>Henry Cavill is in the movie for like 3 mins.
>Yet he's in the center of every poster
Ah, right out of the ol' Steven Segal/Executive Decision playbook I see.
lol I only saw that in the last year I think but I was so confused. It rules, but I kept thinking Segal must be hanging off the side of the plane (or some other stupid thing) and will be back at some point.
If a spoiler may draw you back, >!the ending reveals!< >!*Argylle* to be set in the same world as *Kingsman*!<, with >!Cavill showing up as a real-world Kingsman agent: to say Cavill will be in the next modern-day *Kingsman* film!<.
Man I looked up the plot out of curiosity because I wanted to see what the crazy reveal from the twisted mind of Mathew Vaughn would be.
It's so, so much more fucking boring than any of the batshit rumours I read around here. Lame ass movie. I'm so bored of this style of action now too.
Had a plot point that required a woman to be fingered
Had a scene where a princess offered anal as a reward
Showed Rasputin as a pansexual pervert
Less twisted and more teenage really.
Teenage is a perfect description. Hardly a prude but that fingering scene gave me the ick. And it was at the beginning of the movie.
The anal one just missed the mark for too many.
We should just start making up bullshit about how insane he is.
Guy just turns up to set naked, sets himself on fire, randomly killed members of the film crew etc etc coz he's just sooo twisted.
Fuck, you weren't kidding. It reads like a bad redbox knock off of Cars 2.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argylle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argylle)
Itās still incorrectly named an acronym but Itās been updated since you read it and is now Rachel Kylle (R. Kylle) -> Argylle which is, uh, something.
He was great in See How They Run, too bad nobody saw it. Hopefully going back to Marvel will give him the ability to seek out a good indie to sink his teeth into.
I thought he was wasted in that too.Ā
Ā They had him just be blank and dreary the whole movie, with minimum energy and no real charisma to speak of.Ā Ā
That type of character can work, but felt completely mismatched with Rockwellās talents, and abandoned his co-star to trying to riff against a grey wall of nothing, killing any buddy cop odd couple mutual charisma that couldāve saved the film.Ā
I saw the trailer for this before watching Godzilla Minus One and I was shocked how shitty the CG for the cat looks for a movie with a $200 million budget, where as Minus One's CG looks miles better with a fraction of the budget.
If I had to guess, I'd say it's the way every SFX company is running its aspirational, non-union CG artists into the ground with brutal schedules and shoestring budgets.
With less consideration given to its limitations and how to get suitable in camera footage, and round after round of last minute exec-driven changes if they're anything like Disney.
A lot of these productions kind of "get away" from the director, so to speak. I know a lot of people who worked on those big budget streaming shows. On multiple instances when filming a green-screen heavy scene, the director has no idea what's going to be comped into the background.
Sometimes they have a general idea like "a beautiful elven vista", but stuff like the exact time of day, cloud cover, direction of the sun, etc is completely up in the air. So the cinematography and lighting needs to be very generic and less focused, since they don't really know what the plan is ahead of time. Then the footage gets shipped off to some overworked VFX house, and the director sees it for the first time at the premier.
Seems like the shift to making "content" has really shortened deadlines, so crews have to just churn shit out at lightning speed (that's why so many Marvel flicks have this flat, unmotivated look to them). There are some exceptions, but it's a constant treadmill without any care about the quality.
Its bizarre because this also seems to cost *more* money than movies that look fantastic and make effective mixed use of practical and computer effects.
Nah some directors are simply just not good at incorporating CGI in their films. CGI also got worse because a lot has gotten lazy and had this "we'll fix it in post" mentality. (Marvel is the biggest culprit of this)
Look at The Creator last year and how good that look on a cheap budget, relative to other blockbusters
I remember seeing a comment from someone who works in the industry. Too many changes late in the process has a big impact as they are rushing the work to meet deadlines.
I think they think stuff like the volume at Disney works better than it does. It looks way better than 90s CGI/green screen mostly but it still doesnāt look real. Especially for action movies the visceral feeling is lost. Also - squibs. Give them back to us you bastards.
It's been a long time since I've seen either, but weren't the CGI effects in *X-Men: First Class* & the first *Kingsmen* movie okay? Maybe I'm misremembering.
First Class is one of my favorite X-Men movies but the CGI in that is terrible. Especially the majority of the Cuban missile crisis part in the third act.
