By: Sandra Benlian
Who doesn’t love a good spy movie? From series like James Bond to movies starring Jackie Chan or Tom Cruise, and of course the beloved Spy Kids, the idea of spies and a secret intelligence has been a concept captivating viewers for decades. The Kingsman series feel no different to me. Starting with the first movie of the now-trilogy having come out in 2014, starring figures like Colin Firth, Taron Egerton, Samuel L Jackson and more, I’ve loved what it had to offer— up until a few weeks ago. The newest and third movie, so cleverly named The King’s Man, felt to me like a let down. Everything I liked about the first movie felt absent from this newest version; the extreme gadgets, exciting fight scenes, witty dialogue, and so on. All the eccentric elements that make for a captivating and exciting spy movie fell flat in The King’s Man. However, I can’t say it was all that bad.
As a stand alone movie, it might not have been so disappointing. It starred individuals like Ralph Fiennes, Gemma Arterton, and Harris Dickinson. For those who like history, the storyline fits into events of the first World War, and the involvement of Britain, Germany, and Russia, and the infamous Grigori Rasputin is even intertwined with the plot. There are some shocking twists and satisfying victories, but most of the movie contains no action and lots of uninteresting dialogue.
There certainly were some enjoyable fight scenes, but like I said, it pales in comparison to the action-packed original, which I hoped for instead. It also was not as humorous, and felt too serious. However, if you enjoy history, or maybe even liked the other Kingsman movies as I did and wished to learn more about its origins, The King’s Man does just that, setting up the basis upon which this Kingsman spy agency was established.
Overall, based on the expectations I held for it, I would maybe rate it a 5/10. But on it’s own, it can certainly go for a 8/10. What do you guys think?
Categories: Arts & Reviews