ARGYLLE - Matthew Vaughn/Henry Cavill spy movie series

124

Comments

  • Posts: 17,756
    Watched Argylle tonight, after finding out it's now available on Apple TV+.

    This was a rather…strange watch. The only thought that stuck with me throughout, was a feeling that it was …intentionally bad?

    You know those movies that are so bad that they are entertaining to watch? Like you cannot believe that they actually made this, and you are sitting there, enjoying it for that reason alone? Argylle felt like film that intentionally aims for that same vibe, only with a big budget and an ensemble cast.

    I simply couldn't place what they were trying to do with this film. It way too long for the story it tells, there are elements here that would belong in a full on spy spoof, but it never feels like one – and as a spy caper it falls flat. I'm really just left thinking, why did they make this? Who signed off on this thing?

    It's not the worst movie experience I've had though, I'll give it that. And should there ever be a sequel, prequel or another film in the "Argylle universe", I'll happily watch it out of pure curiosity. But this was certainly not a good film.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 4 Posts: 16,383
    I made it through it but yeah, not great. Similar thoughts to you really i.e. what were they aiming for?
    I watched The Beekeeper, Statham's latest. It's utter trash, but it's enjoyable and knows what it wants to be, and is a lot better than this.

    Also, shoot something not in a studio. There's even a bit where two characters have to jump off a not-very-tall building next to the Thames, but they do it entirely with CGI. Why not get some actual stunt performers to do it? It's not the most challenging stunt ever on film and would have looked so much more impressive done for real
    Oh and Lorne Balfe is my next choice for Bond composer based on his score here (minus Vaughan’s unusually off song choices) and his earlier work on Gemini Man.

    I thought it was Henry Jackman doing it, as he seems to be very much channelling Jackman's Kingsman scores.
  • Posts: 17,756
    mtm wrote: »
    I made it through it but yeah, not great. Similar thoughts to you really i.e. what were they aiming for?
    Also, shoot something not in a studio. There's even a bit where two characters have to jump off a not-very-tall building next to the Thames, but they do it entirely with CGI. Why not get some actual stunt performers to do it? It's not the most challenging stunt ever on film and would have looked so much more impressive done for real

    Yes, exactly! I have so many question marks with so many aspects of this film (the CGI being one of them), that I struggled to even write down my thought above. I was just completely puzzled about Argylle, from start to finish.

    I'm almost tempted to read the tie-in novel just to see if Argylle works better as a book.
  • Posts: 1,986
    I'm not sure I lasted 15 minutes. I didn't care enough to discover if it got better. I saw enough to convince me I don't want HC as Bond.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,383
    Yes there’s a bit towards the beginning where he’s supposed to be romancing a lady on a balcony and gets a Bond-style cheesy quip to deliver, and he kills it stone dead.
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,135
    I was in a sales meeting at work last week, and three of the four women in it mentioned how hot Henry Cavill is.
    Knowing I'm a Bond fan, they added that he'd be a great James Bond.
    I had to disagree stating that he's as wooden as the boardroom table.
    Sadly, this is the consensus of a selection of the general audience who see actors like Cavill as a potential Bond, based on his looks and physique.

    I didn't mind Argyle for a couple of hours of entertainment. I thought Bryce Dallas Howard and Sam Rockwell did well with what they had to work with.
    I know exactly what @Torgeirtrap is saying about the film being intentionally bad.
    The opening minutes of the film are very average cgi, and I was left wondering if this is a intentional. Like a nod to B-grade actioners of old.
  • edited May 5 Posts: 2,266
    I don’t necessarily think Cavill is a bad actor; if anything he’s serviceable and I think he made for a damn fine Superman given the material he had to work with. The prospect of him as Bond however is just such a boring and played out idea now; as old as Idris Elba, Tom Hardy, and Tom Hiddleston being named as candidates.

    I hope Henry finds his own niche/role that brings him great success (he was kind of screwed out of being Superman after announcing he was coming back), and while I could think of several less ideal choices than Cavill for Bond, I’d much rather someone unique/interesting comes along.
  • Posts: 17,756
    Benny wrote: »
    I was in a sales meeting at work last week, and three of the four women in it mentioned how hot Henry Cavill is.
    Knowing I'm a Bond fan, they added that he'd be a great James Bond.
    I had to disagree stating that he's as wooden as the boardroom table.
    Sadly, this is the consensus of a selection of the general audience who see actors like Cavill as a potential Bond, based on his looks and physique.

    I didn't mind Argyle for a couple of hours of entertainment. I thought Bryce Dallas Howard and Sam Rockwell did well with what they had to work with.
    I know exactly what @Torgeirtrap is saying about the film being intentionally bad.
    The opening minutes of the film are very average cgi, and I was left wondering if this is a intentional. Like a nod to B-grade actioners of old.

