This film is absolutely beautiful in its naivety, stupidity and playfulness. Every scene, every fight, every episode is a banter on the genre, the plot, the expectations and disappointments of the audience, and especially the criticism of the critics. To assume that this is a bad director and / or a bad script, or an unsuccessful choice of actors, means not to understand the main thing – this is not accidental with a budget of 200 million USD.
The detective-espionage genre, if not outlived itself completely in our days, then certainly came to the very line when any new film that pretends to be serious, with stereotyped disgusting villains and incredible super agents, in the same long-legged agents, looks initially like a parody collected from some pieces of past films. Some parodies are better, some worse. And Argyle is not just a parody, but a parody of a parody, a grotesque of a grotesque, etc. To ask questions, why is everything there and not otherwise?, plus, why? – is to ask these questions in vain and in vain.
And even if you imagine, in the process of watching this movie, or you can after it, in place of a fat writer, for example, Cruise or Damon, then everything is unlikely to play with completely different colors, with the same visual and semantic range. Maybe it will be even funnier and more ridiculous. .
So stock up on popcorn, and there should be plenty of it to make it to the final credits.
“Knight of the Day,” “The Carrier,” “Faster Than Bullets,” “Long Kiss for the Night,” and all-everything!
Ellie Conway (Dallas Bryce Howard) writes books about the superspy Argyll (Henry Cavill) and they are very popular with the reader. Ellie even holds meetings with fans of her work, where some “fans” are not averse to her and ask her out on a date. And when Ellie goes on a trip by train, it turns out that they want to kill her, and those about whom she wrote! I mean, some spies. The truth of why and why is not yet clear.
But we all know that this is only an element of twisting the script and sooner or later all the secret will become clear!
Director Matthew Vaughn, who created Kingsman, creates his own spy universe and soon we will see another project, which will be the third in this universe. Its name has not yet been announced, but Vaughn is serious about doing so. True, the box office failure of Argyle can affect this. Still, this picture was far from the level of the first two “Kingsmans”.
Vaughn failed to make it completely original, so that it differed significantly from the storylines of Kingsman and almost from the very beginning, the viewer can begin to draw analogies with the previous projects of the director.
In “Argyle” famously shot fights – scenes with beatings are great from the point of view of editing and the camera operator. It's level, no questions asked. The realism of these fights sometimes resembles fights from Indian films (especially in the final fight on the ship), where only an imitation of a blow occurs and the leg / arm brakes in centimeters from the beaten face.
Some jokes and dialogue are also good (but not all!), and Sam Rockwell is perhaps the only one from the cast who can not find fault with. Rockwell is great in any film where his stupidity appears, harmoniously intertwined with seriousness - this is what he knows how to use qualitatively.
This was the case in The Great Scam, Confessions of a Dangerous Man, Seven Psychopaths, and Three Billboards, which earned him an Oscar. But these are the films that came out in the interval from the beginning of the zero at the end of the tenth years and Rockwell was always great!
Howard as Ellie Conway was harmonious, while her second incarnation was not accepted. The actress is far from in the same conditions that she had “Jurassic World” and a clear excess weight still takes place. Although it is possible that Vaughn did not seek to bring the actress closer to the model framework and therefore there is a sense of carelessness when choosing Howard for the main role.
And the viewer is used to the fact that spies always have a spectacular appearance. What is Jen Lawrence, what is Scarlett Johansson, what is Jolie or what?
Just when you see the posh-Howard on the “skates”, freely gaining high speed, or when she without a shadow of shortness of breath waves her arms and legs in a fight, there is a certain dissonance in the perception of what she saw!
Now to secondary.
The idea of memory loss was used by Vaughn in his Kingsman, as well as the return of such a character to life. We saw the same thing in The Long Kiss of the Night with Samuel Jackson. The hero of Rockwell (I repeat – to the actor himself there are no questions at all), his first appearance, his long hair – like a parody on “Fast Bullet” act, as well as the abundance of those on the train with whom he has to fight.
The visit of the two main characters somewhere in the Middle East is like one of the stages of the adventure of James Bond in the Quantum of Mercy. The oil spill scene is a clear reference to one of the parts of the Carrier. That’s just Jason Statham was all in the oil, riding on it, and Howard, O Miracle, knees and dress were clean, although she pecked them right and left!
And “Knight of the Day” – the events and adventures of the two main characters, as well as the fear of flights performed by the heroine Howard, pushes even to the picture of Mangold with Cruz and Diaz.
Again, a Syndicate or Division of the same kind. We saw strangers among our own in Kingsman. He's not surprised.
And if Argyll were touted as a spy action parody of other spy films, then yes, all of these similar elements would be appropriate. But Argyll. Superspy acts as a standalone product that, along with Kingsman and another Vaughn project, forms the universe. And since Kingsman isn’t a parody of spy movies, it’s probably silly to think Argyle is a parody.
