Regie:
Guy RitchieDrehbuch:
Guy RitchieKamera:
Alan StewartMusik:
Christopher BensteadBesetzung:
Matthew McConaughey, Charlie Hunnam, Michelle Dockery, Colin Farrell, Henry Golding, Hugh Grant, Jeremy Strong, Eddie Marsan, Lyne Renee, Tom Wu (mehr)Streaming (8)
Inhalte(1)
Smart, knallhart und mit genialem Gespür fürs Geschäft hat sich der Exil-Amerikaner Mickey Pearson (Matthew McConaughey) über die Jahre ein millionenschweres Marihuana-Imperium in London aufgebaut und exportiert feinsten Stoff nach ganz Europa. Doch Mickey will aussteigen, endlich mehr Zeit mit seiner Frau Rosalind (Michelle Dockery) verbringen und auf legalem Weg das Leben in Londons höchsten Kreisen genießen. Ein Käufer für die landesweit verteilten – und dank des chronisch geldknappen Landadels gut versteckten – Hanf-Plantagen muss her. Auftritt: Matthew Berger (Jeremy Strong). Der exzentrische Milliardär bietet eine hohe Summe, will jedoch Garantien sehen. Und das ausgerechnet in dem Moment, in dem sämtliche Groß- und Kleinkriminellen der Stadt Wind von Mickeys Plänen bekommen haben – von Triaden-Boss Lord George (Tom Wu) über den durchgeknallten Emporkömmling Dry Eye (Henry Golding) bis hin zum schmierigen Privatdetektiv Fletcher (Hugh Grant). Während Mickeys rechte Hand Ray (Charlie Hunnam) seinem Boss den gröbsten Ärger vom Hals hält, überbieten sich alle Beteiligten mit Tricks, Bestechung, Erpressung und anderen fiesen Täuschungen und lösen eine folgenschwere Lawine aus… (Constantin Film AT)
(mehr)Kritiken (18)
A more elegant version of Snatch that does not boast that many entertaining twists and instead makes do with a surprisingly smooth style, but it still relies on brilliant and unpredictable characters and, at least for the first time, a plot that is playfully put together, which develops and changes according the knowledge and the interpretations of one of the protagonists. What’s important is that, right from the start, Ritchie tries to be ahead of the viewer, pushing questions whose answers demand a full (and not quite reliable) reconstruction – as in most of Ritchie’s films, the story crumbles into small episodes that lead to a big outcome, but this time it also undermines itself with several subjective perspectives, with a final act that is not as surprising as it could be expected, whose effect lies on the fact that the story of these elegant, smooth and always ready “gentlemen” is resolved through the intervention of an old, unpredictable and hardened world that sticks to its own codes. It’s entertaining and solid and the protagonists are fun to watch, but I felt that the overall structure of the narration was vague at times and the core conflict too subordinate to the confusing screenwriting jokes that are revealed at the end. In other words, an excellent verbose ride that unlike Snatch, which always keeps the gas pedal on the floor, looses some of its momentum among the episodes and triumphs with an outcome that looks a little forced, but that is still subversive and smart. And with great actors who are really enjoying themselves. 80%
()
So soll das Jahr 2020 beginnen! Der beste Ritchie seit Snatch - Schweine und Diamanten. Also in den letzten 20 Jahren. Ein tolles Drehbuch nicht nur bei den Dialogen, sondern auch was den Plot, die ausgefeilten Figuren oder das spielerische Umrahmen des Erzählens (als ob das Drehbuch eine von den Figuren geschrieben hätte) angeht. Super ist natürlich auch die Nutzung des Charismas der ganzen köstlichen Schauspieltruppe. Ich muss Ritchie dafür loben, wie seine Unterhaltung für Erwachsene vulgär ist und dass er viele Menschen krepieren lässt. Trotzdem enthält der Film keine graphische Gewalt und es wird der Unterschied zwischen der fehlenden Moral der Negativgestalten und dem charaktervollen Niveau der "guten Gangster“ betont. Ein bewusst schlauer und eleganter Gangsterfilm. Der größte Boss ist McConaughey, der beste Typ aber Hunnam. Und der Witzigste natürlich Farrell.
()
Als ob sich Guy Ritchie für Aladdin entschuldigen wollte und genau das gedreht hat, was seine Fans sehen wollten. Und es hat ihm offensichtlich Spaß gemacht. Obwohl ich nicht zu denjenigen gehöre, die mit Ritchies Schaffen in den letzten Jahren unzufrieden sind, habe ich The Gentlemen sehr genossen. Ein schlaues und witziges Drehbuch (eigentlich ist der ganze Film eine große Anekdote, die Pointe ist eine Szene am Ende), tolle Schauspieler an der Spitze mit dem perfekten Matthew McConaughey in der Rolle eines neuen Vito Corleone, eine sichere und wilde Regie… Was will man mehr?