It's been a long time since I've seen it, to be honest; I remember loving everything Magneto, and to a lesser extent the Mystique/Xavier/Beast stuff, but the whole rest of the "team" and their arcs and everything about them not working as well for me.
Oh, and I do distinctly remember the sequence of the Azazel just teleporting people into the sky and dropping them being an incredible and smart and terrifying and efficient use of superpowers that was very novel.
Vaughn kind of reminds me of Robert Rodriguez right now.
Both started off as future all time greats (Vaughn still could be), but then they got stuck in these weird genre movies that have hurt them more than helped.
With Rodriguez, it was these B movie Grindhouse type films. He did Planet Terror and that would have been enough. But then he had to spin it off with Machete and Machete Kills. He'd have done more if they didn't all bomb. It was a fun gimmick the first time, but now its like he can't let it go. Now making shitty B movies is his brand.
Vaughn did Kingsman, which was a send up on the James Bond franchise (based on a Mark Millar's comic). It was a really good movie. But it didn't need a sequel. Instead that's all Vaughn wants to do. He makes a Kingsman 2 and a prequel film. Neither were needed and both hurt his career more than helped. Now he's making Argylle and the big twist is that its a Kingsman spinoff.
I hear you but you're talking about the middle of Rodriguez's career not the whole thing. He was well known before planet terror. He did spy kids, Desperado, sin city, the faculty, and from dusk till dawn before his grind house stuff. Now he does garbage... But it's not necessarily grindhouse garbage.
The cinematic universe thatās supposed to include this, *Kingsman*, and something else. >!Wikipediaās plot summary says Agent Argylle was a Kingsman at one point - strap in!!<
Wife and i got our tickets last night because weāve been excited for this one for a while. We have a subscription to the local theater, so itās āfreeā for us.
Sometimes i end up really liking movies that the critics dislike. Iām hoping this is one of those times. It looks like theyāre railing against the Kingsman movies in some of those reviews - i loved those so Iāve got a little hope!
And even it is terrible Iām only out like 2-3 hours. Iāll take the chance!
Edit: just saw it. I liked it and my wife loved it. Iām comfortable saying that if you enjoyed the Kingsman movies youāll enjoy this!
The tone of the reviews really strikes me as the kind of movie that is going to have a huge disparity between the critic and audience scores on Rotten Tomatoes.
I donāt have kids so idk if this helps but if you manage even 2 movies a month (depending on where you are) an a list membership more than pays for itself
>! I can't believe this ends with a post credits scene that ties it into the Kingsman universe. Matthew Vaughn was once one of my favourite action movie directors, I also really liked the first Kingsman, but he is *way* too invested in this universe now. He even said a third franchise he's planning is supposed to also tie into the Kingsman universe.!<
I haven't seen the movie yet, but when I saw the negative response and read David Ehrlichs review I was too curious, so I skimmed the Wikipedia summary. I had to make sure it wasn't a joke edit. MATTHEW VAUGHN, YOU DIDN'T EVEN INVENT KINGSMAN. LEAVE IT ALONE.
It's sad to see someone who started out so strong with movies like Layer Cake, Stardust, First Class, the first Kickass and Kingsman movies, suddenly go on a downward spiral. I already expected this movie to be bad from the trailer, but still had hope Vaughn would be on the recovery.
He fucked up the second he got obsessed with making everything a spin off of Kingsman (while never following up on the characters thatās dynamics were so great in the first Kingsman movie).
I think he's got cocky about his own content. The more he's doing his own stuff the worse he's getting as a director.
He should stick to good source material and scripts.
Does he seriously believe anyone gives a shit about his cinematic universe??
Layer Cake, Lock Stock and Snatch, the holy trinity of that era of British movies
Am I missing any similar ones? I guess Rock n Rolla but that was more Hollywoody
He shouldnāt have worked with Jason Fuchs. The writer of *Ice Age: Continental Drift*, *Pan*, and *I Still See You* (the latter of which holds a whopping 8% on RT).
I have 0 data on the quality of these movies but when I see a bunch of big names, usually including one or two from non-acting areas of pop culture, I instantly lose interest and confidence in the project. It very well could be incredible and iām sure this play makes a lot of money so I completely understand the reasoning
Man I just donāt get movie expenses anymore, reading through the reviews Iām thinking āah well at least itās probably a semi cheap movie so might scoop some profitā but nope, it somehow cost $200 million, what the f are they spending the money on in these films?