Facts:
- Argyle is named after the limousine driver from the first Die Hard movie.
- While Ellie and Aiden are in London exploring satellite locations, a can of Statesman from the Kingsman franchise stands on a table in the park next to a laptop.
- The finale, in which a tanker explodes and the main characters run away from it, is very similar to the finale of the 1997 action movie Speed 2: Cruise Control.
- Matthew Vaughn chose Henry Cavill because "he needed a man who was born to play James Bond." In fact, Cavill was a contender for the role of Bond in the movie Casino Royale, but was rejected for being too young (he was then 22 years old).
But look at you. I do not impose my opinion on anyone.
Writer Ellie Conway is finishing her fifth novel about the adventures of spy Aubrey Argyle, who fights a sinister secret organization. When a woman goes by train to her mother, a long-haired man sits up to her and reports that he is a real spy, and Ellie has guessed many of what is really happening in her books, and they immediately need to fly to London in search of hacker Bakunin.
I think few people will argue with the fact that Argyle can be safely called one of the main surprises (unfortunately not in the best sense of the word) and high-profile failures of the year. It would seem that the director is not a bad and proven director, the idea looks at least interesting and with an abundance of surprises, and the cast can safely envy any large-budget studio project. However, instead of a commercially successful blockbuster, it turned out to be a film that neither critics nor viewers liked. What's the reason? Let's figure it out.
At first glance, it may seem that we have a rather primitive and trivial story in the spirit of numerous spy fighters. Except that, the authors of the picture tried to diversify and refresh the narrative by introducing imaginary characters from the novels of the main character into the history. However, after half the screen time, the authors of the picture give out the promised plot twist, which literally turns inside out the previously shown and exposes its true face.
If “Kingsman” authored by Matthew Vaughn “mocked” Bondiana, then in this case, another spy hit in the face of “Bourne Identity” obviously fell under the gun of the author. In addition to everything, Vaughn brought elements of such films as “Roman with a stone” and “Remember everything”. But instead of ridiculing or reassembling the genre, it actually rebooted the story, and that’s its main problem. There is too much going on in the picture, and mainly at the level of farce, it turns everything into a kind of clowning. Thus, in no way causing a smile or laughter when watching, how much perplexity about what he saw.
From a director’s point of view, the film definitely looks much better. Numerous transitions from reality to the fantasies of the main character look interesting and smooth, the action for the most part looks extremely creative and unusual, and the picture stands out with some diligence. However, there were not without shortcomings. First, the film is overloaded with computer graphics (even in those moments in which you could do without them). Secondly, this very computer graphics look very cartoonish and sometimes repulsive. Thirdly, the narrative looks uneven, and the film itself is simply lengthy.
As for the cast, it is certainly he who pulls the whole film on his shoulders, but with some reservations. Brian Cranston plays a cardboard villain, but performs quite well on screen. The same can be said about Samuel L. Jackson and Sophia Butell, whose original characters fit into one sentence. However, the actors definitely do everything to make the characters a little less flat. Henry Cavill appeared in an atypical role, and John Cena in a typical one. Together, the two actors also play their roles well. It is a pity that in fact within the framework of the plot, their characters are not so necessary and this fact does not allow the actors to play out in full force. Except that Bryce Dallas Howard and Sam Rockwell do not hit their faces in the dirt and pleasantly surprise with numerous personal transformations of their heroes and excellent play.
5 out of 10
Argyle: Superspy is definitely one of the biggest failures and disappointments of the year. The film promised at least something interesting and the beginning of a new franchise. However, in fact it looks very uneven, absolutely superficial, certainly raw and obviously very ridiculous work, which does not cause laughter and smiles when viewing. Only perplexity as to what happened next almost two hours of screen time and what target audience the film was aimed at.
Having become one of the most respected directors of the spy genre after the release of the bright comedy The Secret Service, director Matthew Vaughn decided to associate his next projects with a given artistic theme. And so he signed up for a new project called Argyle, which, according to some reports, spent about $ 200 million. However, the result in the end was not as inspiring as he wanted to see.
In the center of the plot of the film is a modest but very successful writer Ellie Conway, who came up with a special agent Argyle, acting in the style of James Bond. The first 4 books about Argyle were very popular, but the fifth book became a great test for the girl. She does not really know how to finish it and tries to find support from her mother.
Sitting on the train, Ellie thought to quietly spend time on the way, but here she is joined by a strange guy named Aiden, who turns out to be a real secret agent who saves Ellie from certain death. They will have a great adventure ahead of them, as according to Aiden, Ellie somehow predicts everything that happens to him and this unique ability is simply necessary to use for the good guys who continue to fight the bad.
