|
I just watched this for the second time, and for the second time wondered where the hell are all the other Kingsman during everything. Apparently there are like 10 of them but we only see the one die at the beginning. Also butt stuff.
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 04:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 12:20 |
|
|
drunken officeparty posted:I just watched this for the second time, and for the second time wondered where the hell are all the other Kingsman during everything. Apparently there are like 10 of them but we only see the one die at the beginning. They drank the toast with Arthur before Eggy came in, we don't know how long before. I think he straight up poisoned everyone else.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 05:06
|
|
|
Yeah I think Merlin, Galahad , and Lancelot are the only Kingsman 'Agents' left. There's support staff, but no other field types.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 05:17
|
|
|
I thought they specifically left the other Kingsmen out of this mission because they didn't know who they could trust.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 14:50
|
|
|
LorneReams posted:I thought they specifically left the other Kingsmen out of this mission because they didn't know who they could trust. It was stated on screen as this. With Merlin turned and a ticking clock there was no time to call in people and test them to see if they'd also been turned. Especially since the holo-council implied that the rest of the agents were at least decently far away.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
Mark millar is a loving hack
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 00:18
|
|
|
He licks goats, in fact.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
Harime Nui posted:He licks goats, in fact. quote:Rolling Stone: He still lives in Glasgow, is there a chance of bumping into him?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 04:55
|
|
|
This is possibly one of the worst films I've ever seen. A absolute glorification of wanton violence and typical hollywood values. 70 Million people died during World War 2. The only thin that prevented Global Warming from coming sooner and made progressivism and socialism potential policies on the world stage. If that had not happened we would not know global warming exists. Because the very idea of discussing such a prospect would be banned. Sometimes people have to die for the better good. This is seen constantly in every phase of world history. And I'm supposed to see this fellow who just happens to be black willing to actually do something as a villain and the ever so pomp properly victorian British characters as heroes? They're no better than the villain. If anything they are worse. While the Villain wears on his heart on his sleeve and fully recognizes what must done to save the world they're twiddling around shoving their thumb up their asses doing not a drat bit about it. And the world will suffer a lot more thanks to their actions. This film reminds me of a much better film: Snowpiercer. In the world of that film the Kingsman prove to be the perfect images of the Conductor. A group so entrenched on maintaining the status quo no matter how many continuos horrible atrocities are required to do so. Valentine meanwhile is the perfect image of Namgoong, a man who realizes that for in order for any kind of real progress to be made and for future generations to live in a better world sacrifices must be made. Even if that means the death of the vast majority of mankind. A man willing to commit one last atrocity to bring about true freedom for the world and humanity. What a piece of poo poo film. And what do I get at the end Anal Sex? gently caress off like the first thing I cared about when facing the reality of the horrid dark fate of humanity is sex. What a simple minded and droll piece of poo poo character.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 06:07
|
|
|
 GMo is a treasure of the comics industry.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 06:15
|
|
|
Well now I feel I have to say that, actually, I like Mark Millar and think he's done good work, albeit I don't know what's transpired between he and Morrison personally but I'm sure Morrison's right and Millar is sort of a grandstander, yeah it's obvious from any interview you have of him, okay.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 06:22
|
|
|
gently caress, I just can't let a good post stand, can I?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 06:22
|
|
|
PerpetualSelf posted:
Though it's a little understandable that someone might be confused at first because they used more polish than Grownups 5 or Medea's Wet Fart or whatever the gently caress is supposed to pass for comedy these days.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 06:23
|
|
|
Look, I just don't know, and I have a lot of angst about this because I like both writers. It all comes down to Red Son, I think, and probably Morrison is not lying when he says "I gave Millar the idea for that," they were probably talking in a bar one night and Morrison goes, "what about, the House of El... L... L for Luthor! And it turns out Superman didn't go through space he went through time, and Lex Luthor is the descendant of the Els!" and Millars like ".....poo poo!" and years later he uses that in a comic. That probably happened, or it could have happened, and Mark genuinely does not remember it or doesn't think it happened, and Grant thinks he went uncredited for the core idea in a comic; that could certainly drive a wedge between them. Probably alcohol was involved, neither are bad men, and yeah.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 06:28
|
|
|
osietra posted:Curvy swords, flying carpets, jihadis and hummus. My perfect Sunday.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 06:29