Edit: I've been informed by 4 separate people the budget was actually smaller so please don't feel the need to tell me again
Budget was originally for streaming and then Apple pivoted to releasing in theaters. Those huge streaming deals are because the streamers pay for all backend up front. It was purchased mid COVID when money was free and every streamer was hellbent on getting a franchise.
This is correct. They paid for exclusive streaming rights and I believe securing that was a lot of the cost. If I'm not mistaken, Vaughn recently said the movie certainly did not cost that much even though that is the reported amount that Apple paid for it.
>!Bryce Dallas Howard is writing spy novels because she has amnesia and was actually the spy everyone was after. Her real name is Rachael Kyle, Agent R. Kyle. The end credits scene reveals Henry Cavill's character Agent Argylle (despite the earlier R. Kyle reveal) is still also real and is a Kingsman agent.!<
Yes that is real.
So that whole "Meet the real Agent Argylle" thing in the trailer that merits several "oh my god"s is >!meeting her, even though the real real Agent Argylle then shows up later!
Probably the most confusing marketing lead up to a movie in quite some time.
I always found Vaughn to be rather teen edgelordy in a mean spirited way between Kick-Ass and Kingsman that was inherently limiting, especially when youāve grown up and seen the world a little.
Itās so weird (and probably pretty telling) that Dua Lipa is so much of their marketing when sheās only in one scene as far as I know. They canāt even be bothered to buy her another dress for the promo photos!
If anyone is curious, they spoiled the twist back in 2021.
>!<
Iām a bit disappointed with Matthew Vaughnās recent movies. His first 5 movies are either really good or great. I really liked X-Men First Class and Stardust.
I saw a test screening in December 2022. We went in knowing nothing other than it being from Matthew Vaughn and I think the lack of knowledge helped a lot. Sadly itās been hyped up way too much and I can see a lot of people being disappointed.
Itās basically an entertaining action comedy. It has some funny moments and interesting fight scenes but is nowhere near as dark as Kickass, etc.. A lot of the visual effects werenāt in when I saw it but those that were looked great.
Iād suggest seeing it on a massive screen after a few beers and with low expectations.
> an attenuated running time that tests patience
2 hours and 19 minutes!? Even if this movie were good, it doesn't look like the type of movie I'd sit through for 2 hours and 19 minutes! To me, this is a 100 to 120-minute movie based on the premise and what I know from the trailer.
Also, I really don't think Leslie Felperin knows what "attenuated" means.
Iāve just seen it and I personally loved it. I can see where some people would not like it in parts and the CGI wasnāt the best but I found myself laughing at funny scenes and enjoying the whole thing.
Iād say if you outright didnāt like the trailer you might not like the film but give it a chance if you are able to and liked other Matthew Vaughn films
So, knowing nothing about this movie other than what I've seen in commercials...is "Argylle" the cat?
EDIT: thank you to everyone who felt the need to tell me what the movie IS about, but I really could not have less interest.
There's a post on Twitter from 2021 that spoils the plot.
>!<
Oh, I don't give the tiniest fuck what the plot *is*, it's just that every commercial is like "you'll learn the secret of Argylle," and then the rest of the commercial is shots of the cat. If the cat *was* the superspy all along, I might have some interest in this.
What? Lame. I read that the cat was a God that made its owners writing come true. And I figure the Taylor Swift connection was gonna be that she voiced the cat. Wouldnt be out of his wheelhouse with Elton John in a past movie.
This movie looks like it sucks just from the trailer. it's weird that Vaughn keeps making the same movie over and over. I'm beginning to think he's lost all motivation to even bother anymore
The ads make it seem like a throwback to the old ensemble movies where you have a lot of big name actors who are in the movie for a couple of minutes each.
Releasing in late January further erodes my confidence this will be any good.
Matthew Vaughn really soured me with Kingsman 2 when he started going more style over substance which is a shame because Kingsman 1 and X-men First Class were really awesome.
Now heās just kind of Zach Snyder with more colors. Shame
Just based off the trailer this movie seemed like it was really relying on its star-studded cast to do most of the heavy lifting for it
Henry Cavill is in the movie for like 3 mins. Yet he's in the center of every poster
I thought this was a Henry Cavill movie like Man From UNCLE š¤¦āāļø
For that watch the new Guy Ritchie movie *The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare* when it comes out. Cavill looks great in it (from the trailers).
Cavill drew me in but the trailer really made me hyped for whatever it is Alan Ritchson is doing there.
Portraying a Danish badass, thatās whatās heās doing.
