Ok downvotes. Defend that movie. Especially the scene with the princess at the end. I can sort of understand how most people liked it because for most people the bar is low on movies. But this is HN. How can smart people like a movie that treats the audience like idiots?
That movie is intended more as a parody or farce. If you expected a serious movie, it would be disappointed. Although its been a long time since "action" movies were serious.
Lowest hanging fruit would suggest James Bond? The insane gadgetry, the dedication to Britishness, the utterly bonkers plot of the villain and "getting the girl" at the end were all mainstays of that type of film. Albeit turned up to 11 and taken in, as mentioned above, farcical directions.
It's far closer to Austin Powers. You can't parody suave James Bond with a no class street thug who spends most of the film in training, which Bond has never done on film. Or moping about his mom, Bond doesn't even have have a mom. Bond works for the British government, and he works alone.
First the spy/action movies are epitomized by the Bond series, and Kingsman has little to do with Bond. Sure it has gadgets, a megalomaniacal villain with a world destroying plan, and British agents. But Bond isn't a street urchin, never has a family, let alone family problems, never goes thru a recruitment or training process, rarely ever works on a team, and is entirely a governmental employee.
And it's even farther away from Mission Impossible, and the Bourne Identity series. So it can only be a parody of Bond, and not only is it far from Bond, it's not even funny. How can you parody something without being funny? It really smells like they had an idea that was more serious, then realized they couldn't make it work midway through, and pivoted to a not very funny parody.
