Follow TV Tropes
I'm certain that the second movie is going to share a lot of tropes with the first one.
I'm not completely sure of the protocol (I'd love to know where're the guidelines for this, or where stuff like this is commonly discussed), but shouldn't "Film/Kingsman" be a page in itself detailing tropes shared by both movies, with the specific ones in the pages for each movie?
Done - Kingsman
Valentine as Affably Evil or Faux Affably Evil:
The main film page and character sheet claims former, while the latter lists Valentine. It's one or the other, which is it? It's easy to be cynical and pick the latter, but still, which is it?
I'd say he's Affably Evil, he doesn't like blood or killing and tends to treat everyone, even the ones who disagree with his plan, nicely enough; or at least tries to keep them comfortable.
I don't know if anyone else might have noticed, but mirrors seem to feature prominently in this movie, specially regarding Eggsy and his hero's journey.
I think I got them all. I might be looking too much into it, which is why I ask here for someone else to weigh in.
If I'm not looking too much into it, then under which trope would this fall? Rule of Symbolism? Any of the reflection tropes? Maybe even Faux Symbolism if it was unintentional by the filmmakers, but I think there are too many coincidences for that to be the case.
Would someone else like to weigh in on the trope One-Man Army? I posted the trope as a general Kingsman attribute and put down Harry as the only person who actually pulls it off onscreen, due to what happened in the church, but stated that Eggsy only got close. Another troper put Eggsy in on the basis that all mooks were directly targeting him, but I contend that he didn't actually fight all of them - he made it through a number of them while actively trying to avoid and get away from them, and then Merlin made all their heads explode. I don't want an edit war, but I don't agree, so would someone else want to put in their two cents?
I was the one who made the edit.
Eggsy was mostly trying to get away, yes, and even then he killed at least 20 mooks and disabled some more (and then he went back and started fighting them up front, killing more). Also they weren't fighting each other, they were all attacking him, so it was a situation of him against them, which is what One Man Army stands for. It's also safe to expect that the mooks had at least some training or experience, making them an actual (small) army.
Harry is the one who actually might not qualify (well, it is implied he does, but not onscreen), since the people at the church weren't all attacking him, they were mostly untrained and unarmed people in blind rage attacking everyone and, for the same reasons, while he killed a lot of them he wasn't the only one attacking or intending to attack each of those he killed. In other words: there weren't sides in that melee and he wasn't actually fighting an army. I still left him as example because, army or not, it was still an impressive display.
All in all, I think One-Man Army's description fits Eggsy's situation at the end much better than it does Harry's at the church. Except for the psychological aspect, and even then Harry's main objection seemed to be that he was forced to kill them and the fact that they were civilians (further reinforcing the "not actually an army" aspect).
As for the Keystone Army thing, even the Avengers had to use that, doesn't make any of them any less of one-men/woman/god armies.
Yeah, I saw your screenname in the edit history and read your comment – I just didn’t agree, so I was hoping for a third opinion. Reading your more in-depth argument here though, I am more inclined to agree with you. My issue with Eggsy has always been that he was on the defensive, and that when it really came down to it, his being completely hemmed in by dozens of mooks, he flat-out admitted that he was screwed and only survived because of the heads exploding. That vs. Harry actively on the offensive, going hand-to-hand with numerous opponents, and outright winning without help from anyone. But taking another look at Eggsy’s ultimate situation, I doubt Harry would have done much better – you probably would have needed a superhero to deal with that (although just because the Avengers resorted to Keystone Army tactics doesn’t mean they didn’t spend considerably much more time on the offensive against more opponents than either Eggsy or Harry ever did). And you’re certainly right that the melee Harry’s involved in is not an army working together while Eggsy’s is, although the Unstoppable Rage in Harry’s opponents somewhat evens things out. Anyway, no one else has said anything either way, and no one has changed your edit, so I’d say the site has essentially spoken at this point and there’s no need for further argument on my part.
Yeah I used the Avengers as extreme examples; Harry and Eggsy ain't superhumans, but I'd say both came close to real life examples of One Man Armies (not counting snipers and people on machine guns, but people fighting up close like they did).
I also considered it a lot before editing your fragment and I think reversing the positions goes both ways: I don't think Eggsy's and Harry's ordeals would have turned out much different if they had been in the other's place.
Still, if anyone else cares to weigh in all the better.
A Brit says "that's the million-dollar question". Can that possibly be british slang? (I don't know if there's a trope for this)
It's slang in general, not British-specific. I don't think it would fall under any tropes.
What would be the best way to add a deconstruction description under the asshole victims trope based around the Church Massacre scene's Catharsis Factor fight scene and following My God, What Have I Done? / Nightmare Fuel framing of the aftermath?
I would also like to see a more nuanced discussion of that scene, going beyond "haha, a bunch of bigots got killed, serves them right!" This is the massacre of people who are technically innocent of any crime (as far as we know). I think whether they "get what's coming to them" deserves to be moved to YMMV at least.
They might be unsympathetic, but as soon as we take a group of people and claim they can be liquidated without a qualm, doesn't that put us on Valentine's side?
I agree with you on YMMV. I LOVED that scene, but I loved it because they portrayed it funnily and it's a movie so nobody actually got hurt. That doesn't mean I would condone that happening in Real Life - that would be awful.
Hermunster, I'm not 100% sure what you're getting at. Are you arguing that it's a deconstruction because it seems awesome and then the aftermath reminds us just how sucky it would be if it were real? Are you wanting to put it on the Asshole Victim trope page, or list it on the Kingsman page? Sorry if I'm a bit thick, but I'm not sure how to answer the question.
It seems like a bit of both. The film makes it so that the targets are bigoted assholes, but in the end, Harry is disgusted at what's been done and he still killed a bunch of civilians.
Community Showcase More
How well does it match the trope?