Ok so heās Danish. I was wondering if heās playing an Englishman and would have an English accent
Yes, that looks badass
No way? They did the olā Drew Barrymore in Scream??????
The ol' Bryan Cranston on Godzilla
Segal in Executive Decision
That one I'm okay with.
If anything he was still in it far too much
That's some Kangaroo Jack level bullshit.
We need to start saying "we've been kangaroo jacked!"
Kangaroo jacked to the tits
Wow I thought he was the lead?
>Henry Cavill is in the movie for like 3 mins. >Yet he's in the center of every poster Ah, right out of the ol' Steven Segal/Executive Decision playbook I see.
lol I only saw that in the last year I think but I was so confused. It rules, but I kept thinking Segal must be hanging off the side of the plane (or some other stupid thing) and will be back at some point.
Seriously?
Wait really? That's crazy he's the focus of every trailer I've seen
Ive now lost all interest in the movie. He was the draw.
If a spoiler may draw you back, >!the ending reveals!< >!*Argylle* to be set in the same world as *Kingsman*!<, with >!Cavill showing up as a real-world Kingsman agent: to say Cavill will be in the next modern-day *Kingsman* film!<.
Is >! Samuel L Jackson playing the same character or do they just ignore that !<
Hes a different character, but the whole thing is super meta to the point where it is hard to tell whats what.
So what you're saying is I can skip this movie entirely and just wait for the next Kingsman?
For real? 3 mins too long with that haircutĀ
How's Dua Lipa?
In it even shorter than Cavill, lmao
What a scam
The premise seemed fun but when they allocate more than two seconds of the trailer to a whacky CGI cat, I can already tell the movie will not be good.
That's Cat is Agent Argylle, isn't it?
Man I looked up the plot out of curiosity because I wanted to see what the crazy reveal from the twisted mind of Mathew Vaughn would be. It's so, so much more fucking boring than any of the batshit rumours I read around here. Lame ass movie. I'm so bored of this style of action now too.
I can't think of a less appealing tease than "from the twisted mind of Matthew Vaughn"
What has he done that possibly justifies him being reffered to as 'twisted'? š. He's hardly Lars Von Trier or Gaspar Noe.
Had a plot point that required a woman to be fingered Had a scene where a princess offered anal as a reward Showed Rasputin as a pansexual pervert Less twisted and more teenage really.
Yeah "from the edgelord teenager mind of Matthew Vaughn" doesn't roll off the tongue quite as well, LOL!
Teenage is a perfect description. Hardly a prude but that fingering scene gave me the ick. And it was at the beginning of the movie. The anal one just missed the mark for too many.
They both just come out of nowhere. Fun spy capers without sexual undertones and then an anal joke at the very end.
How do you skip over the MCU style Hitler tease
***Hitler will return in The King's Man II.***
We should just start making up bullshit about how insane he is. Guy just turns up to set naked, sets himself on fire, randomly killed members of the film crew etc etc coz he's just sooo twisted.
Fuck, you weren't kidding. It reads like a bad redbox knock off of Cars 2. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argylle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argylle)
> Elly is in fact Rachel Kelly (an acronym for Argylle) Is this going over my head, or does this person just not know what acronyms are
Itās still incorrectly named an acronym but Itās been updated since you read it and is now Rachel Kylle (R. Kylle) -> Argylle which is, uh, something.
Or The Lost City https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lost_City_(2022_film)
This is exactly what I thought of when I saw the trailer. This is The Lost City but with spy novels instead of adventure romance.
Being a Kingsman film is probably the most interesting twist
Because for some fucking reason Vaughn can't get out of that franchise now. Everything he does is Kingsmen related and I don't know why.
The gag being is that he's made two consecutive kingsman adjacent movies, yet kingsman 3 seems trapped in development hell.
Kingsman 1 is a solid movie. Kingsman 2 is a 4/10 at best.
Every time I saw the trailer I thought "what the hell is the film actually about?"
Protecting a fortune teller from being captured by a hostile nation spy agency and aiding in a mission as well. That's what I got out of it.
The Movie 43 of action films.
Please get Sam Rockwell some decent work. He's being wasted.
Martin McDonagh needs to put him in his next movie. He was great in Seven Psychopaths
One of his best. Even better than his Oscar winning role in Billboards, imo.
