Is it better than the first?
“The Golden Circle” had some hype to live up to, “The Secret Service” had quick action, a surprisingly good script and great actors portraying the characters. But does it hold up? “Kingsman: The Golden Circle” (Directed by Matthew Vaughn) is the sequel to “Kingsman: The Secret Service”( Also directed by Matthew Vaughn), which was a surprising hit in theaters, and was hailed as the modern James Bond. Does it really hold up to “The Secret Service”? Ultimately, it really doesn’t. You can really chalk that up to “sequelitis”. They went to make it bigger and better than the first, when it really doesn’t get any better than the first. There is more action, which is pretty great, but the script really doesn’t hold up to the first. Does that mean it’s not a good movie? No, it’s a pretty good movie. I enjoyed it, and that’s what it comes down to at the end of the day, if you enjoy it or not. Just don’t go in with huge expectations.
Taron Egerton reprises his role as Eggsy and puts in another good performance in the film, he has amazing action scenes and has great chemistry with the other people on screen. Jeff Bridges, Channing Tatum, Halle Barry and Pedro Pascal headline the new “Statesman” and are pretty good, they aren’t breath taking in their performances, but they’re decent. Julianne Moore’s character is the one disappointment in the movie. Her villain just doesn’t hold up to the rest of the cast. She does her best with the role, but it just doesn’t work.
“Kingsman: The Golden Circle” is a pretty decent movie with returning characters doing pretty well. It just falls victim to “sequelitis”. An actual story, not just a rinse and repeat, would’ve been better for the movie as a whole. Julianne Moore’s character wasn’t completely fleshed out, and could’ve been a lot better. You wouldn’t be missing a whole lot by not seeing the movie, but make that decision for yourself.
“Kingsman: The Golden Circle” receives a 3 stars out of 5.