Dir. Guy Ritchie
After some slightly baffling turns of the King Arthur and Aladdin variety, Guy Ritchie has returned to the gritty, London crime dramedy genre that made him a household name in the late 90s. This movie retains his signature style; it’s sleek and violent and darkly funny- but in many unfortunate ways it hasn’t progressed from the 90s. This is the kind of movie Todd Phillips probably walked out of cheering because someone was “brave” enough to be racist for laughs again. The plot, action, acting, and dynamic characters all say I should love this movie, but the amount of times I was left grimacing at the screen just made the experience one I’m unlikely to repeat.
This movie follows Mickey Pearson as he tries to retire from his life of crime and sell his Marjiuana empire to quirky billionaire Matthew (Jeremy Strong) (who is referred to frequently as “the Jew”). The sale is imperiled by conflicts with his drug lord competitors, Lord George and Dry Eye (Tom Wu and Henry Goulding respectively), as well as an attempt at blackmail by a very camp Hugh Grant as Fletcher, a private investigator. The movie is unreliably narrated by the PI as he explains to Ray (Mickey’s right hand played by Charlie Hunnam in a very nice cardigan) how much he knows about the entire operation and what he could disclose to the public if he isn’t paid off.
Aside from Henry Goulding, who they somehow make not charming (a feat I’d considered impossible), every actor in this movie is a rather captivating scumbag. Hugh Grant especially appears to be having a great time. His character is weaselly and dramatic and understandably hot for Charlie Hunnam. He has a Littlefinger-esque sliminess, and hilarious self-obsession that I can respect. The relentless smarminess of his character is perfectly set against Charlie Hunnam in my favorite role of his to date. Ray is a soft-spoken, obsessively clean, short-tempered killer who loves an expensive steak and his boss but not in that order. He bristles with disdain for almost every person he meets who all fail to live up to his fastidious standards. The entire movie could have been a two hander between them and I’d consider it a job well done.
I was unsure if I’d ever forgive Matthew McConaughey after whatever the hell Serenity was, but this role was a true return to form. He swaggered and drawled his way over the screen, hobnobbing with the English elite while constantly vibrating with the restrained violence of a man who’d become a kingpin the bloody way and is willing to return to form if pushed far enough.
Colin Farrell similarly stands out as an MMA/boxing instructor dragged into the drama entirely against his will. His resigned participation as a man doing bad to do good is a nice counterbalance to all the genuinely greedy and violent men in the rest of the film. (Well…until he assists in something that’s a bit unforgivable for the alleged good guy of the film.)
All the things I enjoyed about this movie make the unecessary racism, anti-semitism, homophobia, bestiality, and sexual assault that much more disappointing. A lot of this movie feels like it does these things because “it’s about bad people and this is what bad people do”. Like I’m not going to get hung up on language, who gives a fuck. But a lot of the lines just had me staring straight faced at the screen while the men around me got their chuckles at someone else’s expense. It felt like Guy Ritchie was trying to make it funny by force, and if you didn’t think it was funny then there is a whole exchange in the movie just to tell you specifically “it’s not that serious, lighten up.” A Black character takes issue with being called a “Black cunt” by another character and Colin Farrell immediately waves him off with something along the lines of “it’s said with love, whatever.” I.e if you the audience don’t think it’s funny- you’re the problem. And the amount of ways this film manages to be racist to Asian people is remarkable in the worst way possible; to the point that it seems weird that it takes place in the modern day, when’s the last time you heard someone called a “Chinaman”?
There’s an attempted sexual assault in the film that had no real place in the movie. As mentioned earlier, the story is told by Fletcher and he adds tons of narrative flourish to entertain himself that is later proven completely made up. So it’s entirely possible that the assault didn’t actually happen and Fletcher, who is essentially a mouthpiece for Ritchie, just thought it was funny. And that would make sense because at one point he “jokes” about creeping into Ray’s room and “wanking into a hankie” over his bed. So clearly he finds sexual assault and harassment hilarious. And this exchange perfectly exemplifies how this desire to be edgy takes away from what was previously an enjoyably awful character- being a raving narcissist looking for a pay-day was enough.
(So um…what’s with the British and sex with pigs? Is this how y’all get down? Black Mirror was one thing, than the Prime Minister, and now this? DIRTY.)
This movie has all the ingredients of a movie I’d love- larger than life characters chewing the scenery, bad guys trying to outsmart each other, great looking action, an unreliable narrator, and a very unexpected musical break. The Gentlemen is Ritchie saying he can still deliver on what made him famous. Unfortunately, it also reeks of “just because I made a Disney film, doesn’t mean I’m not HARD!”. What could be a great movie is repeatedly dragged down by random asides into the racist and anti-semetic that serve no real purpose but to nod at an audience that doesn’t need to be served. But for every racist cloud is a silver lining, and this movie cemented Charlie Hunnam for me. I’m totally in. When is King Arthur 2?