()
Der König ist zurück! Nun ja, hoffen wir es zumindest. Guy Ritchie ist zurück in den Gangsterkreisen, in denen er sich als Regisseur und Drehbuchautor am besten entfaltet hat. Seine Filme der letzten Jahre haben mich nämlich bestenfalls kaltgelassen, zum Beispiel sein angeblich cooler Sherlock Holmes, den ich nicht wirklich ertragen kann. Aber The Gentlemen fährt wirklich und ohne Übertreibung auf der Welle seiner klassischen Meisterwerke Bube, Dame, König, grAS und Snatch mit. Die Besetzung ist insgesamt sehr gelungen, aber Colin Farrell sticht notwendigerweise aus den anderen großartig gewählten Schauspielern hervor. Die effektiv konstruierte Handlung ist ausgewogen genug, um nicht künstlich zu wirken, sie verbindet farbenfrohe Charaktere und unterhält mit jeder aufgedeckten Kartenspielminute. Ich habe ein bisschen mehr Schärfe und einen überraschenden Abschluss vermisst, aber ich habe es genossen, wie der Film die Meta-Rahmung des Filmgeschäfts berührt und insgesamt eine lockere, positive Atmosphäre schafft. Ritchies Rückkehr zu seinen Wurzeln war schon seit Jahren dringend notwendig, und ich hoffe, dass dieser Film nicht das Ende davon ist.
()
The Gentlemen hat richtig dicke Eier und keine Angst, sie zu zeigen! Ritchie hat eine hochkarätige Besetzung zusammengestellt und einen publikumswirksamen und rasanten Action-Gangsterfilm mit unverwechselbaren Erzähltechniken und einem Drehbuch, das so bissig ist, dass es alle Genitalien durchschneiden könnte, aufgetischt. Es war offensichtlich, dass alle Schauspieler ihre Rollen genossen und überzeugend gespielt haben - Hugh Grant war derjenige, der mich am meisten überzeugt hat. Trotz des anfänglichen Handlungswirrwarrs habe ich ein clever geschriebenes Katz- und Mausspiel - in diesem Fall ein Spiel um den König des Dschungels - sehr genossen, bei dem man bis zum Abspann nicht wusste, in welche Richtung es eigentlich gehen würde. Zwei Stunden akzeptabel blutiger und richtig unanständiger Spaß sind garantiert. P. S. Gravity kills people!
()
Four stars, by a hair’s breadth. It’s not as sophisticated as it wants to be, the final twist is rather banal, and the lukewarm and cluttered first half does the film no credit. Ritchie can do better than that and the current 89% rating on this site is completely overblown. All in all, I enjoyed myself: there are a couple of good ideas and you cannot help but root for excessively elegant McConaughey... but I don’t feel like I’ll want to rewatch this. I almost feel compelled to paraphrase the Bard in saying this is much ado about… well, not entirely nothing, but a slightly above-average film.
()
I'm satisfied. Very satisfied, actually, because Guy Ritchie promised to deliver a Guy Ritchie-style gangster movie, and he did. So the only potential problem I have with his new release is that it sticks to the beaten track and makes only minimal attempts to surprise. But it doesn't really matter, because Ritchie knows this genre like nobody else, and once again he manages to make a very brisk film with unexpected twists and even more unexpected directorial ideas, in which all of the actors (probably most notably Hugh Grant and Colin Farrell) clearly enjoy themselves. Ritchie has a way with slow-building tension ending in absurd violence reminiscent of the beginning of Pulp Fiction, but he manages to switch gears to his typical frenetic pace within moments. He manages to be funny and entertaining, and moments later his characters go regular scared. He's just the Ritchie we wanted to see. Nothing more, nothing less. That's good enough for me.
()
Guy Ritchie returns to the genre that made him famous and serves up a pure crime gangster flick that is probably the closest thing to Snatch. The film has a very unorthodox storytelling and at times it can seem confusing. Especially at the beginning I couldn't quite get into it, but somewhere in the middle I was enjoying truly it, and a big thanks goes to the awesome performances by the cast. Matthew McConaughey and Charlie Hunnam are traditionally excellent, Hugh Grant feels like in the role of a lifetime, and Colin Farrell steals all the scenes for himself and rips your diaphragm! Apart from the performances, the film is pulled up by the great black-dry British humour and the unexpected twists. Guy Ritche has made a playful, stylish, funny and unconventional gangster film and people will love it. 7.5/10.
()
A sad and unwelcome moment when one of the best directors puts a group of people I love (Matthew McConaughey, Colin Farrell, Charlie Hunnam) or even adore (Hugh Grant, Michelle Dockery) in front of the camera and creates a new contribution to one of the most beloved genres, and the public reacts more than positively – and I end up sadly shaking my head at the result. The form, the pacing, it's all there. But sticking to drugs, poses, and dialog competitions about who can pee further after the age of fifty seems at least unfortunate to me, in some twists even stagnant. In the details, it's still the same Guy Ritchie from Snatch, but on the whole, for the first time ever, nope.
