Film Review: Kingsman: The Secret Service

‪ 
Kingsman: The Secret Service. Rated MA 15+ (strong violence and coarse language). 129 minutes. Directed by Matthew Vaughn. Screenplay by Jane Goldman and Matthew Vaughn. Based on the comic book by Mark Millar and Dave Gibbons.‬

Verdict: An abundance of violence undermines a potentially great film.

It’s either an incredibly brave or equally naïve creative team who would dare to take on the celebrated spy movie genre, which has been enjoying something of a renaissance with Daniel Craig’s spectacularly produced outings as James Bond in films such as Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace and 2012’s superb Skyfall.

Trust Vaughn (Kick-Ass, X-Men: First Class) to throw caution to the wind and deliver a timely variation on the grand themes associated with espionage, which also packs a mighty punch in relation to the perils of our reliance on our precious mobile phone technology.

When special agent Harry Hart’s (Colin Firth) colleague is murdered during a mission, he visits the man’s widow Michelle (Samantha Womack) and young son to offer his unconditional and life-long support. When the boy, Gary ‘Eggsy’ Unwin (Taron Egerton), grows up to become a troubled teenager desperately trying to help his mother break out of an abusive relationship, Hart returns and offers Eggsy the opportunity to end the relentlessly abusive cycle and make something of his life.

Firth and Egerton are fantastic as the stylish Hart and his protégé, and Kingsman only works as well as it does because of their committed, engaging and enthusiastic performances. Samuel L. Jackson is wickedly entertaining as the lisping villain Richmond Valentine, who plans to solve the problem of climate change by eliminating most of the world’s population via their SIM cards.

The only problem is that if Vaughn wasn’t as convinced that we need as much ultra-violence on screen to make a lasting impression, he would be a film-maker whose films would reward close, and a good deal more devoted, attention.

This review was commissioned by the West Australian Newspaper Group.

Film Review: RoboCop

RoboCop. Rated M (science fiction themes and violence). 117 minutes. Directed by José Padilha. Screenplay by Joshua Zetumer.

Verdict: A slick remake of an unforgettable classic.

Remakes (or the current ‘buzz word’ reboots), are continuing to sweep through Hollywood like a plague, with Godzilla, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Endless Love and even little orphan Annie just a few of the titles lining up for release this year. The first remake off the rank is this slick entry into what will become a very crowded field.

If you haven’t seen Paul Verhoeven’s celebrated original, released in 1987, there’s much to engage with in this re-telling of the story of adoring father, husband and Detroit policeman Alex Murphy (Joel Kinnaman).

Fearing the police are closing in on their illegal weapons trade, Murphy is targeted by the gang who almost kill him by blowing up his car. When he regains consciousness, Murphy discovers that technology company OmniCorp, led by CEO Raymond Sellars (Michael Keaton), has encased what remained of his body into a state-of-the-art robotic suit. Sellars needs to win the trust of the American people by humanising the company’s robot soldiers that are seen as ruthless killing machines, incapable of considering how dangerous situations might be resolved with less brutal efficiency.

As was the case in the original, the themes of greed and exploitation play out in an ethically challenged minefield – with the rules of engagement starkly illustrated in the film’s opening sequences set in a US-occupied Tehran. When OmniCorp’s drones kill an innocent Iranian boy during a live cross to Pat Novak’s (Samuel L. Jackson) television program, the political pressure on the corporation results in Dr Dennett Norton (Gary Oldman) being given permission to go to whatever lengths are necessary to develop a more humanised version of the drones.

While it certainly suffers by comparison to the original, Padilha’s less boisterous version still wields a significant amount of clout, with the consequences of the story still as thought-provoking as they were back in 1987. And that just may be the point.

This review was commissioned by the West Australian Newspaper Group.