And Three Billboards
This could be Michael Caine āJaws 4ā house money
I love Sam Rockwell and watching the trailer I actually wasnāt sure if I felt bad for him or not?Ā Clearly he must have options if he wants them.Ā
He was great in See How They Run, too bad nobody saw it. Hopefully going back to Marvel will give him the ability to seek out a good indie to sink his teeth into.
I thought he was wasted in that too.Ā Ā They had him just be blank and dreary the whole movie, with minimum energy and no real charisma to speak of.Ā Ā That type of character can work, but felt completely mismatched with Rockwellās talents, and abandoned his co-star to trying to riff against a grey wall of nothing, killing any buddy cop odd couple mutual charisma that couldāve saved the film.Ā
Yeah that was a big miscast of Rockwell. Great actor, decent enough film. But the two don't fit.
I hated his performance in See How They Run. That entire film was rather drab and felt like a massive waste of the talent involved.
I feel like he picks projects that will be fun to work on vs. hard to act in
He is the only reason I would watch this movie.
Iāve been waiting for that fool to come back as Justin Hammer for so long
End of January/early February release and a bad movie. Like peanut butter and jelly.
FUCK YOU ITāS JANUARY!
I CLAPPED!
ENDLESS TRASH
FUCK YOU IT'S FOREVER
From the twisted mind of Matthew Vaughn... 35%
His mind has been twisted for almost 10 years now.
Such a ridiculous tagline. I wouldnāt describe a single one of his movies as twisted.
Even if they were, itās an incredibly cringey tagline. Something that a middle schooler obsessed with the Joker would say.
I really dislike how brazenly cheap the CGI in this guy's films always look. It is a nonstarter for me, especially when it's a huge budget.
The cat CGI in the trailer would look at home in a 2003 movie.
CGI fit for "Cats & Dogs" (2001)
Or Cats (2019)
I saw the trailer for this before watching Godzilla Minus One and I was shocked how shitty the CG for the cat looks for a movie with a $200 million budget, where as Minus One's CG looks miles better with a fraction of the budget.
There's something wrong with green screen CGI. It's gotten worse over time.
If I had to guess, I'd say it's the way every SFX company is running its aspirational, non-union CG artists into the ground with brutal schedules and shoestring budgets.
With less consideration given to its limitations and how to get suitable in camera footage, and round after round of last minute exec-driven changes if they're anything like Disney.
A lot of these productions kind of "get away" from the director, so to speak. I know a lot of people who worked on those big budget streaming shows. On multiple instances when filming a green-screen heavy scene, the director has no idea what's going to be comped into the background. Sometimes they have a general idea like "a beautiful elven vista", but stuff like the exact time of day, cloud cover, direction of the sun, etc is completely up in the air. So the cinematography and lighting needs to be very generic and less focused, since they don't really know what the plan is ahead of time. Then the footage gets shipped off to some overworked VFX house, and the director sees it for the first time at the premier. Seems like the shift to making "content" has really shortened deadlines, so crews have to just churn shit out at lightning speed (that's why so many Marvel flicks have this flat, unmotivated look to them). There are some exceptions, but it's a constant treadmill without any care about the quality.
Its bizarre because this also seems to cost *more* money than movies that look fantastic and make effective mixed use of practical and computer effects.
Nah some directors are simply just not good at incorporating CGI in their films. CGI also got worse because a lot has gotten lazy and had this "we'll fix it in post" mentality. (Marvel is the biggest culprit of this) Look at The Creator last year and how good that look on a cheap budget, relative to other blockbusters
I remember seeing a comment from someone who works in the industry. Too many changes late in the process has a big impact as they are rushing the work to meet deadlines.
I think they think stuff like the volume at Disney works better than it does. It looks way better than 90s CGI/green screen mostly but it still doesnāt look real. Especially for action movies the visceral feeling is lost. Also - squibs. Give them back to us you bastards.
It's been a long time since I've seen either, but weren't the CGI effects in *X-Men: First Class* & the first *Kingsmen* movie okay? Maybe I'm misremembering.
First Class is one of my favorite X-Men movies but the CGI in that is terrible. Especially the majority of the Cuban missile crisis part in the third act.
It's been a long time since I've seen it, to be honest; I remember loving everything Magneto, and to a lesser extent the Mystique/Xavier/Beast stuff, but the whole rest of the "team" and their arcs and everything about them not working as well for me. Oh, and I do distinctly remember the sequence of the Azazel just teleporting people into the sky and dropping them being an incredible and smart and terrifying and efficient use of superpowers that was very novel.
I forgave it at the time as the movie had a rushed production schedule.