|
|
|
A movie about an elite and entrenched aristocracy secretly forming a privatised and completely unregulated spy service and foil new money trying to stop global warming. gently caress this movie. With Kickass Vaughn was decent enough at filtering out the worst of Millar from the film but this one is still a really ugly and mean spirited movie. CrashCat posted:It was a spoof film. I'm sorry you managed to find all the glaring, shining, screaming inconsistencies without realizing why there were so many of them. How exactly is the film satirising this when it is clearly portraying the kingsman as heroes and the villains as people bent on mass genocide. These aspects are only satirical if you're some far right nut who's laughing at 'evil pussy liberals'. Also that dialogue between Firth and SLJ about the old Bond movies being the best for being goofy and over the top rather than the new too serious movies is a load of bullshit. Of the old Connery/Moore Bond movies the best ones with only 1 or 2 exceptions have been the more down to earth stuff like From Russia with Love while something like Diamonds are Forever or Moonraker are complete horseshit. If the movie is going to be nostalgic about an older generation of media it should at least have some understanding of what it's nostalgic for.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 06:59
|
|
|
Harime Nui posted:Look, I just don't know, and I have a lot of angst about this because I like both writers. It all comes down to Red Son, I think, and probably Morrison is not lying when he says "I gave Millar the idea for that," they were probably talking in a bar one night and Morrison goes, "what about, the House of El... L... L for Luthor! And it turns out Superman didn't go through space he went through time, and Lex Luthor is the descendant of the Els!" and Millars like ".....poo poo!" and years later he uses that in a comic. That probably happened, or it could have happened, and Mark genuinely does not remember it or doesn't think it happened, and Grant thinks he went uncredited for the core idea in a comic; that could certainly drive a wedge between them. Probably alcohol was involved, neither are bad men, and yeah. I mean, the fact that like 75% of Millar's output is total garbage makes me kinda side with GMo
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 15:42
|
|
|
AFoolAndHisMoney posted:How exactly is the film satirising this when it is clearly portraying the kingsman as heroes and the villains as people bent on mass genocide. These aspects are only satirical if you're some far right nut who's laughing at 'evil pussy liberals'. And that's just for starters. Nearly everything in the movie is a ridiculous sendup of some standby movie conceit, but played with a straight face to make it funnier. In my opinion if you don't get that it's a farce you are tone deaf and possibly devoid of fun in your life.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 15:55
|
|
|
LORD OF BUTT posted:I mean, the fact that like 75% of Millar's output is total garbage makes me kinda side with GMo Millar is great at concept, but he absolutely hate hate hates the idea of heroism. He can't comprehend that anybody would feel the slightest hint of altruism ever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 17:23
|
|
|
Humbug Scoolbus posted:Millar is great at concept, but he absolutely hate hate hates the idea of heroism. He can't comprehend that anybody would feel the slightest hint of altruism ever. Also, he uses the same John Campbellian plot device of "you are a master assassin/spy/wizard Harry" repeatedly. When I found out that it was a Millar property, I could really see that the concept for Kingsman was pretty much the same as Wanted, except Millar swapped out the son of Deadshot with the son of James Bond. I really want to think GMo's The Filth was probably an answer to Millar's Wanted and Kingsman, even though it actually predates them by a few years.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
Wanted was fantastic purely because of how limp the finale was. Sure dude, go on about the reader being a lifeless loser who won't amount to anything when you're a fictional character who inherited his powers, wealth and influence, lol.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
LORD OF BUTT posted:I mean, the fact that like 75% of Millar's output is total garbage makes me kinda side with GMo He did a year on Wolverine that was so good dude
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
CrashCat posted:The villain is as over the top as it gets. They took an actor who is famous for badass roles and made him use a ridiculous lisp and a meek personality (to the point he can't even deal with seeing blood), then gave him ever the slightest nugget of a real concept (overpopulation problems) blown to the most ridiculous proportions. Not only does he decide that the solution to too many people is to have them all fight each other to the death (something even the biggest Darwin fans wouldn't dream of asking) but then he implements it in a fashion consistent with the neurotic warnings usually parroted on the evening news. Could your cell phone be killing you? Find out at 11! So what's the message of this satire? That people who care about the environment are loving nuts while the aristocrats are the only levelheaded people in the area? There is nobody on Eggsy's side who even acknowledge that global warming might be an issue. Meanwhile the villain's ranks include the likes of Obama and a Swedish republican portraying them and the villain as weaklings who are too afraid to get their hands dirty while still murdering innocents. It can send up all the movie concepts and ideas it wants but by doing this it ends up creating a pretty disgusting message. I would say inadvertently but I've read Mark Millar's poo poo and these are the kinds of messages he writes intentionally. It's a farce but one that clearly sides with the Kingsman and other nobility such as the princess who represent some sort of right wing ideal and are a pretty abhorrent concept at the end of the day. It's fun and goofy is a reductive argument that ignores that it obviously has a very mean spirited and ugly message at its core. In my opinion it's a terrible movie for terrible people like you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 03:00
