"Kingsman: The Golden Circle" Movie Review - For King And State

Back in 2015, Matthew Vaughn graced the spy genre for the first time with Kingsman; The Secret Service, and it took the world by storm. Brilliantly stylish, outrageously funny, and with some memorable characters, the first Kingsman still stands as one of my favourite spy films of all time. It was natural, given the success then, that a sequel would be placed into the works, and now we have been delivered Kingsman: The Golden Circle. Does it live up to the naturally high expectations after the fantastic original then? Unfortunately, it falls short of that bar in my mind, and it is sadly one of the most disappointing movies of the year for me. The story this time round involves the Kingsman, including the returning Eggsy (Taron Egerton), Roxy (Sophie Cookson) and Merlin (Mark Strong), being put on the tail of a drug cartel and crime syndicate known only as the Golden Circle. However, finding their organisation attacked and decimated during their investigation and the world being held hostage, the surviving Kingsman make their way to America, there continuing not only their work but also discovering the existence of a sister organisation, the Statesmen, including Agents Tequila (Channing Tatum), Whiskey (Pedro Pascal), and Ginger (Halle Berry). Despite their differences, the two organisations agree to work together to face their greatest threat yet, the head of the Golden Circle, Poppy (Julianne Moore). Unfortunately, for all the promise that plot might seem to show, the story suffers from some serious pacing issues immediately. The movie opens with a bold action beat involving a taxi chase, and set up  for the rest of the movie continues from there. The amount of time spent on preparations for the rest of the story seems overdone at some points in this film, and a number of scenes feel entirely pointless in the grand scheme of things, especially when reflected on after the film has ended. The movie runs at 141 minutes, and it certainly feels like at least 30 minutes of the movie could have been cut to make the story a considerably more concise one. Further than that, the story becomes so overly convoluted throughout to the point that it becomes difficult to understand exactly what is happening at some points. The screenwriters on this movie were clearly struggling to think of reasons for characters to go to certain places for the purposes of the plot and for that of a certain action sequence. There were clearly more natural reasons available for characters to go to certain locations, especially when it feels like entire portions of the movie could have been removed in favour of an alternate possibility (take the entire Glastonbury sequence for example and don't worry, I'll get into that in a lot more detail later). Possibly the biggest problem I have is that the villain, Poppy, has made her hideout an entire fake town in the middle of a jungle temple called Poppyland, and she isn't exactly hiding. Honestly, it seems so implausible that nobody, not even the government of that particular country, would be aware that she was there, and manufacturing her..."products" from that location. Oh, and the reveal about Colin Firth's Harry Hart that we say very definitely killed in the first film? There's no spoilers to be found here, but it's unlikely to be the satisfying answer you're looking for, that much I will say. It's typical spy movie nonsense to be found here, and it certainly lives up to the tagline "A Proper Spy Movie". The problem I have is that the first film is so grounded in the real world with a mature tone that it almost feels like this movie is set in an entirely different universe, and it's a real shame that it falls short of the standards of the original.

Let's talk about the rest of the writing in the movie outside of the plot. The first film was renowned not only for the originality of the plot, and for some fun and ultra-violent action sequences (we'll talk about what this film has to offer in the letter department later), but also for the great character dynamics and the humour of the movie which was derived from that. Thankfully, character dynamics are still the bread and butter of this movie. Characters are written incredibly well, and all of the humour which flows between their interactions feel natural. This is helped in large part by the great chemistry between actors which I'll talk about in the next segment, but the relationships and the fun interactions between the people we are watching in the movie are the easy highlight of the entire film.  However, while this works, the rest of the humour in the film is incredibly hit and miss. There are some visual gags that work during the film, if only for the absurdity of them and the insanity of watching them unfold (watch out for one in particular with Channing Tatum around halfway through the film if you choose to see it). That said, most of the humour here simply is not as effective as the first film. A lot of the jokes simply are not funny and failed to resonate with me at least. I Heard some laughs in the cinema was in, admittedly some from myself, but I don't think anyone was really laughing consistently throughout the film. It felt like it was more a series of one-off jokes which worked, with 5 other attempts thrown in for each one that worked. Here's the real problem with the humour, however, and that comes with the style and tone that director and writer Matthew Vaughn has unfortunately chosen to adopt this time around. You may remember the first Kingsman film ended on a quite...ahem...bum note (I am so so sorry, I couldn't resist), and that joke received a fair deal of controversy upon release. Exactly why then, the writers have chosen to expand on that type of crude, secular humour, is a real mystery to me. These jokes did not just fail to land, but they felt awkward and generally uncomfortable. There's a few moments throughout the film where there are jokes like these, but the main example is in one particularly sequence set at Glastonbury, which I briefly hinted at before. Of course, I am not going to spoil the exact context of the scene, how we got to this point, or how it is resolved, but this is an extremely drawn out and extended sequence. The writers attempted to add some consequences to the scene as if to justify it's inclusion, but it's clear that the entire point of the scene is to lead up to this particular "joke" at the end. The moment is genuinely awful, and feels entirely misguided. It feels especially unnecessary when you begin to consider the reason for the scene and why the characters were there. I can think of a few possible script changes to remove this entire portion entirely and still have the same result for the film, so there is clearly only one reason for the inclusion of this moment in the final cut. It's a real shame that the writing team felt the need to resort to moments like these. Like I said before hand, the character dynamics in the movie are excellent! The humour is great when it relies on established character dynamics, and it's clear that the writers were in their elements with these segments. It's just more of a tragedy then that the rest of the humour simply does not stick the landing. Even more so when the brilliance of the first film is again considered.

