|
Well, poo poo, if we're going to go down that road let me take it all the way. Comedy movies can be serious! This movie is horrendous when I take it seriously, which is not any sort of warning sign! The writer must be a radical or a sociopath! I am obviously the intended audience to be subverted by evil brainwashing! Still waiting for someone to let me know what the big message was that I missed in Austin Powers. I really need more reasons to hate Mike Myers.
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 15:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 06:09 |
|
|
Cakebaker posted:People in here seem to think a movie can't be a comedy and have a message at the same time for some reason. Except...he only succeeds by remaining a crass and 'improper' lower class guy and the whole point is that his father who I assume was also kinda low end was a great soldier and he is too because the values of living in an environment like he did are things like loyalty and brotherhood and junk, the exact things the Kingsmen want but were too haughty to realize other classes of people had? Like, the long scene where his mentor goes 'yep, we're snobs, and there's absolutely no difference between you and me except luck of birth, and that's a fact of the world that is unpleasant but kinda unfixable' wasn't clue enough that the point was that the 'gentleman' values are universal, just through different contexts?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 16:32
|
|
|
LORD OF BUTT posted: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. Since people are continuing to say poo poo I've already refuted and not a single person even acknowledged that I said a thing I'm just gonna post this again
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 16:38
|
|
|
LORD OF BUTT posted:Since people are continuing to say poo poo I've already refuted and not a single person even acknowledged that I said a thing I'm just gonna post this again
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 23:06
|
|
|
Cakebaker posted:People in here seem to think a movie can't be a comedy and have a message at the same time for some reason. The culture he's escaping from isn't the honest poor, it's a criminal underclass. I mean, it's not like he comes from a family of villainous bricklayers. His stepdad is some kind of drugdealer or something with a gang of armed, violent hoodlums. That's what he rejects at the end, not the idea of being poor.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 23:29
|
|
|
CrashCat posted:It's still giving too much credit to the writer to even analyze it that deep if you ask me, but I do like what you wrote there. I just think it's probably largely accidental that it arranges that way. Like everything just gets so ridiculous I just assumed it was set up for entertainment and not to form any real stand on anything. Everyone is hosed up one way or another and even the good guys are bad guys. Yeah, I'm sure the writers of this movie put less though into their work than some random people who paid $10 to post on an internet forum.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2015 14:10
|
|
|
PerpetualSelf posted:This is possibly one of the worst films I've ever seen. A absolute glorification of wanton violence and typical hollywood values. Did i read this right, you are upset 99% of the world wasnt killed...in a comedy action movie?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2015 15:01
|
|
|
sassassin posted:Yeah, I'm sure the writers of this movie put less though into their work than some random people who paid $10 to post on an internet forum. There's a lot of work put in to this movie to parody a lot of classic spy movie bits, I think it's likely the emphasis is on that and not some political message. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2015 15:33
|
|
|
CrashCat posted:There's a lot of work put in to this movie to parody a lot of classic spy movie bits, I think it's likely the emphasis is on that and not some political message. What film was it parodying when Obama's head explodes to a triumphant score? You're doing the film and its makers an incredible disservice when you claim that their work is incapable of having a political message.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
The Kingsmen do not prevent the cull, they merely ensure that those who agree to its necessity are first against the wall, transforming it from an act of selfishness to a moral sacrifice for the good of the people. What makes Sam Jackson villainous is that he planned primarily for his own survival through the event.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2015 16:09
|
|
|
sassassin posted:What film was it parodying when Obama's head explodes to a triumphant score? It really depends on what point of view you're looking at Obama from. Are you looking at him as the Democratic President of the United States as an American, or as the American President as a non-American? Using a stand in for the actual President instead of creating President Smith for your movie does not, inherently, convey a direct opinion of the actual President. In the movie he functioned less as Barack Obama and more as American President/World Leader who you can recognize immediately.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2015 16:26
|
|
|
What was the message of Wanted? Because this was the exact same story.. How is the scene in Superman 2, when Clark regains his powers and humiliated the trucker, received or interpreted? To me these scenes undermines any message and heroes journey because all that's shown is they learned to be better oppressors than their former foils. In this story, Eggzy is left in a broken home by the kingsman, bullied and unable to protect his family, until he is taken in and taught by the kingsman; is this not the essence of patrician society? That people have their places and knowledge/resources are controlled by people on the top who know better than? Even when eggzy questions his figurative father figure, Firth explains to him that the Kingsman do know better and have their ways. Its pretty obvious to me that this movie is a right-wing message; don't question authority, strength is all that matters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2015 16:55
|
|
|