    Re. the CGI again, in the scene where Argylle chases Legrange, I thought they were going for a CGI variant of what they did in the OSS:117 films with Jean Dujardin, where details like using (bad) rear screen projection behind a moving car was part of the style they were going for. In the OSS:117 films they succeed because it's so obviously intentional. With Argylle I was left thinking (at many times throughout): was this or was this not intentionally bad CGI?



    As for Cavill, the reasons why he shouldn't be Bond is covered more than well enough on several threads in this forum, and I don't think this film will change anyone's opinion of him – as Bond or an actor. That being said, this was not a film that gave him the chance to give a better impression. Like you mention above though, @Benny, Bryce Dallas Howard and Sam Rockwell did well with what they had to work with.
  • Posts: 1,340

    Benny wrote: »
    I was in a sales meeting at work last week, and three of the four women in it mentioned how hot Henry Cavill is.
    Knowing I'm a Bond fan, they added that he'd be a great James Bond.
    I had to disagree stating that he's as wooden as the boardroom table.
    Sadly, this is the consensus of a selection of the general audience who see actors like Cavill as a potential Bond, based on his looks and physique.

    I didn't mind Argyle for a couple of hours of entertainment. I thought Bryce Dallas Howard and Sam Rockwell did well with what they had to work with.
    I know exactly what @Torgeirtrap is saying about the film being intentionally bad.
    The opening minutes of the film are very average cgi, and I was left wondering if this is a intentional. Like a nod to B-grade actioners of old.

    Re. the CGI again, in the scene where Argylle chases Legrange, I thought they were going for a CGI variant of what they did in the OSS:117 films with Jean Dujardin, where details like using (bad) rear screen projection behind a moving car was part of the style they were going for. In the OSS:117 films they succeed because it's so obviously intentional. With Argylle I was left thinking (at many times throughout): was this or was this not intentionally bad CGI?



    As for Cavill, the reasons why he shouldn't be Bond is covered more than well enough on several threads in this forum, and I don't think this film will change anyone's opinion of him – as Bond or an actor. That being said, this was not a film that gave him the chance to give a better impression. Like you mention above though, @Benny, Bryce Dallas Howard and Sam Rockwell did well with what they had to work with.

    There's a lot of bad CGI lately. Could it be because of Covid?
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited May 5 Posts: 4,516
    Total Dutch boxoffice is $1,480,059 and that's more then X-First Class did, whyle that movie later with Bluray/DVD get more positive comments. No Bluray/DVD/4K anouchment yet from Universal whyle already confirm that for monkey/stunt guy movie.

    Iam curious how much time of delete and alternate/extended scenes there are and it be possible to at two versions of the movie include shorter Directers Cut.

    A bit of stunts and white filter look in the above scene of example in Greece remember me a bit to The Hitman's Bodyguard scenes playing in Den Haag (The Netherlands) who i rewatched last week. Looks better whyle it is done by Dutch stunt crew.



    Problem be is that Argylle is filmed digital whyle that movie is filmed on film i think. Disapointed look from studio that let play two Mamma Mia movies in Greece. Also there are studio behind Johny English movies.
  • Posts: 1,986
    Cavill could probably help himself by not auditioning for Bond in other spy/action roles. Rather, do some meaty character roles that illustrate his range. Of the roles I've seen him play, I liked his work in The Tudors best.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,383
    M_Balje wrote: »
    Total Dutch boxoffice is $1,480,059 and that's more then X-First Class did, whyle that movie later with Bluray/DVD get more positive comments. No Bluray/DVD/4K anouchment yet from Universal whyle already confirm that for monkey/stunt guy movie.

    Iam curious how much time of delete and alternate/extended scenes there are and it be possible to at two versions of the movie include shorter Directers Cut.

    A bit of stunts and white filter look in the above scene of example in Greece remember me a bit to The Hitman's Bodyguard scenes playing in Den Haag (The Netherlands) who i rewatched last week. Looks better whyle it is done by Dutch stunt crew.



    Problem be is that Argylle is filmed digital whyle that movie is filmed on film i think. Disapointed look from studio that let play two Mamma Mia movies in Greece. Also there are studio behind Johny English movies.

    I like that Hitman's Bodyguard opens in the same location used for Skyfall's Shanghai skyscraper.
  • Posts: 348
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Cavill could probably help himself by not auditioning for Bond in other spy/action roles. Rather, do some meaty character roles that illustrate his range. Of the roles I've seen him play, I liked his work in The Tudors best.

