bitbydeath
Gold Member
Looks good, I’ve always seen this series as the James Bond successor or what James Bond should have been.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The King's Man | Official Red Band Trailer | 20th Century Studios
- Thread starter bitbydeath
- Start date
Davey Cakes
Member
Ralph Fiennes kicking ass? Sign me up.
That said, I should probably watch the other Kingsman movies...
That said, I should probably watch the other Kingsman movies...
bitbydeath
Gold Member
You should.
It has the classic James Bond, Connery era formula. IMO
-British Secret Service /British humour
-Beautiful women
-Gadgets
-Over the top villains
-Tons of action
RJMacready73
Banned
Say what!? i know its an opinion but by fuck is it completely and utterly wrong. Kingsman is what bond would be like set in the marvel universe ffs
AV
We ain't outta here in ten minutes, we won't need no rocket to fly through space
You should watch the first.
Alx
Member
Well it's always hard to beat the "origins" story : rookie training, discovering the lore, the characters... It might help with the prequel actually, but sequels always have a hard time living up to expectations.
Love Ralph Fiennes (he'll have another go at impersonating John Steed at least
), and Gemma Arterton also looks gorgeous in that trailer.
Last edited:
bitbydeath
Gold Member
Kingsman is old school Bond, cool if you like the new Bond movies but I don’t.
I must've missed the old school Bond films where they casually talk of anal sex.
bitbydeath
Gold Member
Maybe not anal, but Bond had a threesome in From Russia with Love.
jufonuk
not tag worthy
This is gonna be good....
loved the Kingsmen films this looks just as good.
This and Mission Impossible are the better Bond series' yeah I said it.
why?
because they can stick to the basic undercover spy idea, but then they can go off in crazy directions and go OTT with certain areas of the Genre as well as subvert them in places.
thank you that is all, there will be no questions!!!
good day to you all.
I said GOOD DAY!!
loved the Kingsmen films this looks just as good.
This and Mission Impossible are the better Bond series' yeah I said it.
why?
because they can stick to the basic undercover spy idea, but then they can go off in crazy directions and go OTT with certain areas of the Genre as well as subvert them in places.
thank you that is all, there will be no questions!!!
good day to you all.
I said GOOD DAY!!
Last edited:
strange headache
Banned
I really liked the first two movies, unfortunately I'm really not too keen on prequels. Fiennes is a good actor, but I've grown attached to seeing Taron Egerton as Eggsy so that is another disappointment.
I'll give it a watch although I'm not really feeling this one.
I'll give it a watch although I'm not really feeling this one.
Don't get me wrong, I know the Connery/Moore Bond films are full of innuendos, but nothing quite so bold as those in the Kingsman films. They seemed unnecessary and only there to reach out to the 'gross-out comedy' market.
bitbydeath
Gold Member
True, but I think it’s better than going in the opposite direction.
Raven117
Member
Kingsmen is great.
First one is absolutely great. Second one is just okay (can't believe I'm saying this, but it needed more Chanting Tatum with Eggsy).
This one definitely looks to be better than the second.
Its not REALLY Bond...its more of hyped up version of Bond with uber-violence, sex, tech gadgets, and spies.
First one is absolutely great. Second one is just okay (can't believe I'm saying this, but it needed more Chanting Tatum with Eggsy).
This one definitely looks to be better than the second.
Its not REALLY Bond...its more of hyped up version of Bond with uber-violence, sex, tech gadgets, and spies.
Fbh
Member
Looks great.
These movies are great at embracing their over the top style and nature. It's one of the few franchises where the obviously fake digital effects sort of enhance the experience.
The first one is definitely worth watching.
The second one has a few good moments but was rather disappointing, which was a shame as the main concept was fun.
These movies are great at embracing their over the top style and nature. It's one of the few franchises where the obviously fake digital effects sort of enhance the experience.
The first one is definitely worth watching.
The second one has a few good moments but was rather disappointing, which was a shame as the main concept was fun.
Last edited:
Diatribe1974
Member
Watched the first two movies yesterday after telling self I'd watch them forever. Really enjoyed the first one, second one was okay, but the third one looks to be great.
strange headache
Banned
Man, I loved the Kingsman movies for scenes like this:
Over the top action mixed with strong work ethics and moral principles of being as upright and excellent as possible.
The King's Man however is a prequel that nobody asked for, an atrocious movie that contains almost nothing that made the other two movies so great. The "shocking plot twist" makes no sense, is boring as f*ck and clashed with the general tone of the film. The main antagonist is lame and the whole thing really makes no sense anymore.
The best part of the movie is Rasputin, Rhys Ifans seemed to have a blast with his character and it shows. The rest of the movie is utterly forgettable though and Fiennes is utter and completely miscast. The introduction of various historical figures is also completely pointless. They had such a good thing going with the other two movies, it is beyond me why they couldn't keep building on this instead of going for a crappy prequel.
Over the top action mixed with strong work ethics and moral principles of being as upright and excellent as possible.
The King's Man however is a prequel that nobody asked for, an atrocious movie that contains almost nothing that made the other two movies so great. The "shocking plot twist" makes no sense, is boring as f*ck and clashed with the general tone of the film. The main antagonist is lame and the whole thing really makes no sense anymore.