The story itself was incredibly promising, and the plot existed in two dimensions at once. That is, on the one hand, we saw the adventures of Argyle and his friends in the world of books, and on the other, we watched what was happening in the life of the writer. And gradually the first part of the story completely disappeared and we were left alone with Ellie and Aiden. Absurd in the plot became more, and common sense was almost not.
Of course, spy comedy could be forgiven a lot, but not boredom and problems with the development of the story. The film is very often slowed down and tired of unnecessary scenes and conversations. Timekeeping puts a lot of pressure on the viewer during viewing, which makes the story difficult to perceive. Well, in the second half of the film we are waiting for so many unexpected plot twists that they simply made the plot absolutely uninteresting and in the end absurd.
“Argyle” could be a great spy comedy with an acceptable level of absurdity, but instead we got a frankly strange and boring film that does not realize its initial magnificent potential.
4 out of 10
You know, the first 20 minutes made me happy. They are funny, grotesque, skillfully hyperbolize the clichés of the genre, bringing them to the absurd. Even improbable action scenes and mediocre special effects can be attributed to the fact that most modern blockbusters are on the path of toothless computer graphics and “fast-and-fast” productions. It all works.
But then every minute the film starts to stall more and more, until you finally realize that you are tired of Argyle. If you expected something from him, then in the end any expectations should be hidden as deep as possible.
I had some anticipation of watching. Matthew Vaughn is a director not of the last echelon, he knows how to make interesting pictures that can compare favorably with the rest. The same Kingsman came out competent rediscovery of spy paintings, which worked both as an ironic comedy and as a self-sufficient representative of the genre. About the subsequent sequel and prequel, the same can not be said, but I wanted to believe that they were only a slight misfire of a sharp shooter. Ah, no. It seems that the shooter himself became weak and now he smears more often.
Again, compared to Kingsman. Does Argyle manage to balance between ridiculing spy movies and, at the same time, displaying their genre tropes? Hardly. In the main plot, Argyle categorically refuses to follow the trampled clichés and instead chooses the path of intricacies that, instead of the “wow” effect, impose only a feeling of fatigue. Plus, there are a lot of plot twists per square meter, which is why their weight begins to simply lose.
Satire on the spy genre does not work, since at times the picture ... oddly enough, lacks humor. Not humor from the category of the film “Knight of the day” with Cruz, where the heroine is simply in shock with what is happening and it should be funny. But humor, which would specifically take some trope, beat it in a different way, and then would laugh at the fact that working in the cinema in reality does not roll, completely lacks. Only if the fake Henry Cavill ad is added to the bad irony that we expect 'men in beautiful jackets' to star.
Yeah, speaking of that. I’m not a big fan of this actor and I don’t think he’s the De Niro of our generation, but I totally understand the fans. Posters and promotional materials specifically focused on him, misled the inexperienced viewer. At the same time, the real main character performed by Bryce Dallas Howard was always somewhere on the side of the hook. And in the film, she feels like a character who was literally forced to become the main character instead of Cavill, although Howard has almost nothing to offer.
But in defense of the actress, it should be said that the script itself gives less room for revelry. Of all the people here, only Sam Rockwell tries to suggest something beyond the norm. The rest either look plain, or roll everything into a banal farce, depending on the degree of absurdity of the scene.
In the dry remnant, Argyle remains an extremely nondescript ridiculous movie, either a parody of the genre or not. Is there anything in it that might attract you? Well, as it turned out, Vaughn somehow combined his two franchises into one universe (although both have the same actors playing different characters and this is emphasized). If he wanted to achieve the Split effect, where everyone was shocked by the scene after the credits with Bruce Willis, then this, alas, failed. Rather, the situation with the recent Transformers, where the attempt to concoct a crossover caused only bewilderment. And to endure for two hours for the sake of doing such a thing.
Alas, if this spy had any mission, he successfully failed it.
Here is the story of writer Ellie Conway, who finishes the fifth novel about the spy Argyle fighting a sinister organization. One day, Ellie encounters a real spy who informs her that everything she has written in her books has come true. So she needs to write the last chapter of her book.
Argyll: Superspy is a new film from director Matthew Vaughn, which I’ve been waiting for with interest, because I like Vaughn’s movies for his recklessness, besides I love spy movies and the film has a rather interesting cast.
I can say that the movie turned out quite good, of course not a masterpiece, but you can see it. I liked that the film turned out to be dynamic, boring, spectacular, but this is what I did not like that I was overthinking with “unexpected” plot twists that occurred well, very often from which I wanted to “roll my eyes” and say “Yes, OK”.