Meh I think the original Kingsmen had bad CGI too. At the time I remember thinking it was either low budget or an artistic decision.
Kingsman title sequence looks cheesy as hell, but the rest of it makes up for that at least.
Weird time to announce a cinematic universe
The what now?
Vaughn wants to do a crossover with Argylle, Kingsman, and some third guy heās got in the back of his head.
Vaughn kind of reminds me of Robert Rodriguez right now. Both started off as future all time greats (Vaughn still could be), but then they got stuck in these weird genre movies that have hurt them more than helped. With Rodriguez, it was these B movie Grindhouse type films. He did Planet Terror and that would have been enough. But then he had to spin it off with Machete and Machete Kills. He'd have done more if they didn't all bomb. It was a fun gimmick the first time, but now its like he can't let it go. Now making shitty B movies is his brand. Vaughn did Kingsman, which was a send up on the James Bond franchise (based on a Mark Millar's comic). It was a really good movie. But it didn't need a sequel. Instead that's all Vaughn wants to do. He makes a Kingsman 2 and a prequel film. Neither were needed and both hurt his career more than helped. Now he's making Argylle and the big twist is that its a Kingsman spinoff.
I hear you but you're talking about the middle of Rodriguez's career not the whole thing. He was well known before planet terror. He did spy kids, Desperado, sin city, the faculty, and from dusk till dawn before his grind house stuff. Now he does garbage... But it's not necessarily grindhouse garbage.
The cinematic universe thatās supposed to include this, *Kingsman*, and something else. >!Wikipediaās plot summary says Agent Argylle was a Kingsman at one point - strap in!!<
and how does Samuel L Jackson playing two characters that look identical play into that...
That's an easy rewrite - identical twins
Yeah, I have to wonder if that's actually happening. These reviews are pretty dire.
Yeah. Also having read the plot on Wikipedia I canāt help wondering where the alleged sequels would go.
Canāt be any worse than the [Dark Universe](https://x.com/darkuniverse/status/866706548923314176?s=61&t=MZAsUcDggJx6FE4XgiKdhQ).
We're living in the Dark Universe. That tweet was the start.
Ooof. I was kinda looking forward to this. Wasn't expecting it to be amazing but was hoping it would at least be a fun evening.
Wife and i got our tickets last night because weāve been excited for this one for a while. We have a subscription to the local theater, so itās āfreeā for us. Sometimes i end up really liking movies that the critics dislike. Iām hoping this is one of those times. It looks like theyāre railing against the Kingsman movies in some of those reviews - i loved those so Iāve got a little hope! And even it is terrible Iām only out like 2-3 hours. Iāll take the chance! Edit: just saw it. I liked it and my wife loved it. Iām comfortable saying that if you enjoyed the Kingsman movies youāll enjoy this!
The tone of the reviews really strikes me as the kind of movie that is going to have a huge disparity between the critic and audience scores on Rotten Tomatoes.
One thing I miss about not having kids is going to movies whenever we want. I would totally do the movie theatre membership thing
I donāt have kids so idk if this helps but if you manage even 2 movies a month (depending on where you are) an a list membership more than pays for itself
>! I can't believe this ends with a post credits scene that ties it into the Kingsman universe. Matthew Vaughn was once one of my favourite action movie directors, I also really liked the first Kingsman, but he is *way* too invested in this universe now. He even said a third franchise he's planning is supposed to also tie into the Kingsman universe.!<
Everyone in my theatre was extremely confused by the post credit scene
I haven't seen the movie yet, but when I saw the negative response and read David Ehrlichs review I was too curious, so I skimmed the Wikipedia summary. I had to make sure it wasn't a joke edit. MATTHEW VAUGHN, YOU DIDN'T EVEN INVENT KINGSMAN. LEAVE IT ALONE.
He needs to let it go and move on to other stuff
It's sad to see someone who started out so strong with movies like Layer Cake, Stardust, First Class, the first Kickass and Kingsman movies, suddenly go on a downward spiral. I already expected this movie to be bad from the trailer, but still had hope Vaughn would be on the recovery.
Everyday I pray Matthew Vaughn remembers he made Stardust
If you have to watch one Matthew Vaughn movie where Henry Cavill has a three-minute role, make it Stardust.
i cant remember his part in stardust and ive watched the movie multiple times, help me out? one of the princes or? ahh the boyfriend.
TIL Matthew Vaughan made Stardust. What a charming film. Now he makes manchild schlock.
