The King's Man (2021)

[Jake Lipson]

Title: The King's Man

Genre: Action, Adventure, Comedy

Director: Matthew Vaughn

Release: 2021-12-22

Plot: Third installment of the 'Kingsman' franchise.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Despite what TMDB's poster art shows right now, which they will make the image for this thread, Taron Egerton says he's not going to be in Kingsman 3 at all:

I don’t know how hot off the press this is, and I think I’m allowed to say it, but I’m not in the next Kingsman movie. That doesn’t mean I won’t be in Kingsman ever again. I was with Matthew [Vaughn] as little as a few days ago, we’re still very much in business together, but his next journey in that world doesn’t involve me… His idea for the new one is incredibly exciting. I’m sad that I won’t be on that journey with him, but it’s not the last you’ve seen of Eggsy.

https://www.slashfilm.com/kingsman-3-taron-egerton/

I'm not so sure about this idea. The cast is a large part of the appeal of these films, Egerton in particular. I love Matthew Vaughn, but...we'll see. I'm not convinced.

 

[dpippel]

Neither am I. I thought the second film was a pale shadow of the first, which was great. This doesn't sound too promising, but who knows?

 

[Malcolm R]

Yeah, I don't see any Kingsman without Eggsy. Sounds like a Halloween III.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Since this is a Fox property, there is also the question of whether Disney will proceed with the franchise, or not, once the acquisition is complete. The extremely violent nature of the first two doesn't mesh with Disney's brand. They could allow Fox to continue it anyway, but it's worth noting that it isn't entirely clear in what capacity Fox will function once it is a subsidiary and not its own fully autonomous studio. Last I heard, the deal is expected to close on January 1, so Disney will have their hands in this sooner rather than later.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Since this is a Fox property, there is also the question of whether Disney will proceed with the franchise, or not, once the acquisition is complete. The extremely violent nature of the first two doesn't mesh with Disney's brand. They could allow Fox to continue it anyway, but it's worth noting that it isn't entirely clear in what capacity Fox will function once it is a subsidiary and not its own fully autonomous studio. Last I heard, the deal is expected to close on January 1, so Disney will have their hands in this sooner rather than later.

It's all speculation so I'm anticipating that Disney is going to continue with the Fox brand and allow their future film projects to continue as plan for the most part.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Right. They could very well leave it alone. I'm just saying that nobody knows for sure what Disney is going to do until Disney actually gets in the picture. It would not surprise me if they allow Kingsman to continue, and it would also not surprise me if they didn't. If they didn't, perhaps it could get picked up by a different studio, like Hellboy made the jump from Sony to Universal (and now to Lionsgate for its reboot.)

 

[Robert Crawford]

Right. They could very well leave it alone. I'm just saying that nobody knows for sure what Disney is going to do until Disney actually gets in the picture. It would not surprise me if they allow Kingsman to continue, and it would also not surprise me if they didn't. If they didn't, perhaps it could get picked up by a different studio, like Hellboy made the jump from Sony to Universal (and now to Lionsgate for its reboot.)

It would surprise me if Disney discontinues Fox from releasing their edgy/R titles under the Fox banner.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I can’t imagine that Disney bought Fox to shut it down, or just to strip mine its intellectual property.

Disney used to have Touchstone as an outlet to create films and attract talent that didn’t otherwise fit the Disney brand. It allowed them to capture more of the market, not less. With Fox, they’ll have that kind of outlet again.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I can’t imagine that Disney bought Fox to shut it down, or just to strip mine its intellectual property.

Disney used to have Touchstone as an outlet to create films and attract talent that didn’t otherwise fit the Disney brand. It allowed them to capture more of the market, not less. With Fox, they’ll have that kind of outlet again.

You and I are on the same page as Disney paid a lot of money to just strip mine it's intellectual properties.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Disney used to have Touchstone as an outlet to create films and attract talent that didn’t otherwise fit the Disney brand. It allowed them to capture more of the market, not less. With Fox, they’ll have that kind of outlet again.

They still have Touchstone. They've just chosen not to use it because they don't do a bunch of mid-range films anymore. But they could dust it off and use it again anytime they so chose. The thing is that except for the odd inspirational sports drama or nature documentary here and there, everything that Disney does now is a major tentpole event films. If they allow Fox to continue producing films that are not that, it will represent a change in strategy from what Bob Iger has been shepherding for the last several years. I think it's highly likely that the scenario you're describing will play out, but I wouldn't call it a sure thing just yet. That's all I'm saying.

 

[Malcolm R]

Kingsman: The Great Game confirmed to be a prequel to the first film and will not include Taron Egerton's Eggsy character. Release date is November 8.

https://ew.com/movies/2019/02/08/kingsman-3-the-great-game-aaron-taylor-johnson/

 

[Robert Crawford]

Kingsman: The Great Game confirmed to be a prequel to the first film and will not include Taron Egerton's Eggsy character. Release date is November 8.

https://ew.com/movies/2019/02/08/kingsman-3-the-great-game-aaron-taylor-johnson/

Hell, I haven't seen the second one yet. I like it's going to be a prequel so I'm sure they'll explore Eggsy's father in that film.

 

[Mikael Soderholm]

Hell, I haven't seen the second one yet. I like it's going to be a prequel so I'm sure they'll explore Eggsy's father in that film.

Trust me, don't bother. The first was pretty cool and had its moments, the second was a POS ... sorry, but a tragic waste of money and talent.

 

[Jake Lipson]

I'll probably see it, but I'm less excited than I would be if it were a third film with Eggsy.

 

[Sam Favate]

I'll probably see it, but I'm less excited than I would be if it were a third film with Eggsy.

Ditto.

I assume they still have Colin Firth? The article makes it sound like they do not.

 

[dpippel]

Colin Firth was the best thing about both Kingsmans if you ask me. However, after the travesty that was the sequel I have no real desire to go back to this for a third time, no matter who's in it.

 

[Malcolm R]

Ditto.

I assume they still have Colin Firth? The article makes it sound like they do not.

The article isn't clear, but it would seem odd if he were not included since he was part of the organization prior to Eggsy's arrival, and actually recruited/selected him. Though they might need to de-age Firth since this is a prequel. Perhaps that's not cost effective within the budget if they need to do it with CGI, so maybe he'll just have a cameo and be away "on a mission" for much of the film.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Trust me, don't bother. The first was pretty cool and had its moments, the second was a POS ... sorry, but a tragic waste of money and talent.

Well, I have the 4K/UHD disc so I'll see it eventually, but I do have low expectations.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

I thought there were two separate projects: Kingsman 3 set after Kingsman 2 with Eggsy back, down the road, and the Kingsman prequel set during Edwardian England next.