layered character. He certainly has quite the background, amidst those London's East End hooligans. He grew up in a flawed family, and gets the chance to improve his live....to fully use his talents that he never used before.

    Sorry, with the character Eggsy, I think "Kingsman" really distinguishes itself from James Bond. Because it's a character you'll never see in a Bond film. Period. It's also quite a typical Matthew Vaughn-character, and reminds me about "Layer Cake".
    Excuse me, but where is there supposed to be any resemblance to a Bond film? The quip about recent Bond films being to serious wasn´t bad at all, but I´d prefer the most serious Bond film to this.
    The clothing may have been stylish, but that was about the only stylish thing. Story telling, camera work, music, nothing stylish there.
    I wasn´t expecting a Bond film, but after one viewing, I tend to agree to the mess part in @timmer´s review above.
    Having seen Layer Cake, Stardust, Kickass, and Kingsman, I can´t help but feel as if Vaughn´s films get worse rather than better. But maybe I just don´t catch the drift.

    I don't understand why more people are not commenting that it is more like a Flint film than James Bond.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    Perhaps because not as many people know any Flint films ;-).
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Yeah Flint is poor too.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    boldfinger wrote: »
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    I wanted the film to be good. But it wasn't. I wasn't upset that Harry Hard died, just the fact that he was the only decent character in the film. Not feeling the 'chav' hero!

    I find that not true. IMO Eggsy was quite a multi-layered character. He certainly has quite the background, amidst those London's East End hooligans. He grew up in a flawed family, and gets the chance to improve his live....to fully use his talents that he never used before.

    Sorry, with the character Eggsy, I think "Kingsman" really distinguishes itself from James Bond. Because it's a character you'll never see in a Bond film. Period. It's also quite a typical Matthew Vaughn-character, and reminds me about "Layer Cake".
    Excuse me, but where is there supposed to be any resemblance to a Bond film? The quip about recent Bond films being to serious wasn´t bad at all, but I´d prefer the most serious Bond film to this.
    The clothing may have been stylish, but that was about the only stylish thing. Story telling, camera work, music, nothing stylish there.
    I wasn´t expecting a Bond film, but after one viewing, I tend to agree to the mess part in @timmer´s review above.
    Having seen Layer Cake, Stardust, Kickass, and Kingsman, I can´t help but feel as if Vaughn´s films get worse rather than better. But maybe I just don´t catch the drift.

    Totally Agee with Boldfinger.
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    Good news for "Kingsman"! Apparently, as I already expected, "Kingsman" is on its way to score big in China. Entgroup China is expecting a $100 Million box office result over there, pushing it easily towards $400 Million globally! Fox Pictures did some pretty damn smart marketing in Asia:

    http://english.entgroup.cn/views_detail.aspx?id=2982

    And make no mistake, 20th Century Fox now have "their own Bond". There will most certainly be a sequel to "Kingsman: The Secret Service". The figures so far, excluding figures from this weekend in the USA (March 28th & 29th) and the figures from its opening weekend in China:

    Domestic: $117,214,000 39.1%
    + Foreign: $182,913,440 60.9%
    = Worldwide: $300,127,440
  • dragonskydragonsky
    Posts: 2,491
    It passed 300m ? Great ! I am glad the movie is doing well..300m dollars is nice haul for the movie so far. Idk if we'll get part 2 but this movie works as a stand alone movie as well and I am glad to see it is doing well.
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    edited April 2015 Posts: 11,119
    dragonsky wrote: »
    It passed 300m ? Great ! I am glad the movie is doing well..300m dollars is nice haul for the movie so far. Idk if we'll get part 2 but this movie works as a stand alone movie as well and I am glad to see it is doing well.

    Updated 29.03.2015, with new South Korean overseas figures and USA weekend estimates from Friday, Saturday and Sunday included:

    Domestic: $119,424,000 36.4%
    + Foreign: $208,301,000 63.6%
    = Worldwide: $327,725,000
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Posts: 4,515
    Dutch release of the dvd and BD is 24 June 2015

    9200000039499866_1.jpg
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    edited April 2015 Posts: 11,119
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    dragonsky wrote: »
    It passed 300m ? Great ! I am glad the movie is doing well..300m dollars is nice haul for the movie so far. Idk if we'll get part 2 but this movie works as a stand alone movie as well and I am glad to see it is doing well.

    Updated 29.04.2015, with the impressive figures from China included "Kingsman" now passed the $400 Million globally:

    Domestic: $126,525,869 31.6%
    + Foreign: $274,478,257 68.4% ($77 Million in China)
    = Worldwide: $401,004,126
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    And it's official now. A 2nd Kingsman-film will be made. Fox makes their own spy-franchise out of this one :-):
    http://www.slashfilm.com/kingsman-sequel/

  • dragonskydragonsky
    Posts: 2,491
    Cool. I would have been fine if they made the movie a one-off feauture, but this is cool news.

