New review: Kingsman: the Golden ring 03.10.2017

The first film Kingsman was great. About this movie usually say: “there is style, there is taste.” And the story was reasonable and logical. The icing on the British cake was the humor. All of these components, combined directorial work, showed extraordinary and worthy of the ribbon.

Yes, I can not say that the second part I was waiting for, but alas, I can say that:

1. So stupid to kill one of the main intrigue of the film had to be able. But even more ridiculous was the introduction of the character Colin Firth. BAM! And after head-shots he live like this, well, I think, lost its memory.

2. What is the meaning of all was to collect a number of truly great actors, when to give them, well if 5 minutes of screen time?

3. Eggsy — well, then all downhill. Wanted further development of the character? Will not wait. The Monsieur Lamour tuzhur.

4. A good sense of humor the first part the first part ended. In the “Golden Ring” he quickly slid into the groin. Or vanished into the blackness.

5. Colleagues of our favorite Brits were simply cardboard, osleplennye from all sorts of clichés and templates. Channing, you hurt.

6. The villain strode down the essence. As a story point. The motivation has been there and not started.

7. Yes, action, but the blood sometimes was not justified. Rather, its the quantity.

Summary: claimed to be the style and originality — get the one less-traveled, predictable and banal tape.

If all the above is not to draw attention and set a goal to watch humorous blacktop with a dash of action — a good choice. But fans of the first part can’t advise you on the sequel. He really dropped off.

New review: Kingsman: the Golden ring 03.10.2017

Поделиться в соц. сетях

Share to Google Buzz
Share to Google Plus
Share to LiveJournal