|
|
|
One thing that pisses me off is that people seem to think this film is smart. It's not smart. It's inconsistent as gently caress. Predictable. Stuff is telegraphed and obviously played up for dramatic impact. That's not smart. A fight during a countdown ending with the world being saved at the least possible minute is not smart. "This is not that kind of movie" ? It rings so hollow BECAUSE it IS that kind of movie. You know what's smart? What really isn't that kind of movie (or story)? Watchmen. (I realize the cinematic version is not the best version of that story) But the part where Vincent goes on about how he'd explain everything to Firth's character and then come up with a brilliant way to kill him that he'd then escape was telegraphed. The very fact of saying that telegraphs you are gonna shot someone. You don't need to tell someone you're gonna shoot them. You just loving shoot them. You know what would of been smart? If Vincent had actually killed all the loving rich smug fucks himself. Because it doesn't make sense for a man that goes around, wooing them all, at the same time saying how none of them were willing to do anything serious about global warming; to suddenly like them. If anything he would despise them. He would want them dead for being the pitiful uneffective little worms they are. Also a countdown timer to when the program goes online? It should of been a countdown timer to when the program stops. When the Kingsman got their a great amount of earths population should of already been loving dead. That would of been smart. That would of actually had to take some balls to write and some creativity. What did you think? That I'd explain my big plan if there was the slightest chance you could affect the outcome?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 03:01
|
|
|
AFoolAndHisMoney posted:So what's the message of this satire?  Now I'm kind of wondering if I missed the big political message in Austin Powers...
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 04:37
|
|
|
I'm seriously baffled that anyone got a right-wing message out of this. The princess isn't a "right wing ideal," she's the representative of the tiny fraction of bourgeoisie who don't constantly try to gently caress the working class and who get to live after the revolution. The film's approach to the Kingsmen is the same- they're mostly anti-proletariat and corrupted, but that doesn't mean their tools can't be used to enact revolution in the right hands, and those "right hands" are one of the above group (bougies who aren't total poo poo) and a poor person. If the film has a coherent message, it's that the poor need to gently caress the rich up, but that they're not going to be able to do that without the help of rogue rich people, due to the massive power differential between the two groups. That sounds leftist to me- pragmatic and slightly cynical, but leftist. Pretty much the only sticking point is the existence of rogue rich people who see the light, and honestly I could buy that- I mean, I'm an upper middle class white dude and my beliefs are radical as hell, I can't be the only one on Earth. WeedlordGoku69 fucked around with this message at 05:40 on Jun 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 05:07
|
|
|
AFoolAndHisMoney posted:So what's the message of this satire? That people who care about the environment are loving nuts while the aristocrats are the only levelheaded people in the area? There is nobody on Eggsy's side who even acknowledge that global warming might be an issue. Meanwhile the villain's ranks include the likes of Obama and a Swedish republican portraying them and the villain as weaklings who are too afraid to get their hands dirty while still murdering innocents. The proposed solution to Global Warming is make people kill each other and then go right back to doing what we were doing, only with less people. It's not an environmental solution, it's an insanely right wing capitalist solution. The entire point is that it's a rich rear end in a top hat's completely dick move solution. All the rich people bunker down while the poors do a little advanced survival of the fittest until the rich think enough of them have died. They don't care about the environment, they only care that it will end up impacting their way of life so they come up with the most bastardy way of "fixing" things without impacting their way of life in the slightest. Complaining that no one stops and says directly to the camera, "Super Villainy aside, Global Warming is totally real" is not only irrelevant but not in any way the point. There are vanishingly few leftish ideas or philosophies on any side of the equation in the movie. The rich dude literally killing the poor to avoid inconvenience can not in any reasonable examination be taken as either a valid solution to a problem or an indictment of environmentalism in any way. quote:It's a farce but one that clearly sides with the Kingsman and other nobility such as the princess who represent some sort of right wing ideal and are a pretty abhorrent concept at the end of the day. The nobility and the institution of the Kingsmen are villains. Arthur kills one of the good guys and tries to kill another when he won't join in. The entire organization is compromised to an unknown extent. How did you miss the part where rich people were the bad