    I hope they can still make entertaining movie with new director (as the first rumours say) and hopefully new actors that can be good addition to the sequel.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    And it's official now. A 2nd Kingsman-film will be made. Fox makes their own spy-franchise out of this one :-):
    http://www.slashfilm.com/kingsman-sequel/

    They'll be lucky if they get a trilogy out of it.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    And it's official now. A 2nd Kingsman-film will be made. Fox makes their own spy-franchise out of this one :-):
    http://www.slashfilm.com/kingsman-sequel/

    Oh s***. Avoid.
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    Posts: 7,653
    Gustav_Graves wrote: »
    And it's official now. A 2nd Kingsman-film will be made. Fox makes their own spy-franchise out of this one :-):
    http://www.slashfilm.com/kingsman-sequel/

    Good fro them and good for the genre, I prefer this easily over the Twilights, or any recent young adult movies that share and apocalyptic world.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited April 2015 Posts: 23,883
    It's interesting to note that the punk's (Eggsy) name is not on the blu ray cover and he is sharing billings with the thespians.

    I'd be more enthused about this development if they dumped him and focused on one of the veteran spies in the Kingsman clan for installment 2.
    Killing the brilliant Jack Davenport's character, along with Firth's was a mistake imho.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    Idk about that, Firth was badass don't get me wrong but I think it's refreshing to have a character like Eggsy taking the lead in a blockbuster action film.

    I think a sequel is good news, really looking forward to it but a franchise? I don't think that'll work. Kingsman was about taking Bond tropes and pushing them to the extreme, one of the reasons it was so fun to watch was seeing how far they'd go with it. After a while, the shock value would wear off and it wouldn't be as fun or inventive.

    A couple more films would be great sure but I don't think it'll be a long running franchise and I don't think it'd work as one, it borrows too much from other franchises (like Bond) and the appeal would wear off after a few more films.

    I say make it a trilogy.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's interesting to note that the punk's (Eggsy) name is not on the blu ray cover and he is sharing billings with the thespians.

    I'd be more enthused about this development if they dumped him and focused on one of the veteran spies in the Kingsman clan for installment 2.
    Killing the brilliant Jack Davenport's character, along with Firth's was a mistake imho.

    I agree.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Me too. ;) still a second film should be fun.
  • timmertimmer
    Posts: 4,622
    Bad news (sequel).
    I like the genre but I hated this film.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    What I found interesting is how the ratings for the film dropped once it was released in the US. I seem to recall it being at 100% on rotten tomatoes when it was first out in the UK. Perhaps many are a bit more sensitive on the other side of the pond (saw lots of complaints about the violence, which didn't make sense to me), or maybe the whole film was kinda unrelatable to people in other countries (who think of England as all Sherlock and James Bond esque) because of the character of Eggsy (and maybe struggled ot understand his accent)? Not trying to provoke an argument, and yes before some smart arse comments I'm well aware there are plenty of Brits who didn't like it too, it's just something I noticed.
    timmer wrote: »
    Bad news (sequel).

    Never understood this mentality. You might not have liked this film, but lots of others did. So how is a sequel a bad thing? It's something for fans of the first one to look forward to and nobody is forcing you to go and see it. If you're not a fan it doesn't affect you.
  • timmertimmer
    edited June 2015 Posts: 4,622
    What is so friggin tough to understand?
    If I don't like a film, why the hell would I want to see a sequel made? ie studio resources invested in something I don't want rather than something I do want.
    Not complicated.

    This was one dog's breakfast of a film.
    A godawful mess. Definitely the worst film cinema experience I've endured in quite some time.
    I would be remiss to not be appalled at the thought of a sequel. Shudder.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    I thought the film was average. It felt like a remake of Captain America: The First Avenger. Kingsman didn't really need a sequel. Eggsy was a terrible protagonist. I'd rather they make a movie about Harry Hart. Shame he was killed off. He was the best part.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2015 Posts: 23,883
    thelivingroyale wrote: »
    What I found interesting is how the ratings for the film dropped once it was released in the US. I seem to recall it being at 100% on rotten tomatoes when it was first out in the UK. Perhaps many are a bit more sensitive on the other side of the pond (saw lots of complaints about the violence, which didn't make sense to me), or maybe the whole film was kinda unrelatable to people in other countries (who think of England as all Sherlock and James Bond esque) because of the character of Eggsy (and maybe struggled ot understand his accent)? Not trying to provoke an argument, and yes before some smart arse comments I'm well aware there are plenty of Brits who didn't like it too, it's just something I noticed.

