I've never watched the first Kingsman movie - the enthusiasm with which it was endorsed by wingnuts for its political incorrectness was a good warning sign, as well as several reviews which indicated to me that I really would not like anything by its director - so I am somewhat pleased that the second is receiving a lukewarm response from the critics.
And here is more confirmation than I would have thought possible that it must be objectionable on all levels - a thorough endorsement by Breitbart's British village idiot James Delingpole, whose science comprehension level of a 12 year old naughty boy who wasn't paying attention in class indicates taste in movies of a similar immaturity.
2 comments:
It was an entertaining movie not sure what politics had to do with it. And not particularly politically incorrect. Sure there were evil Greenies in it but the bad guys were also the 'rich kids'
Evil greenies = politically incorrect, I would have thought.
And maybe the headline like the one at the Breitbart review ‘Kingsman: The Secret Service’ Insanely Entertaining, Gleefully Un-PC' fooled me, too.
More than one blog review also had a significant problem with the sexual politics of both the original and this one too, and the anal sex joke.
I have watched the church sequence, and a little bit of it on TV.
It is very much is the type of film I am going to intensely dislike - I have a problem with continual swearing and hyper violence as entertainment, which I know marks me out as an old fuddy duddy.
I also know that dismissing a movie without seeing it can be annoying - but sometimes you can know so much about a movie that the negative reaction on actually watching is pretty much a given.
Post a Comment