Went and saw Kingsman: The Secret Service last night(my wife's choice, because she's awesome, hates chick flicks, loves horror movies and welcomes cinematic ultra-violence). I didn't know I could be so unmoved by an evil henchwoman with lethal weapons on the end of her legs. Other than a few seconds of a neophyte agent in riding boots over jeans, nothing of special interest to boot hobbyists. As a movie, quite a lot of mindless fun and exploding heads. Repellent politics aside, a decent little mix of laughs and coherently shot action scenes. At some point today I'll be listening to Freebird REALLY loud(if you've seen the movie you know why).
I'm trying something a little different with the layout of this post and it might look like shit.
Coherently shot and painfully edited in my eyes. Lots and lots of weird effects and too much post production blood. And the scene you are referencing, the free bird one, while entertaining, was almost pornographic. We've all fantasized about doing awful things to westboro, but to actually do a scene of it just didn't quite sit right with me. (I realize it wasn't actually westboro but we all know the church group was modeled after them) I guess what I'm saying is i really didn't like the film. Don't know why I'm sharing it with you though....
ReplyDeleteYou're completely right. That scene, like virtually all the violence in the movie, was gleefully pornographic. From an intellectual standpoint I had a TON of problems with this movie. But then the heads started to explode and both my wife and I burst out laughing. I was judging this movie by the painfully low standards of big budget mega-action movies. Sure, there was a lot of gun porn in it (I want a ban on all movie scenes that involve a sliding door reveling an arsenal under glass-not because it glamorizes guns, but because it's hacky as shit).
DeleteI completely understand why someone wouldn't like this movie. We were sitting next to a group of people who didn't see the humor in a tasteful, plot appropriate scene of projectile vomiting. I know why critics mostly hated it. For me it was just the right kind of indefensible chaotic mayhem and splatter with a layer of British charm and hooliganism . I'm not proud of liking it.
I so desperately wanted to like this film, but I couldn't shake the suspicion that the movie originated as an R rated film, switched to PG-13, and then back to R again. The head explosions weren't gory, the violence wasn't R worthy, and the tone never hit that R rated sweet spot I would have liked.
ReplyDeleteAnd for pornographic violence, I have no problem with it (see the excellent sequel to the mediocre Dead Snow). But I have a high standard for R rated action. The remake of Dredd is a perfect example of this. Ceaselessly gritty while overindulgent in violence and tone. Or the recent John Wick. Aside from the slow paced Willem Dafoe sub plot, the movie was wonderfully hard R with appropriate CGI blood (i'm a gun nut along with a boot nut) that fits, as blanks can't be used that close to person's face. He shoots a lot of people in the face in that movie. And of course any myriad of 80's action star vehicle, or our lord and savior Die Hard.
I guess my point is, Kingsmen felt as if it was trying far too hard, while not trying hard enough if that makes any sort of sense. Differing opinions aside, your blog is absolutely excellent and absolutely keep up the great effort. And i have a major penchant for flat heels, so always keep that content coming my dedicated friend.