The best part of the movie is Rasputin, Rhys Ifans seemed to have a blast with his character and it shows. The rest of the movie is utterly forgettable though and Fiennes is utter and completely miscast. The introduction of various historical figures is also completely pointless. They had such a good thing going with the other two movies, it is beyond me why they couldn't keep building on this instead of going for a crappy prequel.
Last edited:
chromhound
Member
No lies detected
Bitmap Frogs
Mr. Community
Watched recently, didn’t quite like it tbh…
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
I hate to say it but I kind of agree. I wanted to like the movie and WW1 and Victoria's grandkids are my favorite history subject, but this felt so lame. Even the Ferninand assassination was lame, and I pretty much went to see the movie for that.
At least Rasputin delivered, but it all felt rushed and boring.
The WW1 trench sequence and the Rasputin fight were the highlight of the movie. The rest was utterly forgettable.
Pejo
Gold Member
I watched this a few weeks ago, it was still a really fun ride, but in my opinion the highlight was Rasputin. Up until that moment, it felt like a Kingsman movie, but slower and more political (like actual politics, not social politics). The whole time spent in Russia was great, the fight with Rasputin was 10/10, and then the movie just kinda came to a halt until the very end.
I get what they were going for, but it wasn't even as good as the sequel, much less the original. Still, if you are into the fun fight scenes (albeit on the shorter side) the Rasputin fight is worth YouTubing if you don't even want to see the rest of the movie.
I get what they were going for, but it wasn't even as good as the sequel, much less the original. Still, if you are into the fun fight scenes (albeit on the shorter side) the Rasputin fight is worth YouTubing if you don't even want to see the rest of the movie.
Alx
Member
I enjoyed it, but not for the same reasons I like (love) the first two episodes. It's less crazy or parodic, but on the other hand tries something different with a strong attachment to history (turns out almost everything that appears in the film either happened or was said to have happened). In a way it feels like a "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen" spin on the Kingsman formula (thinking of the LoEG comics, not the Connery movie). As in twisting familiar stories by introducing a "superhero mythos" in them.
Loved the Rasputin fight that is the only part that looks like the other Kingsmen. Also Gemma Arterton rules.
Loved the Rasputin fight that is the only part that looks like the other Kingsmen. Also Gemma Arterton rules.
Rockondevil
Member
Was the weakest of the 3, but I still enjoyed it. Rasputin/Ifans was amazing and i wish he got more time.
I'd have preferred another sequel, but it is what it is.
I'd have preferred another sequel, but it is what it is.
SirKicksalot
Member
I wish I could personally strangle every critic complaining about inconsistent tone. What, the movie is unpredictable so now you're upset you can't outsmart it? Fuck off.
It's 4 AM and I need a Bakewell tart
It's 4 AM and I need a Bakewell tart
The ninja farmer
Member
Enjoyed this. Liked the historical references and the slower, less played for laughs pace. Even felt it really went for more emotional moments, that the other 2 movies
Thought Rasputin, all the fencing and Gemma a were the real highlights
The film didn’t really need any twists, but I can see how it became the motivation that was quickly referenced in the first film
Well worth the effort and totally different pace and tonally to the other 2 (although some beats are the same, lots of little links as well)
And the ref to the ‘brogues & Oxford’ line from the first movie. Well played and made me laugh
)
Thought Rasputin, all the fencing and Gemma a were the real highlights
The film didn’t really need any twists, but I can see how it became the motivation that was quickly referenced in the first film
Well worth the effort and totally different pace and tonally to the other 2 (although some beats are the same, lots of little links as well)
And the ref to the ‘brogues & Oxford’ line from the first movie. Well played and made me laugh
)
Last edited:
Weakest of the three. Lacked focus and should’ve narrowed to more Rasputin instead of rushing through that plot in favor of the vast conspiracy, which didn’t have any other strong characterization. I like Fiennes but he wasn’t utilized well here. Gemma Arterton and Djimon Hounsou were good though.
Moments of inspiration in the cinematography with the first person swordsmanship and parachuting, but never fully committed to doing something different.
Moments of inspiration in the cinematography with the first person swordsmanship and parachuting, but never fully committed to doing something different.
MastaKiiLA
Member
Pretty much what Evil said. I'd probably go further and say that Fiennes is too old for the role. Great actor, but there was zero believability when it came to the action sequences, which are a hallmark of the franchise. Compare that to Firth in the first film, who was very convincing, and he's not what you'd consider an action guy.
This was definitely the worst of the 3. I like doing an origin story, but this was poorly-executed.
This was definitely the worst of the 3. I like doing an origin story, but this was poorly-executed.
Burning Blade
Member
It wasn’t a good movie by any stretch, but somehow I enjoyed it.
DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
Saw it on HBO Max last week. I LOVED IT!
DevilMayFlyForAWhiteGuy
Member
I’ve seen all three now and this one seems really disjointed tone wise. Like one minute there’s a cartoony fight with Rasputin dancing on a table, then the next there’s a super serious/realistic knife fight on a battlefield. Then one of the main characters dies in the least interesting way possible. Then the female character just makes quips all the time. I can’t tell if you’re supposed to take the main Jillian seriously or not. Its odd.