If you ignore big chunks of the third act, this is a really good analysis.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
AFoolAndHisMoney posted:Why bring up all of these issues in what is supposedly a harmless fun goofy Bond pastiche throwback? It's at least in part because inequality is kind of the only story going right now. Gyges posted: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. Dean and his scummy mates were very much late 90s Galaxy-man Thatcherites to be fair, the film could easily have had them be dealers or 'debt collectors' to explain Dean having a bit of cash in his pocket but chose not to. Right-wing hate preachers and working class community barons are both deliberate examples of people turned against their own class interest by being given license to be pricks. The master plan was even to break down society and remove peoples inhibitions from attacking the person next to them whilst putting the rich into safe protected bubbles, the whole thing is basically Socialism for the Rich. The point to me wasn't that humanity is inherently shite, but that you have to work at being a decent person like Eggsy, Roxy and the Swedish princess did and like Harry tried to. thehandtruck posted:Did i read this right, you are upset 99% of the world wasnt killed...in a comedy action movie? The grim bit is that like at least 30% of the world must have been brutally killed in this comedy action movie. The fight against bladerunner went on a good long time, the film obviously only showed us people judo throwing each other on a beach but there are also like, nurseries and busy roads. It's a bit 'the death star actually destroyed Endor' but if the story and the plot had been coherent with each other that would be one of the darkest endings to a movie I've ever seen. To be honest calling it right-wing propaganda seems way too simplistic to me. The seemingly schizophrenic Kingsman actually got a very good resolution; the aristocratic elements were, as they probably always were, ultimately villains that worked to destroy the common people. The working class affinity group within Kingsman, made up of Eggsy, the decent and only female agent Roxy, the specifically non-posh Merlin and the unseen support staff helping them saved the world by killing the 1%, including the monarchs they were previously named for. The Kingsman are a completely different organisation by the end of the film, the expensive suits and Chav Fighting fluff is almost a smokescreen for what is a very progressive, radical message that the rich genuinely need to be killed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 10:08
|
|
|
LORD OF BUTT posted:Since people are continuing to say poo poo I've already refuted and not a single person even acknowledged that I said a thing I'm just gonna post this again You're post isn't really wrong, but it's not refuting what I said either. Kingsman is very leftist on the surface, it's just got this weird fetichizacion of the trappings of the rich going on, which makes it all ring really hollow.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 17:14
|
|
|
Meh.I enjoyed it, but the tone was unclear and constantly switching between modern James Bond and Austin Powers and everything in-between, with over the top violence next to a terribly unfunny cartoon vilain level Samuel L Jackson. Didn't work for me. 2.5/5, maybe a 3, and go watch Big Game to forget about Samuel L Jackson's lisp. A much better movie.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 21:36
|
|
|
You are complaining that the villain who successfully murdered millions of people wasn't funny?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
Cakebaker posted:You're post isn't really wrong, but it's not refuting what I said either. Kingsman is very leftist on the surface, it's just got this weird fetichizacion of the trappings of the rich going on, which makes it all ring really hollow. People in well-fitted suits look really good. That's all there is to it. I'm about as left as you can get, but nice (off the rack) suits don't have to be a rich thing. Just read up on them and spend some time at Goodwill. Unless you're a freakish build, you'll find something good before long. And for bonus leftist-cred, you're benefiting from the waste of the bourgeoisie / upper class.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
sassassin posted:You are complaining that the villain who successfully murdered millions of people wasn't funny? I think he was supposed to be funny, but wasn't.  Or maybe whoever made this movie couldn't decide and it ended up sucking. Who knows.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
Something that stuck out to me was Eggzy's sleight of hand. The film pushes it as a hallmark of his lower class upbringing. He attempts to steal a lighter from the shop, and Galahad calls him on it. When Arthur attempts to poison him, he switches the drinks and poisons Arthur instead. Galahad is scolded by Arthur for bringing in lower class talent, but it's this eye for lower class talent that made Galahad aware of Eggzy's attempt to pilfer the lighter, and Arthur's disdain for the lower classes is what made him vulnerable to his drink being switched. The film is making the argument that "lower class" talent is not bad, but has potential usefulness depending on context. In one context he's caught stealing, but in another context he's getting the upper hand on a traitor. Galahad is sort of this bridge between the upper and lower classes, seeing the potential in the lower classes and not looking down on them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
Steve Yun posted:Something that stuck out to me was Eggzy's sleight of hand. The film pushes it as a hallmark of his lower class upbringing. He attempts to steal a lighter from the shop, and Galahad calls him on it. When Arthur attempts to poison him, he switches the drinks and poisons Arthur instead. And Eggsy is their synthesis, having the trappings of the upper class, but without their ruthlessness. He doesn't kill the dog because, to him, it's not an inferior creature, while a blueblood is more likely to see it that way, since they also see people that way.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 23:29
|
|
|
22 Eargesplitten posted:People in well-fitted suits look really good. That's all there is to it. My point wasn't about suits in general. They didn't go to a goodwill in the movie did they? They went to a very expensive-looking tailor.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 01:46
