The Gentlemen
Directed by:
Guy RitchieScreenplay:
Guy RitchieCinematography:
Alan StewartComposer:
Christopher BensteadCast:
Matthew McConaughey, Charlie Hunnam, Michelle Dockery, Colin Farrell, Henry Golding, Hugh Grant, Jeremy Strong, Eddie Marsan, Lyne Renee, Tom Wu, Jason Wong (more)VOD (3)
Plots(1)
When American businessman Mickey Pearson (Matthew McConaughey) decides to sell his booming marijuana business in London to fund his retirement, he sparks a deadly battle for control of his empire. His preferred buyer is Oklahoma billionaire Matthew Berger (Jeremy Strong) but East End gangsters, Chinese rival Dry Eye (Henry Golding) and scheming private investigator Fletcher (Hugh Grant) want their own cut of the deal. (Entertainment in Video)
(more)Videos (9)
Reviews (17)
The Gentlemen is a return to Ritchie's beginnings, i.e., frenzied gangster movies full of betrayals and dirty backstage games, filmed with evident irony and with the director's awareness that he wants to entertain his audience first and foremost. As Guy ages, his characters also age and transform. They are no longer bold little players consumed by ambitions, wanting to thrive among established tough guys, but rather powerful underworld figures who move among the social elites and contemplate stepping out of the illegal business so as not to harm their carefully built reputation. However, the big boss attracts the attention of those who would like to take his place in the food chain, and thus the last deal of his career unexpectedly gets complicated. Instead of content gangster retirement, he is forced to defend himself from attacks on all sides. Ritchie is usually able to come up with entertaining and unconventional characters, and this time was no exception. Besides the partly flamboyant, partly casual gang leader, it is primarily the cunningly corrupted tabloid journalist played by Hugh Grant who stands out. He once became famous for playing stereotypical heartthrobs in romantic comedies, but as he has aged, he has shifted to playing noble villains, usually with a subtle ironic twist and characterized by extremely developed vanity. To sum it up, I had a great time with it. I hope Guy Ritchie has not said his last word yet. Overall impression: 90%.
()
I'm satisfied. Very satisfied, actually, because Guy Ritchie promised to deliver a Guy Ritchie-style gangster movie, and he did. So the only potential problem I have with his new release is that it sticks to the beaten track and makes only minimal attempts to surprise. But it doesn't really matter, because Ritchie knows this genre like nobody else, and once again he manages to make a very brisk film with unexpected twists and even more unexpected directorial ideas, in which all of the actors (probably most notably Hugh Grant and Colin Farrell) clearly enjoy themselves. Ritchie has a way with slow-building tension ending in absurd violence reminiscent of the beginning of Pulp Fiction, but he manages to switch gears to his typical frenetic pace within moments. He manages to be funny and entertaining, and moments later his characters go regular scared. He's just the Ritchie we wanted to see. Nothing more, nothing less. That's good enough for me.
()
Ritchie’s gangster flicks can be looked at as a genre screen on which the direct projects himself, or rather the current point in his life, career and position in the film industry. At the very beginning of his first film, Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, we have a group of self-confidently cheeky youths who have not only talent and ambition, but mainly more luck than sense, when they heedlessly set out into the world of omnipotent old structures. Coincidence plays a much smaller role in Ritchie’s second film, but the director, together with the protagonists, gets into a much bigger game with foreign players in a different weight category, from which he cannot allow himself to escape only with a skinned knee. The already forgotten existentially pessimistic Revolver shows the former wunderkind in his element, which he had been away from for a while, consorting with overly powerful people and now doubting himself, so he tries to kick off a big game that will get him back to the top while simultaneously reassessing his own life. RocknRolla expressed a feeling of newly replenished assuredness and, at the same time, bidding farewell to his island roots while also peculiarly focusing on the position of England/Ritchie between Europe and America. Therefore, The Gentlemen isn’t so much a comeback as an attempt to show others and himself that “the king’s still got it”. He has come a long way and from an untested, clever lout, he has developed into a man of elegance over the years and the owner of a stylish pub and his own hipster brewery, which he does not hesitate to advertise. Though he still sympathises with streetwise hooligans with their online projects, he is far removed from them in his pursuits. He mulls over retirement now that he’s in the company of the cream of society and he’s raking it in with lucrative projects, but this seemingly final money spinner put new vitality into his veins in the end. Predation, courage and cheekiness have been replaced by sophistication (albeit in the snobbish superficial sense rather than true sophistication or ingenuity) and pretentious refinement. Gangster movies have always been founded on the motif of the changing of the guard between generations, or rather the conflict between the young and old schools, so in line with Ritchie's age and self-image, this story from the underworld takes an atypical direction that would not have occurred to him in the early days of his career. The question is how this glorified flaccid middle age will be perceived by today’s young people, who are licking their chops at their own opportunities in the genre world of gangsters – in recent years, francophone productions such as the excellent Les Misérables and the hyper-stylish Gangsta have reigned supreme. However, this in no way diminishes the fun and agility of The Gentlemen, which would have ranked among the most satisfying titles in broad distribution in another, stronger year (at least from the perspective of a boomer viewer).
()
(less)
(more)
A sad and unwelcome moment when one of the best directors puts a group of people I love (Matthew McConaughey, Colin Farrell, Charlie Hunnam) or even adore (Hugh Grant, Michelle Dockery) in front of the camera and creates a new contribution to one of the most beloved genres, and the public reacts more than positively – and I end up sadly shaking my head at the result. The form, the pacing, it's all there. But sticking to drugs, poses, and dialog competitions about who can pee further after the age of fifty seems at least unfortunate to me, in some twists even stagnant. In the details, it's still the same Guy Ritchie from Snatch, but on the whole, for the first time ever, nope.
()
Guy Ritchie returns to the genre that made him famous and serves up a pure crime gangster flick that is probably the closest thing to Snatch. The film has a very unorthodox storytelling and at times it can seem confusing. Especially at the beginning I couldn't quite get into it, but somewhere in the middle I was enjoying truly it, and a big thanks goes to the awesome performances by the cast. Matthew McConaughey and Charlie Hunnam are traditionally excellent, Hugh Grant feels like in the role of a lifetime, and Colin Farrell steals all the scenes for himself and rips your diaphragm! Apart from the performances, the film is pulled up by the great black-dry British humour and the unexpected twists. Guy Ritche has made a playful, stylish, funny and unconventional gangster film and people will love it. 7.5/10.
()
Ads