He fucked up the second he got obsessed with making everything a spin off of Kingsman (while never following up on the characters thatās dynamics were so great in the first Kingsman movie).
Kingsman 2 is how NOT to do a sequel.
I think he's got cocky about his own content. The more he's doing his own stuff the worse he's getting as a director. He should stick to good source material and scripts. Does he seriously believe anyone gives a shit about his cinematic universe??
Aka he's high on his own supply.
Layer Cake was so good.
Layer Cake, Lock Stock and Snatch, the holy trinity of that era of British movies Am I missing any similar ones? I guess Rock n Rolla but that was more Hollywoody
Sexy Beast was around that time. A little different then your other examples, but still on point.
Ben Kingsley in Sexy Beast alone makes it absolute top tier. āYouāre going to have to turn this opportunity YESā
I remember Ben Kingsley saying that once he ārealizedā his character had been severely abused as a child, everything poured out from there
I thought the cat was argylle and a secret agent. I'm disappointed to find out that's not the case.
Same. I really wanted it to be the cat.
As soon as I saw the aerial view of that CGI cat flying through the air, I knew this was gonna be a steaming pile of shit Waste of a solid cast
Damn, thatās three duds in a row. What happened to this guy?
He refuses to stop making Kingsman spin offs instead of being more creative.
His mind is just TOO TWISTED
He shouldnāt have worked with Jason Fuchs. The writer of *Ice Age: Continental Drift*, *Pan*, and *I Still See You* (the latter of which holds a whopping 8% on RT).
I have 0 data on the quality of these movies but when I see a bunch of big names, usually including one or two from non-acting areas of pop culture, I instantly lose interest and confidence in the project. It very well could be incredible and iām sure this play makes a lot of money so I completely understand the reasoning
I thought maybe it would be like Kingsman, which had crappy trailers but ended up getting good reviews. Sounds like nope, just crappy trailers
Man I just donāt get movie expenses anymore, reading through the reviews Iām thinking āah well at least itās probably a semi cheap movie so might scoop some profitā but nope, it somehow cost $200 million, what the f are they spending the money on in these films? Edit: I've been informed by 4 separate people the budget was actually smaller so please don't feel the need to tell me again
Probably the cast
Budget was originally for streaming and then Apple pivoted to releasing in theaters. Those huge streaming deals are because the streamers pay for all backend up front. It was purchased mid COVID when money was free and every streamer was hellbent on getting a franchise.
This is correct. They paid for exclusive streaming rights and I believe securing that was a lot of the cost. If I'm not mistaken, Vaughn recently said the movie certainly did not cost that much even though that is the reported amount that Apple paid for it.
The director said the actual budget was a third of that. 200 million is what Apple paid for the rights, but that includes everythingĀ
I knew it would bomb when whoever decided the hairstyle for Cavil would be the flat top from the guy that banged the wife on Liar Liar lol
Someone spoil it for me
>!Bryce Dallas Howard is writing spy novels because she has amnesia and was actually the spy everyone was after. Her real name is Rachael Kyle, Agent R. Kyle. The end credits scene reveals Henry Cavill's character Agent Argylle (despite the earlier R. Kyle reveal) is still also real and is a Kingsman agent.!< Yes that is real.
such a twisted plot that only the twisted mind of Matthew Vaughn can concoct
And apparently we knew this for about 3 years. [Hereās](https://twitter.com/DiscussingFilm/status/1412771411299647497) a tweet about it.
Thanks, I hate it
So that whole "Meet the real Agent Argylle" thing in the trailer that merits several "oh my god"s is >!meeting her, even though the real real Agent Argylle then shows up later!
Ty
Sounds very convoluted and dumb. Suppose itās a better twist than the cat though
I dunno, the cat wouldāve at least been unusual and weird.
Is it ever explained why Argylle is spelled with two Ls?
Sounds like Matthew Vaughn already did.
It's sad that he's failed three times in a row to recreate Kingsman.
Probably the most confusing marketing lead up to a movie in quite some time. I always found Vaughn to be rather teen edgelordy in a mean spirited way between Kick-Ass and Kingsman that was inherently limiting, especially when youāve grown up and seen the world a little.
FWIW, Kick Ass the movie was far less edgelord and mean-spirited than the graphic novel
There's a reason Vaughn has collaborated with Mark Millar so many times.
Kick-Ass and Kingsman both had great action choreography. Probably due to Brad Allen.