A returning Taron Egerton alongside his thought dead mentor, Colin Firth's Harry Hart

To match the dynamics and writing between the characters, the performances themselves are mostly solid across the board throughout the film, and characters themselves are interesting and engaging as well. There is one exception to all of this, and that comes in the form of one unfortunately drawn out cameo. Initially, I thought it was a one-off joke for the film. Then this particular pop start kept coming back, and back...and back. Honestly, it's simply another example of when the humour for this movie simply fails to work. In the context of the first film, when you see it, this might have worked, but it unfortunately feels extremely out of place here, cringeworthy, and the actor is generally bad throughout. Everyone else, however, succeeds in their roles. The returning Kingsman agents are excellent once again. Taron Egerton remains as liable and charismatic a lead as ever as Eggsy AKA Agent Galahad, delivering his lines with a slight charm that makes him trustworthy but mischievous, and certainly a reflection of James Bond, almost a younger mix of Daniel Craig and Sean Connery. Mark Strong's Merlin has an elevated role this time around, with much more opportunity to become involved in the action, and he has some of the funnier moments in the film. The character also gets some surprising emotional depth that makes his character arc interesting to watch throughout the film. Colin Firth rounds out the group as a returning Harry Hart, the former Agent Galahad and Eggsy's mentor. Although more subdued and removed from the action for a great deal of the film, Firth gives as admirable a performance as ever throughout, and certainly allows for much deeper empathy with the situation of the character, particularly when he first appears, and he receives hints into his backstory. Just hits, mind you, but enough to make him all the more relatable. All of the Kingsman are just as brilliant as you remember from the first film, and their chemistry has not faded in the slightest this time around. That said, as has been heavily advertised, the Kingsman are also joined on this outing by the newly designed Statesmen, who naturally work out of a distillery rather than a tailors, and have alcohol codenames rather than Knights of the Round Table, and thankfully all of these characters are great fun to watch. Channing Tatum makes a great impression as Agent Tequila, the first Statesmen agent we meet on screen, and is a fun presence throughout his surprisingly limited screen time, something a sequel would be wise to rectify. Halle Berry is also fun as tech support Ginger (Ale), and provides a great foil to Merlin throughout the film. Those two characters in particular have a great dynamic, and Berry manages to give the character a personality thanks to some extra depths the script thankfully allows for. Jeff Bridges also appears to essentially give little more than an extended cameo as Statesmen head Champ, but The Dude of course makes an impression in his short time on screen. That said, the main Statesmen agent we spend time with is Agent Whiskey, played by Pedro Pascal, whose credit was criminally excluded from the marketing. Pascal's character has motivation for his actions and joining Statesmen, emotional depth to allow the audience to connect with him on a deeper level, and Pascal simply imbues the character with a great charm and charisma that makes him a joy to watch on screen. It also helps that he can knock out action sequences as if they are nothing but we'll get onto that later. Julianne Moore rounds out the main cast as the villainous Poppy. Julianne Moore is a truly excellent actress, and she brings all of her quirks and skill as an actress to this role, turning what could have been an extremely tired and simple drug dealer into a motivated and intimidating, and at times extremely unsettling given her constantly optimistic demeanour, villain for the Kingsman and Statesmen to face off against. The main problem with her character here is that, although she comes across as very sinister for her time on screen, that time is far too short. She often disappears for large portions of the film, and is generally entirely removed from the action, completely limiting any interactions she may have with the heroes. It feels like a real missed opportunity to make the character that little bit more terrifying, because there was plenty of potential for it in my mind. Where her character does succeed, however, is in the political subtext her character allows. The film chooses to explore the USA's failed War on Drugs through Poppy's scheming throughout the plot, and, for all the contrivances it holds, her plan and monologues do allow for some somewhat deeper exploration of drug use, the lives it affects, and the difficulties of its regulation. Yet another surprising element in what could have been a run of the mill character.