Well, too much, to be honest, although I liked the book Argyle performed by Henry Cavill and Sam Rockwell as Aiden. I wanted to note the camera work, scenes of fights, shootouts, chase looked pretty good, although in some places the graphics slipped especially in the final scene with skates.
The actors. Bryce Dallas Howard, Ellie Conway, her character turned out so peculiar, you can say, getting into a difficult situation she has to grasp everything on the fly to survive. In the image of Howard looked convincing in places, and in places, to be honest, overwired with her character.
Sam Rockwell, Aiden, again I liked his character, he turned out so lively, with charisma it was interesting to watch him.
In general, “Argyle: Superspy” turned out to be quite a watchable film with a good cast, from a visual point of view spectacular, quite boring with an old-school soundtrack, and of course Alfie’s cat, which is a separate star of the film.
How bad! It's so bad it's scary! So scary because bad! (please vary your alliances and prepositions with these two words for a dozen more headlines)
The plot of the film is not bad and even captures attention for a while. In the middle of the film, it went worse, but in general I had the impression that I was in front of a medium comedy action movie, which will be forgotten 5 minutes after watching. How wrong I was! This will be difficult to forget.
After about two-thirds of screen time, the film begins to fall into the abyss of idiocy, where each next scene was worse than the previous one. At first, I mentally began to lower the rating of the film for each terrible scene, but going far into the negative, I quit this case.
I want to say that I always try to watch movies to the end, even if they are bad, giving the creator a chance to surprise me in the end. There are movies where I couldn’t watch them, but there are very few. But this film is unique. He was so disgusting that I forced myself through the “impossible” to examine him, already realizing that it would only get worse in the future to find out how much worse it could get.
One could say the movie is full of cliches, but no, for this movie, "cliché" is a compliment. How can you manage to rip scenes from other movies and make them a hundred times worse and less interesting?
You can’t retell the plot and scenes from the film, but I will try to retell my feelings. Imagine that in the most luxurious restaurant in Paris you are served a dish - cotton candy poured with Coca-Cola, and not just served, but as the best dish from the chef.
Yes, the restaurant is gorgeous, the chef is also cool, but it is simply impossible to have this nasty!
This feeling did not leave me until the very end of this creation.
I recommend the movie to watch!
Not for pleasure, but for therapeutic purposes, such as enema. After watching it, I hope you stop putting low ratings on more or less sane films.
1 out of 10
Matthew Vaughn’s fresh directorial work, another film in the Kingsman universe, judging by the post-credits scene (hardly a spoiler), turned out to be quite a spectator and entertaining pastime for two hours of its timekeeping. Stylish, sharp, with beautifully shot action scenes, as well as parodying both the conditional James Bond Fleming, and the entire genre of spy action films in particular. Only positive emotions after viewing.
I cannot say that this is a new word in the genre and in this segment of cinema. Of the latest action films, which clearly look better and more inventive, come to mind John Wick 4, Extraction 2 and Bullet Train. With such introductory data, you still do not want to scold Argylle, because he copes with his TZ: entertains and tries not to lose you as a viewer. Vaughn perfectly understands what he is shooting: a comedy action with a melodramatic main storyline, while trying to fit everything into the lore of the Secret Service. Meaningful load is normal: you remain who you are, even if you lose experience and memories about your craft. Rhythmic script, constantly evolving plot, well-written characters, although the second and third echelon consists of non-scriptural functions that minimally affect the story, but do not “light up”.
Acting jobs are normal. The protagonist Bryce Dallas Howard is not fit for her fullness, and yet she should clean herself up. There are no complaints about the issue of lyceum work. Sam Rockwell helps Bryce transform throughout the timeline and pushes the plot forward in every way, responsible for all the fighting scenes of the film. It was nice to see on the second or third plans venerable media faces a la Brian Cranston, Henry Cavill, Catherine O’Hara, Sofia Butella, Dua Lipa, John Cena and Samuel L. Jackson. This caste was clearly assembled to draw attention to the picture, because after removing the entire ensemble from here, the average person will not be motivated to click on Play. Operating work, editing and sound design are at a high level, although CGI places really lame. You can see the scarcity of the budget.
"Argyle: Superspy" lacks stars from the sky, but still manages to entertain all two hours of its duration. Personally, I have enjoyed learning what I wish you. There is a great chance that after a while it will wear out of your head, but this does not make it passable or filler. Is the sequel around the corner?
Among the many literary genres that exist in the world, one of the most popular, and perhaps the most, is the detective. Indeed, it does not require much effort from its reader, and is well suited to kill time or soothe after a difficult day. Probably, it is relatively easy for writers, since the formation of a central conflict for such books is not an impossible task, and a detailed study of characters and some complex psychologism are unlikely to be understood and demanded. It is not surprising that there are many adaptations of such fiction: films and TV series, where clever and clever main characters act. This seemed to be the new "Argyle", but, shamelessly deceiving expectations, he went his own way, placing in the center of the plot not a detective (here - a spy), and its author, and, at first glance, unremarkable. The move may be original in many ways, but, to put it mildly, controversial, and not too justified.
