Kingsman: The Secret Service

Matthew Vaughn again shot an almost perfect entertainment which has everything a funny gangster movie needs. A villain with a lisp, portrayed by Samuel L. Jackson, macho agent Colin Firth or a really likeable muddler Taron Egerton. Add in a rather classic story, but with a truly excellent interpretation, which is most apparent in the rather brutal, but all the more fun action scene in the church. I don’t know if Matthew Vaughn is a genius, but he is one of the few directors whose films I keep revisiting and after watching them again I rate them even higher. After Stardust, this flick is the best he managed to entertain me with so far. And I hope it was not the last time. (02/06/2015)

I don't yet know whether, given future trends, we should rejoice or rather mourn as the long-untouchable cinematic mood of the UK becomes increasingly blended with Hollywood enthusiasm, but as long as the result is at least half as nonchalant in its precisely measured performances and diabolical in its irresistibly entertaining action as Kingsman, there’s absolutely nothing to worry about. Matthew Vaughn knows very well what he’s doing, he knows where he wants to take the viewer, and the story as a whole, with all the jokes, is built to satisfy the part of the audience that expects a pure parody of the formally diverse but exclusively British career of a certain James Bond (Colin Firth in a perfectly fitting suit and karate-style pose could replace Daniel Craig in the famous role in no time), as well as the rest of us, who hunger for the insane yet exaggerated details and individual action passages, and the concept of a criminal conspiracy whose mastermind is a rich nigga with a penchant for burgers who doesn't go far for fuck (and he's American, of course – specifically, one who plays nigga just about everywhere). And it all works really well, and, though the first half doesn't bring anything new and the originality stagnates, the ending crowned with the most humorous villain liquidation since Hot Fuzz to the sounds of “Give It Up” by KC&Sunshine Band brought me to a state of ecstasy. In addition to Firth and Jackson, thumbs up to the likeable Egerton, and Mark Strong, who here looks almost like Stanley Tucci. And the biggest praise, of course, for Matthey Vaughn. 80% (19/06/2015)

Vaughn’s enthusiasm really wants make us belileve that it offers something more than the usual. But in the end, it is just as schematic and far-fetched as all other similar films. However, what speaks in favor of Kingsman is the feeling of a British gentleman, the progressive action scenes (the church!) and the boldly playful jokes and lines. But it's still single-use entertainment and I don't feel like watching it again. (10/03/2015)

Kick-Ass made in a style of classic Bond movies. And it is done so consistently and one to one (again, it is genre conscious as much as subversive, furious, with a considerable portion of meta exaggeration, it emphasizes being cool in all circumstances and the resembles in clearly seen also in the course, the type of roles, allusions, etc.) that is clearly to its detriment, because the Vaughn/Millar duo are undoubtedly capable of doing more than just copying themselves. However, if (and as long as) it is such a thoroughly likeable incorrect fun, who would mind it? PS: Too bad the official subtitles, which are not very imaginative are not very good. At least Valentine's speech impediment directly calls for a playful approach. (05/02/2015)

I don’t know if I’ve ever seen a film that so accurately reflected teenage mentality. In some of its details, Kingsman is excellent and breathtaking, in others, I found it awful. Overall, I had fun with it, thought rather reluctantly. Many people value its attempt at being constantly entertaining, tough, controversial, fierce and refreshing, but, unlike with Kick-Ass, for instance, Vaughn here doesn’t keep a measure on things and in some places he falls into a cesspool of a category I can call spoilt brat. That’s what bothers me the most about a film that’s supposed to be about gentlemanhood. The brutal violence against bystanders is here portrayed and presented as cool fun. That not only goes against my moral principles, but also brings up another internal conflict: how are we supposed root for the heroes to thwart the villain’s plan, if it is only when villain wins that we can get another serving of eye-candy brutal action, as in the church (which is the most talked about, not only here)? And what skills of the candidates was the last task of the admission process supposed to reveal? The ability to follow even the most stupid orders without question? Thanks very much for that. Maybe if I was a bigger fan of the old Bond films, my feelings towards Kingsman would be more positive. Or probably not. (20/02/2015)