“Kingsman: The Golden Circle” falls short of expectations “Kingsman: The Golden Circle” falls short of expectations
2
BY DARIAN SABLON After the commercial and critical success of the 2014 hyperrealistic spy flick “Kingsman: The Secret Service,” Matthew Vaughn returns for the... “Kingsman: The Golden Circle” falls short of expectations

BY DARIAN SABLON

After the commercial and critical success of the 2014 hyperrealistic spy flick “Kingsman: The Secret Service,” Matthew Vaughn returns for the highly anticipated sequel “Kingsman: The Golden Circle.” Sadly, rather than living up to the hype, “Kingsman: The Golden Circle” falls victim to poor writing, terrible CGI and mediocre character motivations.

One of the worst problems of “Kingsman: The Golden Circle” is the misstep in the writing, particularly in the plot. The general idea of the movie is that the British super spy organization, Kingsman, is forced to join forces with their American counterparts, Statesman, in order to stop a new enemy while the world hangs in the balance. While the premise has great potential, the execution is less than favorable. The plot is a mess, a problem that can be especially seen in the villain’s motivations. Played by Julianne Moore, the character’s reasoning for her actions is nonsensical and doesn’t justify her villainy.

Moore’s strawman motives are only a small part of the ripple effect caused by the poor writing in “Kingsman: The Golden Circle,” with another huge issue being the decision to amplify the hyperrealism to an obnoxious level. Expertly combined with good writing and captivating characters, the hyperrealism made “Kingsman: The Secret Service” stand out. Yet without any of the aforementioned qualities and made worse by the terrible CGI, “Kingsman: The Golden Circle” feels more like the product of an overly active child. Speaking of the CGI, it’s pretty bad. In a time where we’ve improved a lot with our CGI technology, it’s disappointing that “Kingsman: The Gold Circle” is unable to capitalize on that, which could have made it a better movie in general and suppressed some of its negative qualities.

That is not to say that there aren’t some parts of “Kingsman: The Golden Circle” that aren’t good. While the jokes aren’t as good as they were in “Kingsman: The Secret Service,” a product of the poor writing, there are some very funny moments of the movie that reminds audiences of the fun times in the previous film in the franchise. Also, while some of the dialogue is off, the cast does what it can with the script and makes the movie feel better than what it probably is in reality, a credit to all the actors and actresses.

Adding to the long list of disappointing sequels, “Kingsman: The Golden Circle” is a misfire for Matthew Vaughn. Due to writing issues and weak character motivations as well as bad CGI, the movie lets down all fans of the “Kingsman: The Secret Service.” Hopefully the third installment will fix all the problems and revitalize the loved super spy franchise.

Featured photo courtesy of “Kingman: The Golden Circle”

“Kingsman: The Golden Circle” is a bad movie, combining poor writing, weak character motivations and terrible CGI. The movie relies too heavily on the hyper realistic qualities, making it obnoxious to an almost nauseating level. A disappointing sequel to a once very promising franchise.
  • Good acting
  • Funny at times
  • Weak plot
  • Bad writing
  • Terrible CGI
  • Nonsensical character motivations

3 of 5

2 of 5

3 of 5

2 of 5

2 of 5