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:If you ignore big chunks of the third act, this is a really good analysis. Were the kingsman not the hero? having a traitor is pretty common, and it’s those people you need to cull, then you are pure, pretty standard excuse for keeping the statua quo. As long as the kingsman exist, the status quo is enforced.. its openly stated that's their mission.. what change do you see that the movie implies? He dresses and act the same.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 01:50
|
|
|
Femur posted:Were the kingsman not the hero? having a traitor is pretty common, and it’s those people you need to cull, then you are pure, pretty standard excuse for keeping the statua quo. If you ignore the part where Eggsy does question authority, if you ignore the part where almost every authority figure in the world was willing to violently cull humanity, if you ignore the part where the Kingsmen themselves are shown to be corrupt at the top, then yeah, it's absolutely a film where Femur posted:the Kingsman do know better and have their ways.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 01:56
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:If you ignore the part where Eggsy does question authority, if you ignore the part where almost every authority figure in the world was willing to violently cull humanity, if you ignore the part where the Kingsmen themselves are shown to be corrupt at the top, then yeah, it's absolutely a film where Those figures were all traitors, thus were deserving of being culled. Most other movies, small part time conspirators are usually just humiliated by arrest or whatever. This is the point of the movie and a basic tyrant propaganda, the Kingmans ideals are righteous and pure, those that disagree are traitors. The Kingsman are not shown as wrong, only a decrepit old man. Merlin,the teacher, is still pure, as is Lancelot, who passed the old test. And he dons the suit and acted the same as firth, a product of the old. What changed? You have yo justify your culling of the old authority figure to cement your new rule, this is like dictatorship 101, that's this movie. Why does he beat up those hoodlums anyways? They are never shown to physically harm him.. he stole their car, and out runs them, he is never humiliated by them, as proper propaganda should work. Femur fucked around with this message at 07:54 on Jun 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 07:52
|
|
|
Cakebaker posted:My point wasn't about suits in general. They didn't go to a goodwill in the movie did they? They went to a very expensive-looking tailor. Well, yeah. What I was trying to say is that it's completely possible for someone to appropriate the aesthetic of the upper-class without abandoning the rest of their identity. Which is what Eggsy did, symbolized by the fact that he kept his chavvish accent, except for when he's undercover. He did go to a high street tailor, and I guess I could see how you're bothered by the emphasis on a bespoke suit. That is definitely something either out of the price range or very low on the money priority list for most people.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 09:35
|
|
|
Christ, he gave him a nice suit because nice suits are nice (also, they are body armor). I don't think Eggsy was somehow immune to the charms of a well-fitted three piece. It doesn't mean he's going to start reading The Telegraph and demanding the bulldozing of council estates.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 10:11
|
|
|
Harime Nui posted:Christ, he gave him a nice suit because nice suits are nice (also, they are body armor). I don't think Eggsy was somehow immune to the charms of a well-fitted three piece. It doesn't mean he's going to start reading The Telegraph and demanding the bulldozing of council estates. Eggsy's final act in the film is not to reunite with his two mates from the start - whom he was wiling to go to jail to protect - but to rescue his mum from her boyfriend and move her to a new house away from the council estate. The emphasis is on separation from his roots (his mum had merely been corrupted: a victim, not a cause). He speaks without his old accent. He carries an umbrella even though it's not raining. He is a poser just like Firth and Caine, hiding violent intent to control beneath a "sophisticated" front.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 11:05
|
|
|
Did that girl drown or not? He's only told that "oh, no one actually dies" after falling out of the program. We never see her (or a living dog) again. Once he's outside the inner circle, the front of sophistication gets put back up, its terrible heart hidden.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 11:15
|
|
|
sassassin posted:Eggsy's final act in the film is not to reunite with his two mates from the start - whom he was wiling to go to jail to protect - but to rescue his mum from her boyfriend and move her to a new house away from the council estate. The emphasis is on separation from his roots (his mum had merely been corrupted: a victim, not a cause). You are missing the point by a mile---his roots are not that abusive guy and the council estate. His roots are his dad who was a working-class dude that nevertheless did a ton to save Britain from her enemies. I mean, the movie doesn't say being an uneducated goober is good because that's not good. I don't even know what else to say to your argument. Also, I missed any change in his accent, the umbrella is a bullet shield, and yeah Firth was his mentor. You are totally misreading the movie if you think Eggsy sacrifices "his roots" or something.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 11:32
|
|
|
sassassin posted:Did that girl drown or not? He's only told that "oh, no one actually dies" after falling out of the program. We never see her (or a living dog) again. She didn't drown, the bullets in the dog test were blanks. No one's life was really at risk, but they did everything they could to make the recruits think it was.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 11:33
|
|
|