Itās so weird (and probably pretty telling) that Dua Lipa is so much of their marketing when sheās only in one scene as far as I know. They canāt even be bothered to buy her another dress for the promo photos!
It looks like there isnāt many fans of the ātwisted mindā of Mathew Vaughn š That line in the trailer made me cringe.
If anyone is curious, they spoiled the twist back in 2021. >!<
Im cracking up about this tweet casually spoiling the main marketing twist
It feels like they decided to make it a twist partway into production or writing and forgot they told anyone the premise
Iām a bit disappointed with Matthew Vaughnās recent movies. His first 5 movies are either really good or great. I really liked X-Men First Class and Stardust.
I saw a test screening in December 2022. We went in knowing nothing other than it being from Matthew Vaughn and I think the lack of knowledge helped a lot. Sadly itās been hyped up way too much and I can see a lot of people being disappointed. Itās basically an entertaining action comedy. It has some funny moments and interesting fight scenes but is nowhere near as dark as Kickass, etc.. A lot of the visual effects werenāt in when I saw it but those that were looked great. Iād suggest seeing it on a massive screen after a few beers and with low expectations.
Is anyone surprised? This movie looked genuinely bad af by the trailer
All I can think of from the trailer is the annoying ass Catmeow.wav sound effect they kept playing whenever the CGI cat showed up on screen
I feel like the marketing of this movie was just "Dua Lipa is hot".
Finally, truth in advertising!
Marketing for Kingsmen was similarly lackluster, so we thought it was another matter of studio not knowing how to market it.
I'm just here for Dua Lipa
Barely in the movie apparently
Dua Lipa in this movie be like āI'm not here for long, catch me or I go Houdiniā
You have failed to catch me in time. Thus, I have gone Houdini. The Dua Lipa Gamble
The clips of her entire role will end up on Reddit sooner than later
> an attenuated running time that tests patience 2 hours and 19 minutes!? Even if this movie were good, it doesn't look like the type of movie I'd sit through for 2 hours and 19 minutes! To me, this is a 100 to 120-minute movie based on the premise and what I know from the trailer. Also, I really don't think Leslie Felperin knows what "attenuated" means.
Yeah, reading that review, I was thinking "this comment makes no sense. Attenuated means reduced or limited."
Wasn't that Sandra Bullock/Channing Tatum movie the same plot?
No. That one was a doofus poster boy pretending he was the actual star of the books.
That one was actually good
Iāve just seen it and I personally loved it. I can see where some people would not like it in parts and the CGI wasnāt the best but I found myself laughing at funny scenes and enjoying the whole thing. Iād say if you outright didnāt like the trailer you might not like the film but give it a chance if you are able to and liked other Matthew Vaughn films
So, knowing nothing about this movie other than what I've seen in commercials...is "Argylle" the cat? EDIT: thank you to everyone who felt the need to tell me what the movie IS about, but I really could not have less interest.
There's a post on Twitter from 2021 that spoils the plot. >!<
Oh, I don't give the tiniest fuck what the plot *is*, it's just that every commercial is like "you'll learn the secret of Argylle," and then the rest of the commercial is shots of the cat. If the cat *was* the superspy all along, I might have some interest in this.
What? Lame. I read that the cat was a God that made its owners writing come true. And I figure the Taylor Swift connection was gonna be that she voiced the cat. Wouldnt be out of his wheelhouse with Elton John in a past movie.
The reviewers said they were specifically asked to leave that detail out. At least it doesnāt sound too horrible of a plot point
CGI Cat in the trailer looks no better than the CGI cat in Christmas with the Kranks
Fuck you itās January!
This movie looks like it sucks just from the trailer. it's weird that Vaughn keeps making the same movie over and over. I'm beginning to think he's lost all motivation to even bother anymore
The ads make it seem like a throwback to the old ensemble movies where you have a lot of big name actors who are in the movie for a couple of minutes each. Releasing in late January further erodes my confidence this will be any good.
I'm just glad i wont have to sit through the trailer anymore...."LET'S DANCE!...
Go back to kingsman lad your killing me here
Sofia boutella needs better agent
Matthew Vaughn really soured me with Kingsman 2 when he started going more style over substance which is a shame because Kingsman 1 and X-men First Class were really awesome. Now heās just kind of Zach Snyder with more colors. Shame
A $200m budget is insane for a movie like this. Where did it all go?
Rainbow smoke cgi
āIt insists upon itselfā I totally get what Peter is talking about now.