User blog:Lifeless.sky/Kingsman: The Golden Circle

So I'm a huge fan of Kingsman. Needless to say I was really pumped for the Golden Circle but honestly I was mildly dissapointed. It wasn't nearly as good as the first one was (which I feel everyone was expecting tbh) but there was something else about it that just threw me off. I couldn't figure it out at first but then I eventually got it:

Kingsman: the Golden Circle was not a "good movie", nor was it a bad one. In my own personal opinion, it was just an entertaining movie.

The plot was alright but it wasn't outstanding, none of the twists were really that surprising, it wasn't very well written, and the characters were missing the development and depth they had in Kingsman: the Secret Service. These are all traits found in a good movie. Instead the Golden Circle had traits of an entertaining movie.

It was well enough directed (especially during action scenes) that made the experience fun and the action was memorizing and enjoyable to watch. If it wasn't for the unique style known to the Kingsman franchise, I would have seen the film much more harshly than I do and wouldn't have liked it as much.

Now that that's stated obviously and out of the way, I wanted to mention some smaller things that I like or disliked about the most recent installment of the Kingsman franchise (ooh I s2g there better be more films).

A part of the movie than I found intresting and neat was the design of the villain's (Poppy) little hideout. The design of the 50's mixed with ancient jungle temple lair gave me strong comic book/graphic novel vibe, tying it back to its graphic novel origin. 'Course Poppy as both a villain and character isn't nearly as favorable as Samuel L. Jackson's Valentine from TSS, but she was decent enough to be taken serious (mostly because sometimes I found that I wasn't really enjoying the way she was written).

Also, there was much more action in this movie than the first of the series. It was kind of blatantly obvious that this was because there was less plot development than the first movie, but the way the action is choreographed and filmed makes it more acceptable than average action films.

Something that irrates me as a person who enjoys writing stories and creating fresh unique non-stereotypical characters is the way the Statesman in specifc were written. Sure, at times the Kingsman were a tad bit stereotypical but in general they seemed that way because their title of gentleman spies. But the Statesman on the other hand were like someone just go0gled "American stereotypes" and that was all the effort that was put into their development.

I also wanted to address the indivdual Statesman by name. Jeff Bridge's character, Champ, did literally nothing the entire movie, as did Ginger. They were both there not to progress the plot but to act as another simularity between the two spy organizations. Tequila was pretty much useless as well seeing how they shoved him under cryo not too long after being introduced and left him there until the movie was over.

Can I just say how gotdamn devestated I was when they killed Roxy off within the first ten minutes of the film? Like? You kill off your strongest female lead? Before she has a single action thing? Like please?

That's it for now I'm tired goodbye.