Harime Nui posted:You are missing the point by a mile---his roots are not that abusive guy and the council estate. His roots are his dad who was a working-class dude that nevertheless did a ton to save Britain from her enemies. I mean, the movie doesn't say being an uneducated goober is good because that's not good. I don't even know what else to say to your argument. Also, I missed any change in his accent, the umbrella is a bullet shield, and yeah Firth was his mentor. You are totally misreading the movie if you think Eggsy sacrifices "his roots" or something. Why does he need a bullet shield? Why does he need to start a fight? Eggsy embraces the teachings of his mentor; a bad person who killed a lot of people for a secret cabal of assassins. Harime Nui posted:She didn't drown, the bullets in the dog test were blanks. No one's life was really at risk, but they did everything they could to make the recruits think it was. This is told by professional spies/secret cabal of assassins to a now non-member. How did she not drown? The room literally filled with water and she was pretty clearly dead.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 11:45
|
|
|
The majority of the movie doesn't give the impression that he's abandoning his roots. It's just the final scene that seems incongruous to everything we've seen before.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 11:51
|
|
|
sassassin posted:Why does he need a bullet shield? Why does he need to start a fight? As to your first sentence: It's a superhero film. You always see the hero in his full kit lit in a very cool way at the end. It means that he's assumed the role of protector. As to your second... Colin Firth's character is a good man who raises people up on talent over social connections. In what way is he at all a bad man?? quote:How did she not drown? The room literally filled with water and she was pretty clearly dead. She had an oxygen capsule in her mouth. She was trained by malay pearl divers to hold her breath for up to eight minutes. She had a microsnorkel hooked into her nostril. Pick your favorite. If you aren't familiar with the good old No-Prize you are not a comics reader.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 12:02
|
|
|
sassassin posted:How did she not drown? The room literally filled with water and she was pretty clearly dead. Having recently re-watched the movie: she's seen underwater, not moving, about five seconds after the room has completely filled with water. Also, when the other guys are swept into the viewing room, they see her "body" from a distance, lying face-down ON THE BEDS, well above the level the water drained to. And consider that Eggsy took a breath of air, swam to the door and tried to open it, swam back to the window and broke it, all without taking another breath, there's simply no way someone could have drowned in that timeframe. Logical conclusion: she was a plant, an employee of Kingsman, put there on purpose to "die" and make them think that they could actually be killed during training.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 12:38
|
|
|
sassassin posted:Why does he need a bullet shield? Why does he need to start a fight? He can't very well walk into the pub carrying an AK, can he? And Eggsy might be handy but taking on 8 armed thugs is pretty dangerous. Taking the umbrella as a covert, non-lethal weapon is just smart. And although he might have been hoping for it, Eggsy didn't go there to start a fight, he went to rescue his family. That he jumped at the chance to kick the poo poo out of the bloke who battered and it's strongly implied sexually abused his mum is understandable, even laudable. People seem to think that Dean and his mates represent the working class in some way but they don't, they are a reflection of the negative aspect of Kingsman; a monied, violent, loyal-to-each-other group preserving their position at the top of their social hierarchy. Just like Valentine and the 1% are too. Eggsy, Merlin and Eggsy's friends and family are the only working class characters in the film and they are all presented positively.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 13:24
|
|
|
Harime Nui posted:As to your second... Colin Firth's character is a good man who raises people up on talent over social connections. In what way is he at all a bad man?? Do you feel that the Kingsman organisation were good men? They were murderers, secret police operating without oversight, an archaic and corrupt entity that was justly destroyed over the course of the film. The whole film leads up to Eggsy appropriating the tools of the upper class in order to wipe it out, making sure that the people that saw the cull as necessary were also the first victims of it (transforming the act from immoral to moral, rather than actually stopping it).
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 13:36
|
|
|
Of all the movies I'd expect someone to sperg out over and read way too much into, this was not it. I had a ton of fun watching it though, for what it's worth, and if there's a sequel I'll gladly see that too because spy movies are fun and I'm glad they seem to be making a comeback outside of James Bond.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 14:27
|
|
|
sassassin posted:Do you feel that the Kingsman organisation were good men? They were murderers, secret police operating without oversight, an archaic and corrupt entity that was justly destroyed over the course of the film. The problem with the Kingsman wasn't that they killed, it was that they didn't kill. Harry's Original Sin was preventing the assassination of Thatcher. Eggsy gave him posthumous redemption by killing the upper class and ending the Thatcherite condition Valentine put in place.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 14:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 06:09 |
|
|
sassassin posted:Do you feel that the Kingsman organisation were good men? They were murderers, secret police operating without oversight, an archaic and corrupt entity that was justly destroyed over the course of the film. This is what philosophers call begging the question. The Kingsmen are there to protect Britain from bad things and it might as well be them as anybody. Also we have no idea if the other 8 kingsmen are killed or not in the course of the film, so the organization's status is up to debate as of the ending.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 15:25
|
|