Horrible. Just horrible. The worst thing about 'Argylle (2024)' is that it goes on forever. Seriously, it just keeps going. It's so much longer than it has any right to be. The second worst thing about it is that it's profoundly stupid. How stupid? Well, let's just say that Henry Cavill's haircut doesn't even make the top twenty stupidest things in this mess of a movie. Of course, stupidity by itself isn't necessarily an issue... so long as it's fun. This isn't fun. It isn't boring, but it isn't fun. The feature throws twist after twist at an audience it clearly doesn't respect, taking far too long explaining things we've just seen and even flashing back to them just to make sure we get it. None of the reveals are particularly complicated either, even if the tapestry they weave is definitely dense, so it's entirely unnecessary to call this much retrospective attention to moments which are often obviously obfuscated in the first place simply so they can be the subject of a flashback that occurs later on (sometimes literally in the next scene). Not all the twists are obvious - or even particularly bad - but there are only one or two that have any real merit (and not much merit at that). Furthermore, some of them are entirely contradictory to one another, meaning that the overall narrative isn't cohesive in the slightest. When looking back on the story, it isn't even clear why any of it kicks off in the first place. It feels like its screenplay was created in a stream of consciousness, with no rereading or - god forbid - rewriting. That's likely not very fair, as I'm sure Jason Fuchs tried his best, but it's the impression the final film gives. For all its energetic excess and undeniable on-screen and behind-the-scenes talent, it just seems lazy. It moves so fast and loose that it's never boring, but it's also never inspiring or, even, entertaining. It's as dull as it is hyperactive. It just washes over you, at best provoking an eye roll and at worst provoking absolutely nothing. The action, which ought to be its clear highlight, is so obviously fake that it's hard to take seriously. Even an early(ish) fight on a train, easily the most practical set-piece in the entire picture, is marred by the overuse of a visually interesting effect that would be really cool if it was given time to breathe and not treated like a bludgeon to hit the audience over the head with until they're no longer certain of what they can and can't see on screen. Some later sequences are so over the top that they're theoretically a riot, but they come long after we've stopped caring about anything we see unfold and aren't good enough to jolt us out of the malaise we've inevitably fallen into. The cast is, thankfully, consistently good. The actors sometimes manage to elevate the scenarios they're placed in, and emerge mostly innocent even when they can't. Bryce Dallas Howard is a strong fish-out-of-water lead and Sam Rockwell is as effortlessly charming as ever. Samuel L. Jackson looks like he's having fun with the very little he has to do (and the large paycheck it's probably getting him) and Bryan Cranston crafts a compellingly generic baddie. It's also nice to see Catherine O'Hara chew the scenery when she gets chance to. It's a shame that Henry Cavill and John Cena don't kiss given where the plot takes them, but they do what they need to and they're perfectly fine doing it. I'm a little sad that Ariana DeBose and Richard E. Grant don't get more to do, but Dua Lipa - as much as I love her - is clearly given all she can manage at this point. If this had a less talented cast, it definitely wouldn't be as good as it is (i.e. Not very). I'm not sure what Matthew Vaughn's doing here, to be honest. This clearly wants to be a somewhat meta variation of the irreverent spy satire he's essentially made a career of, but it doesn't say anything about either the genre itself or his entries within it. It doesn't say anything at all, really. That would be perfectly fine if it was entertaining, but it just isn't. It's entirely inconsequential, which might be why I can't quite bring myself to rate it any harsher than I have. Perhaps its baffling narrative and uncanny aesthetic make it somewhat of a curio, an artefact of modern blockbuster filmmaking that does almost everything wrong. I don't recommend it, but maybe it's worth watching to see what not to do if you ever want to make a movie. I don't know. It's bad.
Review of Argylle