One of the important problems of “Argyle” is the indistinct disclosure and confirmation of its main idea, which, in turn, is eternally relevant for Hollywood cinema, but from this no less banal, the consideration that any, even the most undescript, woman is capable of anything. Although "Argyle" demonstrates the above, without exaggeration, literally, does not leave the feeling of pretense and falsehood does not allow you to believe it, however, it is not only in sensations. Let’s say that the two sides of the same character in the interpretation of “Argyle” are too different, too independent from each other, devoid of mutual influence, and the demonstration of communication only through a pet is not enough to seriously consider the character one, albeit versatile, person. It does not work to confirm the central idea and a rather confused and episodic love line, since the local hero-lover repeatedly allows himself harsh and unacceptable statements regarding one of the characters' personalities, and in the traditional romantic representation, a prince on a white horse should love his princess anyone. The finale also contradicts everything in the world, since the film does not offer any explanations and prerequisites for why the character could choose the final fate and life path as presented on the screen.
However, the problem with the main idea of “Argyle” is not limited, offering the viewer to “enjoy” a completely non-trivial plot. The main conflict around which the story develops for half of the picture is so absurd, incredible, improbable and fantastic even for a spy film that the main feeling of the casual viewer is the desire to overcome the spontaneous movement of hand to face, striving to form a typical facepalm. Against this background, all sorts of crazy details shock not so much, but still add emotions: it is still impossible to believe in the accuracy of long-unused skills, and the apotheosis of such a show is a very expressive figurative scene. I wish I could learn to make at least a double axel, relying only on the power of persuasion!
Do you think that’s all the trouble of the movie? No way! The next minus of the picture is not original at all, which, however, cannot serve as an excuse. In "Argyle" absolutely incomprehensible antagonists, however, no, it is even worse here - the sides of good and evil are not clearly highlighted. Although the main characters are certainly positive, the film does not contain any explanation for why their actions are right and moral, and the desires of the opposing personalities are criminal. The picture does not tell about bad deeds committed by negative characters, nor suggests how bad their victory will turn out. Even the notorious goal, which is hunted by all the heroes in a row, does not explain its sensationalism and true value. In short, the film is not able to decide why everything is started at all, some fuss for the sake of fuss. In addition, “Argyle” is not yet friends with elementary logic, not explaining why the heroine at the beginning of the picture is in danger, if, based on general data, everyone needs her, rather alive than vice versa. So here too "failure", however, quite predictable.
Can’t it really be completely hopeless? There really is something good in the picture. No, nothing new: the film is parasitic on beautiful and bright views of cozy European cities and landscapes. However, he has something of his own, namely quality acting, especially the pair of main characters. Although the directorial image of the central heroine is built so well, it was played at a very decent level. And the main character is good quite fully - for the circumstances proposed, this is a very charismatic character.
I think the only thing that could save this picture was a slightly different attitude – a more sarcastic, deliberate choice of absurdist humor in the style of Election Day, which could hide all the shortcomings of the plot. But – no, if Argyle does not treat itself with animal seriousness, it is still not as ironic as it should be. And as a variation of a spy detective with caveats, the film is helpless, and even a great cast does not save the situation.
The attraction of postmodernism, a cross between the "spy" with the "terminator", with mandatory femposite and body positivity.
Colorful and dynamic idiocy, do not try to find plot and logic. The actors are great, the writers are terrible. On serious occasions, acting out stupid plots is skill.
There are no positive characters in the film, all are negative. It is not clear where the good is, where the evil is. All this is perceived by each viewer individually, based on the personal sets of stereotypes of each. There is no sympathy for the main characters from this uncertainty. On the other hand, idiocy brought to absurdity, in general, may well reflect the reality and, perhaps, the propaganda message of the film, i.e. no matter how they try to positively show “strong and independent” with a cat or a brave single hero acting against some secret organization (?), as a result, we see two calculated sadists, without norms and boundaries, killing men on an industrial scale and from this all the murdered men of the second plan are very sorry.
The Man of Steel and Mr. Heisenberg were certainly delighted, especially in the final scene, when Henry Cavill was made a boy with curls a la 80s.
In general, the film is one time like a colorful attraction, with a slight feeling of dizziness and nausea from unreality and uncertainty.
Matthew Vaughn may not be called a superstar director, but each of his new films is an event quite noticeable. So the question of whether or not to go to his new film, not even stood. Besides, the caste was promised! Here and Henry Cavill, whose career is now at its peak, there is a lump Brian Cranston, here and relevant throughout the 21st century Sam Rockwell. And as the protagonist of Bryce Dallas Howard, who, although not a star of the first magnitude, managed to collect several notable roles in mega-popular films in her filmography.
