The King's Man

The somewhat misleading trailers, Matthew Vaughn's reputation, and especially what he did in the first two films, set the stage for another frantic action flick, just set a hundred years earlier. But there was a surprise in the cinema – a very pleasant one for me. Apparently, Vaughn decided that the story of the birth of the Kingsman Agency would be just as much the birth of his unmistakable directorial style, and that's a million dollar idea. This makes The King's Man a surprisingly subdued film for a good while, one that cares about the characters, and when it comes to action, it's good but deliberately keeps a low profile. Vaughn seems to be discovering that frantic style himself with each passing scene, while the heroes unravel a giant conspiracy in a story full of twists and turns (including a truly shocking one) and gather typical Kingsman attributes to become the King's Men in the final three-quarters of an hour. Vaughn got unleashed, started slowing down shots, put the camera on wings and swords, fiddled with shots (my favourite is the duel of silhouettes against the backdrop of the movie screen with the turmoil of war) and simply kept giving the audience what they were waiting for. For some the wait will be long, but others will be royally entertained. (12/01/2022)

If all those amazing visual ideas, the surprisingly resolved situations and the sweetly over-the-top humour were wrapped in something called a meaningful plot and not a twisted alternate reality pulled out of someone’s ass like from the pen of a drunken Vondruška, I'd be happy. Give Vaughn the next Bond movie, really, the guy's got it. (31/03/2022)

It's far from the genius of the first one and it's not as megalomaniacal or over-the-top as the second one, yet still is overwhelmingly a disappointment. It's crazy fun at individual points (the bit with Rasputin and the trench sequences are pure delight), but the whole comes across as rather wild and disorganized (not in a good way, unfortunately). It is, of course, absolutely flawlessly and confidently filmed, but what does it matter when it still turns out to be the weakest installment in the series. Gemma Arterton was great and woefully underused. I expected a lot more and even IMAX didn't save it. [65%] (17/01/2022)

Somehow it just isn’t what it used to be. Setting it in the World War I gave it a more earthy feel, but Vaughn just isn’t trying as hard anymore. While the first part was overflowing with visual finesse and sly jabs, this movie is mostly serious. But the story has a couple of interesting twists and hats off to the respect for historical events, but if it weren’t for Rasputin, there would be nothing to praise. And of course we know how the Great War ended up and it’s unreasonable to expect the opposite from Tarantino here. (15/02/2022)

I like Matthew Vaughn and I will continue to like him, but I can't really enjoy this prequel to Kingsman. On one hand, I have to praise the action, which, however, cannot surprise anyone, including myself – Vaughn has a talent for it. And at least the dance fight with Rasputin is truly applause-worthy. He also manages to sell a century-old past full of gentlemen, lunatics, funny cars, and the end of an era. But about the rest? That's exactly what I don't really know. It still looks nice, it has a fast pace and I wasn't bored, but that's not enough for me when it comes to Vaughn. The story surprises at most with its absurd twists, but due to the use of real historical events, it fails to build tension because – unsurprisingly – Austria-Hungary doesn't end up winning World War I. So, it's not very thrilling and, unfortunately, not even funny or bold like the first installment. The King’s Man the weakest of Vaughn's films. And above all, it’s quite unnecessary. (05/01/2022)