    If he had any interest in acting he would probably take different roles.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    I've still not seen a film this year that was as horrible as this one. I'm confident in considering one of the worst films of the century so far. Awful, rote trash.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited May 6 Posts: 8,395
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    I've still not seen a film this year that was as horrible as this one. I'm confident in considering one of the worst films of the century so far. Awful, rote trash.

    Now you've made your thoughts on Bond 25 clear, what did you make of Argylle? ;)
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    I've still not seen a film this year that was as horrible as this one. I'm confident in considering one of the worst films of the century so far. Awful, rote trash.

    Now you've made your thoughts on Bond 25 clear, what did you make of Argylle? ;)

    Haha, hey now, I actually dug that one! Not a Top 10 installment for me but it was good enough.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 2,016
    As soon as I saw Cavill's haircut, I knew it was time to worry....and I'm not usually critical towards Cavill. But that haircut....wow!
  • Posts: 17,756
    Benny wrote: »
    I was in a sales meeting at work last week, and three of the four women in it mentioned how hot Henry Cavill is.
    Knowing I'm a Bond fan, they added that he'd be a great James Bond.
    I had to disagree stating that he's as wooden as the boardroom table.
    Sadly, this is the consensus of a selection of the general audience who see actors like Cavill as a potential Bond, based on his looks and physique.

    I didn't mind Argyle for a couple of hours of entertainment. I thought Bryce Dallas Howard and Sam Rockwell did well with what they had to work with.
    I know exactly what @Torgeirtrap is saying about the film being intentionally bad.
    The opening minutes of the film are very average cgi, and I was left wondering if this is a intentional. Like a nod to B-grade actioners of old.

    Re. the CGI again, in the scene where Argylle chases Legrange, I thought they were going for a CGI variant of what they did in the OSS:117 films with Jean Dujardin, where details like using (bad) rear screen projection behind a moving car was part of the style they were going for. In the OSS:117 films they succeed because it's so obviously intentional. With Argylle I was left thinking (at many times throughout): was this or was this not intentionally bad CGI?



    As for Cavill, the reasons why he shouldn't be Bond is covered more than well enough on several threads in this forum, and I don't think this film will change anyone's opinion of him – as Bond or an actor. That being said, this was not a film that gave him the chance to give a better impression. Like you mention above though, @Benny, Bryce Dallas Howard and Sam Rockwell did well with what they had to work with.

    There's a lot of bad CGI lately. Could it be because of Covid?

    I imagine there's several reasons, but the impact Covid had on the industry has probably forced more than a few productions to cut costs in several departments – special effects being one of them. Argylle is a $200 million production though…
  • edited May 8 Posts: 346
    This car chase in Argylle looked cartoonish in an obvious cgi way. I guess it's the cost of filming a jeep racing through narrow Greece streets and the potential risk of damage to property, insurance claims, legal disputes vs doing it all with cgi compositing and zero risk of damage to property, insurance claims and legal disputes. With cgi you can destroy any building and no real life consequences but the downside is it tends to look fake.

    The chase is meant to show a lot of property damage and you can't do that for real unless you recreate Greece streets on a set. As all Bond fans know...
    Was GoldenEye filmed in St. Petersburg?
    Parts of the tank chase were filmed at the backlot of Leavesden, parts on location in St. Petersburg.

    One of the most memorable moments in Goldeneye. I don't think the chase had any miniature work? All real size buildings and props.

    Another example: 1989 Batman created Gotham streets at Pinewood. Looked impressive.


  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 8 Posts: 16,383
    bondywondy wrote: »

    The deleted Tangier bike scene in The Living Daylights was all real and there was no intention to destroy property.

    Well, it was shot on a (slightly unconvincing) set in a studio!
  • edited May 8 Posts: 346
    Well the scene with Bond/Dalton appearing on the roof was real. Some of that was filmed on location. But the rest was on a set? I never knew that.

    The deleted scene isn't that great anyway. Had the police got in their cars and chased Bond and the rider (Eddie Kidd), it could have had potential.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 8 Posts: 16,383
    Actually sorry, I'm misremembering - it's just the shots of the banner (the guys setting it up, Tim swinging on it) which look to be on a set: you're right that the bike stunt is on location.

    I know what you mean about it not being great. Perhaps with music it would feel a bit more energetic, but the carpet is so slow and leisurely I'm not sure it would ever work.
  • JustJamesJustJames London
    Posts: 216
    mtm wrote: »
    Yes there’s a bit towards the beginning where he’s supposed to be romancing a lady on a balcony and gets a Bond-style cheesy quip to deliver, and he kills it stone dead.
    As soon as I saw Cavill's haircut, I knew it was time to worry....and I'm not usually critical towards Cavill. But that haircut....wow!