What has the director prepared for us this time, who immortalized his name with the impeccable Kingston?
First of all, I want to disappoint Henry Cavill fans: the British actor is not in the lead role, he is not even in the top three. And if you count a cat (and not count it) - then not in five. His episodic appearances are mostly good: vivid, ironic - and yet episodic. The plot revolves around the characters Dallas Howard and Rockwell. And if the first one's just organic, Sam's great. Slightly cynical, outwardly sarcastic and flattering, but romantic and keenly feeling inside - this is just his type of characters, and here he plays just such.
Second, I’m ready to argue with those who call the film stupid and sometimes not particularly logical. Or rather, do not argue, but pay attention to the fact that it is worth focusing on another. From the first frames, it is clear that Vaughn did not aim to remove a full-fledged spy action movie, but wanted to do exactly what a bright and dynamic tape show would please the eye first, and the brain second. I'm not saying that Argyle is a bad story, no. I liked the script: it is famously twisted and full of very interesting, though not always original, moves. I just want to say that if you stop looking for logical inconsistencies and holes in the film, Argyle will give you a lot of fun. He does not skimp on chicly staged scenes, he brilliantly holds the dynamics for 130 minutes, he gives sometimes very successful jokes, and generally tries to make the viewer interesting. And personally, I felt really good. Argyle may lose to Kingston in almost everything, but the director’s hand is felt. And the operator, by the way, too: a wonderful George Richmond again showed aerobatics. If someone has any complaints about the picture, then I, at least, will be very surprised.
As a result: a great and bright film with such a significant number of positive aspects that, if you do not deliberately look for negative ones, then it will give you a wonderful two-and-a-half hours.
9 out of 10
Matthew Vaughn found something new to say in the spy genre, creating a fascinating and cute film that won many. In 2015. After almost a decade, he decided to compete with himself, pulling this trick again.
Argyle is not a classic superhero spy movie. It's about a writer making novels about secret services and agents. In the moment of a crisis of ideas when writing another chapter, she herself falls into her own book. It's kind of a plot. The unusual setup is not only intriguing, but also gives space for inventive installation. Together with the main character, we quickly move from reality to the universe she invented, and back.
One by one, we are met by a premium cast of actors: Henry Cavill, Sam Rockwell, Brian Cranston. Even Dua Lipa seductively spent her proud 5 minutes. Expensive rich, in the spirit of Apple, which gave money for the production of tape. Posters and trailers make it clear that the famous pop singer and the unfinished Witcher is the character center of the picture. But this is a cheap marketing trick, and the main characters are played by completely different actors.
The film playfully laughs at genre clichés, thereby elevating itself above the canon. Dynamically and cunningly develops, retaining a slight comic, but not brutality in multiple fights and murders. A metaspy action movie where agents are everywhere. Literally.
We see the first twist, great! Then soon the second is not bad. The third one doesn’t take long to wait – so-so. Then the fourth. And the fifth. And ... one hundred and forty-eighth ... The plot begins to spin in sharp turns 180 degrees faster and faster like a scenario top, which after the middle begins to get a little nauseous. It seems that the creators of Argyle want to break the world record for the number of twists per minute, showing how unpredictable their story can be. But in fact, complication comes out for the sake of complication, which is quickly tired of watching, and it is very easy to lose the thread of the narrative, and with it, interest in the film.
In the first third, the director cheerfully begins, leading us along the intricate trajectory of the script. But in the end it becomes a parody of himself from the same movie. As if a strong master began to shoot a movie, and finished a beginner who just stuffs the picture with everything that can and cannot be: endless twists, references to cult films, inappropriate and pretentious action, ridiculous resurrections. The final third would fit a separate title - "Very spy movie."
But more importantly, for what? Entertainment we got lubricated, as if you bite a delicious croissant, but the filling is too sweet, which is even difficult to finish. Did the author have a message? If desired, you can see the subtext about the impostor syndrome, or about the disclosure of the inner female powers that are in every timid girl. But if you have to search for these meanings, will they convey any idea?
Matthew Vaughn said that he will shoot a new spy film back in 2021, during the pandemic, when the global distribution actually paused. The intrigue was that the upcoming “Argyle” was supposed to be an adaptation of the novel of the same name by a mysterious writer, about which the general public does not know. For this venture Vaughn received from 150 to 200 million dollars, and finally the premiere of the film took place, but “Argyle” few people needed.