    You may have a point @thelivingroyale.

    What follows is speculation on my part:

    I think a lot of the North American public do in fact view Brits as the classy stiff upper lip type...'keep calm and carry on' and what not...... So when the individuals who epitomized these attributes in Kingsman (Davenports' Lancelot, Firth's Hart, Caine's Arthur) were killed off one by one in favour of punk Egerton's Eggsy, it must have come as quite a jolt.

    English spies in particular (as captured best by Bond) are meant to be a 'polished', educated, cultured & upper crust lot. It's not meant to be so easy to become one.

    Eggsy may have just smacked of a wannabe, even after his training, and unbecoming of the Kingsman title. He may have come across to many as more from the "Ali G" school of Brits rather than what some were expecting.

    His poor Londoner background/shtick may have been lost on many this side of the pond.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    I'm liking this year so far because there seems to be a rise in inventive, fun, violent (R rated) action movies. Mad Max, Kingsman, etc. Makes a nice change from the big bland blockbuster franchises.

    @timmer I believe Kingsman, like Kick Ass, was independently financed by Vaughn's production company (which is why they were able to get away with so much) and then sold on to Fox who only handled the distribution of the film rather than the making of it, so it didn't actually take up any studio resources.

    What I don't understand is the mindset of detesting something being made when you can simply ignore it. I don't like superhero films. I'm sick of them. But I wouldn't say I don't want them made because I realize they have a large fanbase that enjoy them and the films still being released doesn't affect me, I don't have to go and see them.
    Murdock wrote: »
    I thought the film was average. It felt like a remake of Captain America: The First Avenger. Eggsy was a terrible protagonist. I'd rather they make a movie about Harry Hart. Shame he was killed off. He was the best part.

    Harry Hart was a James Bond clone, badass and brilliantly played by Colin Firth, but essentially just a plot device. Eggsy was the one who was a multi layered relateable character with a backstory, who developed over the course of the film. I don't see how he was terrible.

    How is it similar to Captain America? I'd take Kingsman, which while not a brilliant film, was at least fun and inventive and something different, over any of the bland, cookie cutter, CGI filled assembly line produced cash cow Marvel movies any day. I'd much rather watch a badass secret agent kill an entire church full of mind controlled racist homophobic bigots in an exciting, violent, real fight scene that is made up of only a handful of long, stunning shots than watch The Avengers "fight" an army of CGI aliens using CGI weapons and powers (all while conversing entirely in quips just to remove the slightest possible hint of tension or danger).

    I haven't seen half the Marvel movies, including Avengers 2, and I doubt I ever will. Iron Man was fun, but they've taken that formula and run into the ground imo.

    @bondjames You're American? Huh. Not sure why but I always assumed you were British :P
  • timmertimmer
    edited June 2015 Posts: 4,622
    @livingroyale I don't care where the money came from. You miss the point. Operative word is not "studio" but rather resources.
    Again, this is not complicated. I know you just didn't fall off the back of the turnip truck so I can't believe you truly can't understand why someone might prefer that resources (any resources from anywhere) might not be squandered on a sequel to a bad film, IMOH of course. If you like it though. Go nuts.
    But truly it should not be a mystery to you, or even cause for concern, that some might prefer that sequels not be made for films that they don't like or relate to.
    Need we summon the Thought Police? Such a squad might actually exist in Kingsman world It's that whacked.
    Real world though is free world, at least when it comes to movie-sequel making.
    I don't want to see any more Twilight sequels made either. Horrors!
    In fact there are lots of films, I would prefer that sequels hadnt' been made for. Double horrors!!
    In that spirit,may the impending Kingsman sequel please die on the drawing board, or bomb at the boxoffice, so that cinemagoers might be spared, from even being tempted by such bilious fare.
    I can't in good conscience wish such fare be foisted even as an option, on my fellow humanity. Which is completely different from saying, I would advocate for banning such bad films, which of course I wouldn't.

    Sorry for the lecture, but not wanting sequels to be made for films one doesn't like, shouldn't be a real tough concept to grasp.
    Pretty basic I think.


    Really looking forward though, to the next Captain American sequel. Cap's got to get to the bottom of this Bucky Barnes thing!

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    @thelivingroyale, I grew up in the UK. GCSE's, A levels and university all done there and then headed off to Canada and the US for further schooling/work. I sort of straddle both places these days. So I see both perspectives, and like to think I bring both perspectives too :)
Sign In or Register to comment.