    These are meant to be bad. I haven’t finished watching the film yet, only thirty minutes in, but it’s quite clear that Cavill/Argylle is meant to be bad in the text-within-a-text, particularly in scenes where the writer can’t make her mind up. The haircut is a prime example — it’s a caricature that helps match the action figures at the signing.
    It’s even a ‘oh Noe’s they have a list of our people!/The baddies are in control!’ Story. A staple of pulp spy fiction — see that Gal Godot thingy and Citadel, not to mention Skyfall and Spectre for examples.
    The main narrative is basically a Bourne Identity meta-text too.
    It’s a pastiche — basing how good Cavill would be as Bond on this, would be like judging Moore on that skit he did for TV. (Ok… maybe not the best example…)
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited May 8 Posts: 3,152
    'Serviceable' - yeh, I'd say that's a pretty apt word for Cavill, tbh. Not terrible, not great, but...serviceable. We want more than a serviceable Bond for the next decade, though, don't we?
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,383
    JustJames wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Yes there’s a bit towards the beginning where he’s supposed to be romancing a lady on a balcony and gets a Bond-style cheesy quip to deliver, and he kills it stone dead.
    As soon as I saw Cavill's haircut, I knew it was time to worry....and I'm not usually critical towards Cavill. But that haircut....wow!

    These are meant to be bad. I haven’t finished watching the film yet, only thirty minutes in, but it’s quite clear that Cavill/Argylle is meant to be bad in the text-within-a-text, particularly in scenes where the writer can’t make her mind up. The haircut is a prime example — it’s a caricature that helps match the action figures at the signing.
    It’s even a ‘oh Noe’s they have a list of our people!/The baddies are in control!’ Story. A staple of pulp spy fiction — see that Gal Godot thingy and Citadel, not to mention Skyfall and Spectre for examples.

    I'm not quite sure that works- later we see 'the real Argylle' and sidekick sat in the 'real world' in a flashback at exactly the same cafe table as Cavill and Cena in the opening scene, implying that the opening of the film is basically a version of what 'really' happened.
    I'm also not sure that Cavill is supposed to be acting badly; I get that she's struggling to write it, but I don't think delivering the lines flatly is intentional (if it were then they certainly hired the right person in Dua Lipa! :D )
    JustJames wrote: »
    It’s a pastiche — basing how good Cavill would be as Bond on this, would be like judging Moore on that skit he did for TV. (Ok… maybe not the best example…)

    Heh, yes! Roger is as good as always in that! :)
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited June 4 Posts: 8,183
    Matthew Vaughn sounds like he thinks he made THE SPY WHO LOVED ME but actually made DIE ANOTHER DAY.

    https://variety.com/2024/film/news/matthew-vaughn-critics-hating-argylle-bad-reviews-1236023520/
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,179
    I watched Argylle a few days ago. I'm not sure what went wrong there, seeing who was involved in the making of the film, but this was an awkward experience.
    @Creasy47, surely it wasn't the worst film of the century, though. Just check out Steven Seagal's resume. 😎
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    Love when directors can't handle the poor reception of their garbage films. Out of everything else I'm likely to personally watch this year, I can't see Argylle being "topped" as the worst. There are surely worse products out there but nothing I've seen so far has come close (people say Madame Web wins that award but I doubt I'll ever watch it).
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    I like how Vaughn tries to frame it as critics being “offended”, as if it’s their issue and he did nothing wrong. Look man, people with the best intentions sometimes make bad movies. I’m sure nobody thought DIE ANOTHER DAY was bad when making it.

    At the time this movie came out I revisited LAYER CAKE, a movie I hadn’t seen in over a decade. I remember liking the movie a lot back then, so much that I thought he should direct a Bond film with Craig. Rewatching it, it dawned on me that part of what made it good was that Vaughn was working under a much lower budget and therefore was not giving into his bad instincts that later movies would grant him. Hollywood should just stop giving him these $100m projects and do something more on the scale of LAYER CAKE.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,179
    I like how Vaughn tries to frame it as critics being “offended”, as if it’s their issue and he did nothing wrong. Look man, people with the best intentions sometimes make bad movies. I’m sure nobody thought DIE ANOTHER DAY was bad when making it.

    At the time this movie came out I revisited LAYER CAKE, a movie I hadn’t seen in over a decade. I remember liking the movie a lot back then, so much that I thought he should direct a Bond film with Craig. Rewatching it, it dawned on me that part of what made it good was that Vaughn was working under a much lower budget and therefore was not giving into his bad instincts that later movies would grant him. Hollywood should just stop giving him these $100m projects and do something more on the scale of LAYER CAKE.

    He made The Kingsmen, which is a superb film IMO. And after that one, I completely agree with you, @MakeshiftPython .
Sign In or Register to comment.