Henry Cavill plays Aubrey Argyll, a cool superspy who must deal with a world conspiracy, behind the scenes of which there is a dangerous organization of secret agents. Argyle never loses because he can always rely on his muscles, charm and loyal comrades in arms. But in fact, Argyle is an invention of the writer Ellie Conway.
Ellv herself is a quiet and inconspicuous woman with minor weight problems. She is just finishing a new book about Argyll and wants to consult her mother on how best to bring everything together in the end. But on the train to Chicago, which Ellie boarded, the real madness begins, because she meets an overgrown boyfriend Aidan, who is a real secret agent. And he protects Ellie from other spies who want to kill her. And this is only the beginning of the adventures of a very strange couple who generally look weak together.
Everything in this film suggests that Matthew Vaughn himself did not know what he was shooting. Nor is it the charming "Secret Service," where insanity and farce very delicately coexist with refined British aesthetics. This is not an adequate parody of James Bond, because the level of stupidity and unexpected plot twists is so great that it is all exhausting in the end. And in general, as a comedy, there are very few good jokes and funny moments. Everything here is somehow reduced to an expressionless middle.
But the biggest miss, to me, is Bryce Dallas Howard as Ellie. It plays poorly, and its completeness does not make any sense in the context of the plot. If it was still somehow beaten, then everything would fall into place. However, I do not fully understand why in principle, the slim actress was told to gain extra pounds, if it does not appear anywhere.
“Argyle: Superspy” is another box office and artistic failure of Matthew Vaughn. After the prequel to "The Secret Service" in the memory of the audience takes root the fact that the director does not feel the mood of the audience so much, and personally it upsets me very much.
An exciting combination of wit, entertainment and intrigue
"Argylle" is a fascinating combination of wit, entertainment and intrigue, brilliantly orchestrated by visionary Matthew Vaughn and skillfully written by Jason Fuchs. This 2024 spy action comedy film doesn’t just break established norms, it completely changes them, offering a cinematic experience that is both refreshing and immersive. At the center of this masterpiece is Ellie Conway, played by Bryce Dallas Howard, an introverted spy novel writer whose life takes a thrilling turn when her fictional world collides with reality. Howard’s performance is in no way inferior, adding depth and nuance to a character who could easily become a one-dimensional cliché.
Sam Rockwell as Aidan perfectly complements Ellie Howard, embodying the charm and danger of a spy with an ease that is both enviable and exciting. The chemistry between Howard and Rockwell is electrified, moving the plot with a palpable energy that cannot be ignored. Brian Cranston and Katherine O'Hara as Ritter and Ruth Conway respectively, are performances that are both menacing and magnetic, adding layers of complexity to an already rich narrative picture.
The inclusion of Henry Cavill as Agent Argyll and Sofia Boutella as Saba Al-Badr introduces a dynamic that is both intriguing and integral to the development of the drama. Their performances are powerful reminders of the significance of their characters on Ellie's journey, both past and present. In addition, Dua Lipa as LaGrange and Ariane DeBos as Keira bring fresh vivacity to the ensemble, proving that their talents extend beyond their musical prowess.
Critics who dared to reject low-grade Argylle clearly missed the point. This film is not just another espionage record; it is a bold reimagining that defies conventions and expectations. To disregard the creativity, craftsmanship and pure joy that Argylle brings to the screen is to deny the essence of what makes cinema so magical.
In an era where originality is often sacrificed on the altar of box office predictability, Argylle stands out as a beacon of innovation. This is an exciting adventure that can be both a love letter to spy novels and a witty nod to their inherent absurdities. The final discovery, a clever twist that ties the plot to its beginning, is a genius move that leaves the viewer in anticipation of what Vaughn and his team will come up with next.
In conclusion, Argylle is a triumph, a cinematic jewel shining with intelligence, humor and heart. It's a testament to the talent of its cast and crew, and a brazen rebuff to critics without the vision to appreciate its splendor.
This movie is ridiculously absurd. This is not to be seen on a serious scale.
Let's start with a promotion: A new action movie from Matthew Vaughn with Henry Cavill in the lead roles. It was supposed to be a second A.N.C.L. God, I was wrong.
This film really mocks the genre of spy movies and does it, in my opinion, not very subtly. There are many ‘here are turns’ in appropriate and inappropriate places, sudden ‘eagles of salvation’ almost everywhere, and most importantly, there are few Henry Cavill and John Cena. The film is built as if it is a game where a new location is necessary to promote the plot. And fights are not even up to level 2 of the Kingsman part.
“God, that’s crazy!” someone will say.
“Exactly,” the filmmakers would say.
Modern spy movies or action movies have gotten worse. To surprise the viewer - it takes a lot of money and little imagination.
The film in a satirical manner says: You walk for the face on the cover, you walk, for fights that are not so well or unthinkably staged. You are given a woven plot of flaps, connected by cliffhangers. Wake up and look at this industry with a sober look - this is the theater of the absurd!!