guys, defeated by the poor guy? All of the rich people were either bad guys, locked up, or a single middle aged guy and a girl. Those rich people locked up are shown to not be right wing ideals. The princess won't sell out her people and we find that many famous people who went missing are also locked up. They were presented with literal Social Darwinism and balked. I'm not saying they're Liberal heroes, but they're sure as gently caress not right wing. Oh no, a rich person is shown in a favorable light while also showing that most rich people are dicks. Quit sucking rich, right wing dick, fascist! It's honestly like some people hear the bad guy say Global Warming and see a selective handful of Aristocrats being shown in a favorable light and their brain shuts down and enters into a Fox News Alert panick. Gyges fucked around with this message at 05:28 on Jun 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 05:26
|
|
|
PerpetualSelf posted:This is possibly one of the worst films I've ever seen. A absolute glorification of wanton violence and typical hollywood values. Haha, what the gently caress is this post? There's someone out there angry at Kingsman because the genocidal man couldn't commit genocide. It's one of those opinions that I kind of know exist, but am astonished to actually encounter. Like that guy who thought the Raid's final fight was boring.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 11:22
|
|
|
The difference is that the people siding with SLJ's character are not evil 1%ers. The people identified in league with him are guys like Obama, a climate change scientist and the swedish prime minister. These are the people getting their heads blown up! These are the people who are dying in this so-called revolution. Meanwhile the actual 1% are the only ones actually opposing the villain. This is a movie that acts like people who want to do something about Global Warming are mass murderers who want to cull the population. This isn't a capitalist response to Global Warming. The capitalist response is to act like climate change doesn't exist and to keep going on as if nothing is happening which is exactly what the protagonists do. I'm not asking for the movie to end on some environmental message but the movie goes in the opposite direction and clearly endorses the likes of Eggsy and the other 'good' kingsman who didn't side with SLJ and that's horseshit. And acting like the protagonist having a poor upbringing somehow endorses the lower class is loving dumb. By the end of the movie Eggsy is completely brainwashed into the Kingsman institution, prattling on about manners and beating up poor people- the film isn't on his side, it makes him part of their side. But none of this matters when the overall point is: Why? Why bring up all of these issues in what is supposedly a harmless fun goofy Bond pastiche throwback? The old Bond movies don't have any particular partisan alignments. Hell they go out of their way to remove a lot of the soviet aspects of the books and replace them with SPECTRE and other non-denominal villains that anyone would agree are evil. If this is supposed to be a fun movie then why fill it with edgy controversial elements like murdering obvious real life figures and equating pro-climate change with mass murder. It's completely jarring and gets in the way of any actual light entertainment. This movie is just edgy for the sake of it. AFoolAndHisMoney fucked around with this message at 11:40 on Jun 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 11:38
|
|
|
AFoolAndHisMoney posted:The difference is that the people siding with SLJ's character are not evil 1%ers. The people identified in league with him are guys like Obama, a climate change scientist and the swedish prime minister.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 11:54
|
|
|
AFoolAndHisMoney posted:The difference is that the people siding with SLJ's character are not evil 1%ers. The people identified in league with him are guys like Obama, a climate change scientist and the swedish prime minister. So it's not supposed to be a serious movie, but you're choosing to take it's very, very silly plot very seriously and getting angry about it not being silly enough.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 11:54
|
|
|
PerpetualSelf posted:One thing that pisses me off is that people seem to think this film is smart. It's not smart. It's inconsistent as gently caress. Predictable. Stuff is telegraphed and obviously played up for dramatic impact. That's not smart. A fight during a countdown ending with the world being saved at the least possible minute is not smart. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 12:23
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:And the US Military, and several of the Kingsmen. Also the leaders of virtually every government in the world, almost all of the English Aristocracy, some athletes, some businessmen, other stereotypical rich groups with token representation at the main base so we know that the rich are there. It's not the 1%, it looks more like the top 5% and others of import were offered a spot. The movie goes out of it's way to point out that most of the rich and powerful willingly hopped on given the chance. A small portion of those offered turned down the offer, but we know it's not a particularly large number. The number of missing famous and important people was only high enough to be a news curiosity instead of a leading, important, news crisis.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Also the leaders of virtually every government in the world, almost all of the English Aristocracy, some athletes, some businessmen, other stereotypical rich groups with token representation at the main base so we know that the rich are there. It's not the 1%, it looks more like the top 5% and others of import were offered a spot. The movie goes out of it's way to point out that most of the rich and powerful willingly hopped on given the chance. If anyone got out of that the message 'lol the rich want u ded' maybe you just really, really wanted to hear that. Go with the old standby 'power corrupts' if you must slap a moral on it. In fact take any of the 'lessons' you think it has and step them back a few levels of complexity for the popcorn munching crowd and it starts to make a lot more sense. I don't know who this Millar guy is very well but I doubt he's in the business of writing academic dissertations. CrashCat fucked around with this message at 18:15 on Jun 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 18:11