Pedro Pascal is one of the new faces of the Statesmen, among others

Let's talk about the action in the movie, especially after alluding to it a few times already. Let's get this main point out of the way quickly: no single action beat in this film lives up to the outstanding church scene from the fist Kingsman. No scene in this movie matches the style, hyper-violence, and outright surprise that accompanies this scene and the feeling that (at least I got) from watching it for the first time. The action almost seems slightly underwhelming, and even less imaginative to the first film this time round, and you'll almost certainly recognise clichés from other films, while some elements (particularly with Poppy's technology) that feel overly silly for the film. Yes, it's a spy film, but regardless it was still at one point grounded in reality to a (albeit small) extent. With all that said, the action in this movie is still an enormous amount of fun. Although recognisable in some of its format, the incredible stunt work and choreography keeps action happening on screen always feel fun and engaging to watch. That word, "fun", is the key word to sum up the action on show here, particularly when watching the gadgets of both the Kingsman and also the Statesmen come into play. Agent Whiskey gets one highly enjoyable action beat in the snow, while the finale in Poppy's lair is of course a joy to behold for all it doesn't make a wink of sense. Unfortunately, there is one element which weighs down the action again, and that is an overabundance of highly noticeable CGI. One of the highly regarded elements of the church scene in the first film was how the entire sequence looked like a single shot. Clearly aiming to edit and make this movie's action look similar, director Vaughn has sadly taken the root of trying to make this happen through the magic of CGI. Unfortunately, it's all not very well implemented, making it highly noticeable and the action feel almost entirely artificial. One the action begins to feel like that, there's an immediate decline in the heart-racing and immersive feeling an audience is meant to be having, and this is certainly felt here. The cinematography in these scenes is also often questionable. Although thankfully not throughout the entire film, the team for some strange reason often chose to spin the camera very quickly, which not only made it difficult to see what is happening on occasion, but also was actually quite nauseating and disconcerting. That's even more of a shame when the rest of the cinematography is fantastic! This is an absolutely beautiful looking film, with locations and vistas being perfectly captured, and atmosphere truly being felt no matter where the characters visit throughout. Another aspect of the movie which I have to give credit to is Henry Jackman and Matthew Margeson's soundtrack for the film. The film does incorporate a few real songs which work incredibly well (including one which I've been noticing in a surprising number of films this year), but the score itself is perfect for the actual film. The original film also had a great score, so it's good to see that brilliance replicated here, with some added Americanisms of course this time around. The theme of the Golden Circle and Poppy herself is haunting and insidious, bringing a real menace to their scenes, while the returning Kingsman theme is still as chilling and effective as it was the first time around. However, the real triumph here is in the blend of the original themes and British styles of music with the vibrance of the American south, with elements of excitement and line dancing thrown in just in case you forget that they've added Americans for the sequel. The blend of the music really works here, bringing a fun mix of the Kingsman elegance and class from the first film, and fusing it with the stubborn swagger of the Statesmen. It's an absolute joy to listen to and is consistently enjoyable throughout the film.

Julianne Moore as the engaging and often unsettling villain, Poppy

In short, Kingsman: The Golden Circle is unfortunately far more of a mixed bag than the original movie. Where the first one took it's time and was ingeniously self-aware, this one overcomplicates itself to an unfortunate extent, creating an absurd amount of plot contrivances and unnecessary scenarios for itself throughout. While the first movie's action sequences had some real weight and intensity, this one's feel strangely artificial, weighed down by a strange amount of CGI which, rather than adding the flair director Vaughn was clearly hoping for, only serve to weaken the sequences themselves. Most unfortunately, while the original film's sense of humour was strong and based on genuine character dynamics and actor chemistry, this movie takes a more crude option, with a number of jokes failing to stick their landing and instead coming across as cringeworthy, forced, sexist, or, in one particular case, all three. That said, it isn't all bad. While not the main source of humour this time round, the character dynamics are still the highlight of the movie, supported in large part by strong acting from the all-star cast here. The action is bolstered by some underwhelming visual effects but the stunt work, and sequences themselves are still wildly fun and entertaining. The couple of Statesman sequences and the finale set in Poppyland stand in my mind as particular highlights. The soundtrack is also great and the movie is beautifully shot at least when the camera isn't spinning during action sequences as if they have asked a professional American football player to throw the camera with some spin on it and see what happens. This is a disappointing movie for me, without a shadow of a doubt, and with regards to everything I said above I think the main reason for this is that it is coming off of the back of it's predecessor. I liken the situation to the Guardians of the Galaxy  movies. The first came out with no expectations and took the world by storm. With the sequel, expectations were naturally much higher but praise was a little more muted, generally due to the disappointment that it failed to live up to it. That is where I feel a great number of people are coming from when delivering criticisms of this movie. Make no mistake, as I've said, it's flawed (deeply flawed in all honesty), but, if I was to sum up this movie in a statement it would be this: it is a victim of the first film's success. With expectations so high, it only made the failings of the film more apparent to us all and it is completely understandable why it has received such harsh reception, and rightly so to an extent. That said, despite the shortcomings of this film, I really would like to see a third movie. Director Matthew Vaughn has created some great movies in his time, including the first film of this franchise, so a redemption feels possible. This film, in the meantime, is fun, but regardless of that flawed and feels capable of offering so much more.

Pros

• Great character dynamics
• Some surprising political undertones
• Strong acting across the board
• The fun action beats
• Some great cinematography
• Brilliant soundtrack

Cons

• An overly convoluted plot
• Poor pacing
• A more unfortunately crude sense of humour
• An overuse of CGI throughout

Rating: 6/10

Original Release Date: 20th of September, 2017

Starring Colin Firth, Taron Egerton, Julianne Moore, Mark Strong, Pedro Pascal, Halle Berry, Channing Tatum, Sophie Cookson, Elton John, and Jeff Bridges