I liked the movie. It’s light and easy, funny, because in some scenes you break patterns and the picture is good. From the film blows the atmosphere of fanfiction (what only the main character costs).
But to walk on it with a serious face is contraindicated!!!
Mr. Cavill is always in my heart and I don’t miss movies with him, even if he plays a very secondary role. This allowed me to identify a trend. I don’t know who’s to blame, whether it’s Henry himself or his agent, but the movie with him is always “a little bit short.” And Cavill himself is always great, but here is everything else. . .
To begin with, the idea of the film came to me very, quite fresh and interesting, but the embodiment of it pumped up. "Argyle" somehow manages to combine a drawn-out mud and fierce action, and both too much.
There is no increasing speed of events. At the beginning of the film, everything is very boring, then the speed of what is happening increases sharply, then we listen to some explanations for a long time and needlessly, then everything turns madly again, then, it would seem, at its peak, the pace again decreases and in the end there is an extravaganza of madness. And it's almost two and a half hours!
I never thought I could say that, but there are too many plot twists in this movie! He is saturated with the unexpected twists of the minds of writers and because of this, at some point, you cease to be surprised. At the same time, do not forget about sagging places and as a result, we get a roller coaster of a rural scale.
Despite all of the above, I was happy with the film. Humor is on the level, it is a bit, but some jokes are absolutely delightful. It’s also a very good wordless visual humor, especially in the Cavill fighting scenes. The picture is masterpiece, for the dance scene in colored powder my applause to the creators. In general, the visual and musical accompaniment were delighted (except for Ellie’s evening dress, that’s where the film’s main failure is!).
The film will certainly not become a classic of spy cinema, it is still more of a comedy with spy elements, but it is definitely worth watching in the cinema, the picture asks for a big screen.
And finally, I can’t help but mention the very last scene in front of the credits, the one where Henry is wearing a yellow T-shirt, Argyle is worth watching at least for her sake!
P. S.
It's called Cliffhanger, Mom! It’s not an action movie, it’s a fun adventure that I wouldn’t want to miss – and I’m so glad I went to a session with 4DX. Contrary to critics, I don’t think the film is terrible. Is the story going down? Definitely. Are there shocking plot twists just for the sake of shock? Oh, yeah. But this good enough in previous films Matthew Vaughn. The love line (not for the first time for me) stumbles over the game of Dallas Howard, and her character, undoubtedly interesting, is lost in steep turns. The villains, on the other hand, are one-dimensional. The plot has a lot of unnecessary twists and details that are fun in the moment, but do not lead us to anything. But even this I want to forgive, because it is part of the fun: yes, in some places everything is pulled by the ears and descends to the outdated Bond trails, but the fights are exciting and dynamic (colored smoke! dancing! figure skating!), the cat is charming, Sam Rockwell is just beautiful. The gunman is stuffed with fan service for readers of popular literature, but is not like either Romance with a Stone or The Lost City. Vaughn allows the heroine to be both a cat girl and a writer and a cool girl. Is the extra fem agenda important to the well-fed Barbie and Poor-Unhappy viewer? I guess not. But the ideas hidden behind it are very valuable. And I will gladly review this story, sitting on the couch with the cat. 7 out of 10 Original
I don’t like to give negative reviews to directors who once pleased me with their work. And in the case of Argyle, this would not be entirely fair, because some work was done.
A good movie or a great one will want to watch one day. In the case of Argyle, this could be considered torture, but let’s be more specific:
1. Age rating is 12+. Does that mean anything to you? Seeing this number on the screen and the Apple emblem, I immediately knew that we were waiting for a la Disney Alladin from the world of militants, without memorable jokes like in Kingsman about ass, about greetings of German aristocrats and so on.
The film was too childish and not even teenage.
2. Cast. There's a lot of grief here. The people I wanted to see were too few.
But the next trick is to create the appearance of the desired in the trailer. . .
Rockwell my respects for not finally falling asleep and Samuel Jackson for making good use of his meager screen time.
It is difficult to say anything about the main character. With her as with the exams in uni - endure, angry, nervous and forget as soon as you leave the office with a grade in the credit.
3. Visual. In this regard, Matthew has always been fine, but this is not enough. The same techniques that we have seen before, the same style, the same entourage. It's not boring, but it's not enough.
4. The script is not bad, but it does not pull the film much because of the banal drag of the picture. Meaningless turns of events, illogical actions, ridiculous shootings and a huge amount of stupid dialogue.
Conclusion:
With all due respect to Matthew Vaughn, I do not detract from his merits, but he has already made his best film.
And with Argyle there was a clear sense of crisis, a lack of ideas and all this with a $200 million budget!
5 out of 10