A Terrific Blockbuster Sometimes Marred By Its Violence

Rating: 6/10 (15 July 2015)

It's hard not to miss the early days of James Bond, when the adventures were colorful, 007 was spryly unserious, and the villains were ready to rupture with their European shaded, cackling madmen personas. Such wondrous cool exploded in the early Bond franchise that it isn't unrealistic to watch "Goldfinger" over and over again. Cheekiness goes a long way. But now we have the "modern" Bond (introduced in 2006's "Casino Royale"), who is as sophisticated as ever but is hardly the Technicolor nympho he was in the pre-Brosnan days. He's become a spy grizzled and cynical, more quick to grimace as he goes through the motions, a smirk completely unheard of. I like "Casino Royale" and its sequels ("Quantum of Solace", "Skyfall"), but I miss the days when British spies weren't always well-oiled machines of slickness — agile, action-packed ridiculousness is much more satisfactory in the long run.
I suppose I wasn't sitting around and waiting for a movie like "Kingsman: The Secret Service" to come around and sweep me off my feet, but it's the kind of blockbuster needed to invigorate the incessant rut of superhero franchises/gritty action movies. Here is a movie so cartoonishly brash in its thrills I couldn't help but reflect back on "The Avengers" and "The Man from U.N.C.L.E.". Cheesy yet impressively tactical, both were 1960s spy shows fully aware they were telling comically insane stories most of the time — but through a competent use of gaudy violence and disco ball flashy characters, silliness became sly while everyones tongue remained firmly in cheek.
"Kingsman: The Secret Service" is a parody of sorts, self-aware in its cocktail infused kookiness but ready to pay homage when it comes time to hearken back to the days when Roger Moore was kicking every bad guy's ass as he held an unrealistically sexy woman at close quarters. This film's biggest issue is its violence — while oft comical, there are several gratuitous scenes of bloodshed that hardly match the snickering tone of everything else — but when "Kingsman" succeeds it manages to soar; it's a puff of crisp air following the pollution of its staling super-suited counterparts.
With a lively wicked performance from Jackson, "Kingsman", like one of its characters suggests, is as good as its villain: exaggerated, bombastic, agreeably oily, though a little too violent. Indeed, the majority of "Kingsman" is an amusing take on what the Bond franchise could have been, had 007 been seventeen and let loose in a maze of rated-R obstacles — but sometimes, the film goes too far, a shame when so much of it sits a cut above other modern blockbusters.
My most prominent issue lies in the constant profanity and the sometimes disturbing violence. Though I don't liken myself to the most prudish of people, tonal issues arise through "Kingsman"'s inability to figure out if it's joking or if it's a bit sick in the head. The fight scenes are astonishingly well-choreographed, haphazardly exciting in their fast-motion dexterity — but somewhere during the halfway mark, the film sours once it sets a mass slaughter in a church.
The scene, finding its setting in Kentucky, serves as an introduction to Valentine's new technology, which causes even the most peaceful of people to become violent with just the click of a button, thanks to their Valentine designed cell phones. Unfortunately, Harry Hart is visiting, ending with him killing every single person in the building. Vaughn, who directs most of the film charismatically, decides that such an act is excusable as long as the people are despicable (think the Westboro Baptist Church) — but the murders are less cutely "Kill Bill" and more gory horror movie violent, the acts mostly shocking and not thrilling. The scene ends with a man getting a stake stabbed harshly from the bottom of his face to the top: are we supposed to laugh? Irritating is how much more focus is put into these scenes of gratuitous terror being placed upon innocents while the post-credits sequence leaves Eggsy's beating of his stepfather off-camera. Personally, I would rather my screen violence be justified rather than simply there to be cool. But that's just me.
If my review sounds negative, don't pay any attention: the previous two paragraphs exist as one giant complaint. Fact is, I liked "Kingsman: The Secret Service." Taron Egerton, reminiscent of a snarky young Guy Pearce, has serious potential to become a movie star. You certainly won't look at the normally smooth Colin Firth the same way again. And Vaughn ("Kick Ass", "X-Men: First Class"), for the most part, gives us a strictly fun action movie, full of terrific lines and thrillingly choreographed brawls. I just wish the film had an understanding that violence has to match tone, and for a movie so ready to charm us, we shouldn't have to buckle up and grab our barf bags right after we gleam during a witty exchange. I wouldn't want to have my martini stirred instead of shaken, now would I?