Perhaps because of the traumatic experience of watching "The Gentlemen", I can understand the three-axle axe that Guy Ritchie talks about about urban gangsters. As a result, I can't watch this 1hr50min film again.
Contrasting with the poor Gentlemen, this one,
It's a talker-style mouthpiece, in a sense that it's a bit like the ancients doing fu, writing for the sake of writing. Although I really admire it, because this kind of script is not easy, it seems to be some kind of genius expression of his dyslexia, right? Because of the difficulty of text input, it has a great ability to absorb and control the output. But the text is playing like this for 1 hour and 50 minutes, which is a bit empty, a bit sloppy, and quite boring.
In the group portraits, the British accent is the smartest, noblest, and most rational, holding all the cards; Americans are rash, blunt, unstable; Asians are ancient, evil, unknowable, and untrustworthy. Exactly like in the gentlemen. Hey-hey. After all, Guy Ritchie went from a creative writing type to wanting to be a commercial director. He chose to entertain some of the characteristics in his blood, and he deserved to be rotten to the ground.
His friend, matthew vaughn, like him, made a big fuss about this idiot stereotype in kingsman part 2. Take ignorance for fun. From this feature, we can make a point.
So, to be honest, this can be regarded as a reflection of a basic law of patriarchal society. As for men, middle-aged greasy, middle-aged slips, middle-aged late festivals are not guaranteed, because they can quickly accumulate too many privileges in socialization for more than 20 years because of their biological sex, feeding ego, bigger than the solar system. Narrow and self-conscious, ignorance is interesting. Those who can maintain humble, sensible, and contact with the real world without becoming egotistical are really rare, almost impossible. Indeed, do not expect men.
The third trick is the editing around the soundtrack. Even if this is commercialized, it is actually very exciting with a technical foundation. Even there is a chase scene in "Gentlemen", which is better than Feng Delun (comparison across industrial systems, no martial arts, but I can't help it). His good friend, like matthew vaughn, is so bad that in the third "the king's man" that sticks to the ground, rasputin's sword dance is still very beautiful.
Although Guy Ritchie's widely loved rotten is very happy, but I didn't expect this trick to be used in the 23rd year, Statham is indeed worth holding on to, but why is Hugh Grant at this age (in "Gentlemen") Fletcher, confusing. Generally, hiding the background of characters is for the sake of mystery, so he made Fletcher to make him hate it like a fly that bites meat and can't drive away extreme greed. Or, I may just not be able to stand a man monologue for more than 30 seconds. )?
View more about Revolver reviews
