As with most sequels, the second movie in a series is typically hit or miss. Some sequels are phenomenal and rival the success of the first movie. Others, however, probably shouldn’t have been made. And then there is a special category of sequels that weren’t awful but really just weren’t that great. That’s where “Kingsman: The Golden Circle” comes in.
“Kingsman: The Golden Circle” combines the British secret agency, Kingsman, that was introduced in the first movie and its U.S. counterpart, Statesman. The plot centers on a drug cartel, The Golden Circle, that attempts to destroy Kingsman. The cartel poisons its drugs to try and blackmail international governments into legalizing drug use. Instead of the Kingsman agents combating their opponent on their own, the story forces them to work with their American equivalents if they want to complete their mission and defeat The Golden Circle.
While there were many good things about “Kingsman,” such as the special effects, the acting, the casting, the sets and the stunts, the main issue I had was with the script. The movie was fairly predictable with few surprises or twists. It was your typical action movie with a good guy gone bad, a loved one in danger and heroes who save the world in the end. There were more plot holes in the sequel than in the first film that either left the viewers wondering why something happened that way or how the characters had so little common sense.
For example, in one scene, one of the agents suspects that another has gone rogue. Instead of asking why the agent believed the other to be bad, the rest of the organization just assumed he was crazy. Common sense would be to ask the agent why he believed what he did. Also, The Golden Circle’s secret hideout being on the top of a mountain in clear satellite view made it hard to get into the movie.
In addition to a script that wasn’t completely fantastic, it honestly felt like the writers were trying too hard to recreate the first movie with a different plotline. I don’t have a problem with an R-rated movie using some language or having some sexual content. But, unlike the first “Kingsman” movie that had language sprinkled throughout, there were some scenes in “Kingsman: The Golden Circle” that felt like the writers truly wanted to see how many “F-bombs” they could squeeze into the scene. Instead of adding something to the storyline, the continuous use of bad language was more distracting than anything else because it didn’t always make sense with the scenes.
Despite some small plot holes, a so-so script and a little too much effort on the part of the writers to make a funny, entertaining action movie, “Kingsman: The Golden Circle” really wasn’t a bad movie. There were plenty of fight scenes, a love story, tragedy and a happy ending for most of the characters. The movie had a least one thing that any person could enjoy.
The majority of the movie was entertaining and well done. I thought the casting was great as well. The sequel brought back many of the main characters from the first movie in addition to adding some big names to the lineup, such as Channing Tatum, Halle Berry and Elton John. Each actor fit well with the character he or she played. The stunts and special effects could rival any great action movie while giving it the memorable “Kingsman” comedy from the first movie.
Overall, “Kingsman: The Golden Circle” was a good movie that could’ve used a better script. While I wouldn’t want to pay $10 to see it, getting it from RedBox or seeing it in a cheaper theater wouldn’t be a waste of time.