|
|
|
CrashCat posted:Not directed at you particularly, but I really don't get why anyone thinks everyone threw in voluntarily to murder the world when the movie took great pains to show an example of one of his 'persuasive' sessions. You could go along with the vague promises of this weird Valentine guy who has enough clout to make the rest of your career a success. His clout was so strong that being on his side was basically a golden ticket, and the notion that he is some sort of madman was covered up as well as he could manage. Then if you do, ultimately, decide to oppose him, he could dismantle your personal security in seconds and force you to decide to give up everything if you still want to defy him. He was so integrated and persuasive that he even got Arthur and who knows who else on the Kingsmen to turn traitor. There were no threats of ruining careers or blocking business deals. Just an offer to join team genocide, which most people took. He made the offer to join him in actively working towards the culling of humanity. If you refused and you were important he kidnapped you. If you refused and you weren't important the implication was he had you killed. However it seems he always laid out his entire plan and asked you to join first. Yes, there were probably at least some people who heard the plan, thought it was nuts, but also figured that it was actually happening whether they were on board or not so they got on board. The message wasn't so much the rich in general want to kill you. It was that the rich are corrupt and willing to watch the world burn if it suits their interests. A great many of the rich wouldn't have come up with a plan to kill the poor, however they also didn't exactly fight against it when it was presented to them. We see that some did, however most were persuaded to help kill billions of people by a single conversation with a Bond Villain. A single conversation and Presidents, Nobility, Prime Ministers, and Celebrities sold out the rest of humanity. Not that the poor were exactly painted in a good light either. Your choice in the movie is to be a poor prick or a rich prick. Occasionally there are poor and rich people who aren't pricks, but they're few and far between. The whole movie had a very dim view of humanity in general, and most of the arguments made concerning reasons for eating the rich are in response to other complaints that the rich were somehow the good guys.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
CrashCat posted:The villain is as over the top as it gets. They took an actor who is famous for badass roles and made him use a ridiculous lisp and a meek personality (to the point he can't even deal with seeing blood), then gave him ever the slightest nugget of a real concept (overpopulation problems) blown to the most ridiculous proportions. Not only does he decide that the solution to too many people is to have them all fight each other to the death (something even the biggest Darwin fans wouldn't dream of asking) but then he implements it in a fashion consistent with the neurotic warnings usually parroted on the evening news. Could your cell phone be killing you? Find out at 11! same but unironically
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
Wait there are people who thought the movie with Steve Jobs with a lisp killing people with a free internet app to stop global warming (not how that works) ending end a spectacular head explosion fireworks display and royal buttsex...wasn't a complete farce? Like the movie that has a prolonged scene where two of the leads chuckle and talk about James Bond movies that ends with the villain just murdering his charming english super spy rival because 'this isn't that kind of movie', this is what some people thought was a 100% serious movie?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 06:00
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:Wait there are people who thought the movie with Steve Jobs with a lisp killing people with a free internet app to stop global warming (not how that works) ending end a spectacular head explosion fireworks display and royal buttsex...wasn't a complete farce?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 07:28
|
|
|
Again: even if you get a serious message from it, the only serious message it could reasonably be pushing is radical-leftist as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 10:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 12:20 |
|
|
People in here seem to think a movie can't be a comedy and have a message at the same time for some reason. Anyway the whole mantra of "Manners maketh man" is pretty much the old argument "I'm not racist, I just don't like hood culture". Eggsy is only accepted after removing the signifiers that could identify him as poor. Apparently wearing expensive suits is what makes someone mannered. The movie argues that not all poor people are terrible, just most. A few are worth raising up to the higher classes, but they will need help from the people already there. It's pretty much like fixing a failing public school system with a few scholarships.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 14:55
|
|