()
Ritchie’s gangster flicks can be looked at as a genre screen on which the direct projects himself, or rather the current point in his life, career and position in the film industry. At the very beginning of his first film, Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, we have a group of self-confidently cheeky youths who have not only talent and ambition, but mainly more luck than sense, when they heedlessly set out into the world of omnipotent old structures. Coincidence plays a much smaller role in Ritchie’s second film, but the director, together with the protagonists, gets into a much bigger game with foreign players in a different weight category, from which he cannot allow himself to escape only with a skinned knee. The already forgotten existentially pessimistic Revolver shows the former wunderkind in his element, which he had been away from for a while, consorting with overly powerful people and now doubting himself, so he tries to kick off a big game that will get him back to the top while simultaneously reassessing his own life. RocknRolla expressed a feeling of newly replenished assuredness and, at the same time, bidding farewell to his island roots while also peculiarly focusing on the position of England/Ritchie between Europe and America. Therefore, The Gentlemen isn’t so much a comeback as an attempt to show others and himself that “the king’s still got it”. He has come a long way and from an untested, clever lout, he has developed into a man of elegance over the years and the owner of a stylish pub and his own hipster brewery, which he does not hesitate to advertise. Though he still sympathises with streetwise hooligans with their online projects, he is far removed from them in his pursuits. He mulls over retirement now that he’s in the company of the cream of society and he’s raking it in with lucrative projects, but this seemingly final money spinner put new vitality into his veins in the end. Predation, courage and cheekiness have been replaced by sophistication (albeit in the snobbish superficial sense rather than true sophistication or ingenuity) and pretentious refinement. Gangster movies have always been founded on the motif of the changing of the guard between generations, or rather the conflict between the young and old schools, so in line with Ritchie's age and self-image, this story from the underworld takes an atypical direction that would not have occurred to him in the early days of his career. The question is how this glorified flaccid middle age will be perceived by today’s young people, who are licking their chops at their own opportunities in the genre world of gangsters – in recent years, francophone productions such as the excellent Les Misérables and the hyper-stylish Gangsta have reigned supreme. However, this in no way diminishes the fun and agility of The Gentlemen, which would have ranked among the most satisfying titles in broad distribution in another, stronger year (at least from the perspective of a boomer viewer).
()
(weniger)
(mehr)
The Gentlemen is a return to Ritchie's beginnings, i.e., frenzied gangster movies full of betrayals and dirty backstage games, filmed with evident irony and with the director's awareness that he wants to entertain his audience first and foremost. As Guy ages, his characters also age and transform. They are no longer bold little players consumed by ambitions, wanting to thrive among established tough guys, but rather powerful underworld figures who move among the social elites and contemplate stepping out of the illegal business so as not to harm their carefully built reputation. However, the big boss attracts the attention of those who would like to take his place in the food chain, and thus the last deal of his career unexpectedly gets complicated. Instead of content gangster retirement, he is forced to defend himself from attacks on all sides. Ritchie is usually able to come up with entertaining and unconventional characters, and this time was no exception. Besides the partly flamboyant, partly casual gang leader, it is primarily the cunningly corrupted tabloid journalist played by Hugh Grant who stands out. He once became famous for playing stereotypical heartthrobs in romantic comedies, but as he has aged, he has shifted to playing noble villains, usually with a subtle ironic twist and characterized by extremely developed vanity. To sum it up, I had a great time with it. I hope Guy Ritchie has not said his last word yet. Overall impression: 90%.
()
The Gentlemen is an outstanding, well-thought-out British gangster movie that Richie designed with a little more sophistication than we are used to seeing from him. The narration by the sleazy homosexual journalist played by Hugh Grant, exaggerated just enough to make it sound more cinematic, highlights the business sense of the protagonists and the importance of having reliable helpers. The acting performances are delightful (McConaughey really needed a role like this) and Colin Farrell gives a crowning performance in the role of the honorable trainer who doesn’t like getting mixed up in “gangster shit", but likes to pay his debts. A wealth of one-lines and a good, honest two hours of British entertainment. I just happen to have a bit of Japanese beef in the freezer.
()
Ritchie is a bit restrained this time and delivers a witty action-comedy with direct, typically British humour, which is not for everyone, but it has a sophisticated script and McConaughey as an alpha-male who is hard not root for. A film about drugs presented in such a way that it makes you believe it’s cool to be in the business. Of course, as long as you don’t complicate things, as is the case here. Among the superb, I would put Hugh Grant on top. After the insane mangling of the classic King Arthur, this is finally a return to waters Ritchie understands and relishes. The result does look accordingly, too.
()
How well it works when you want it to! Ritchie has dusted off his well-oiled craft and salted us once again with a raucous gangster tale full of foul language, British humor, excellent acting, and a tangled racing romp, as it should be. Honestly, I couldn't care less that it's not his most original work considering his portfolio of past works, but no one else can make this style of film (McDonagh comes relatively close)! The Gentlemen is indeed more proper compared to Snatch, as befits the title, and there is still a pretty damn dangerous game afoot, but this time with more grace and charisma. The catchphrases aren't quite as Fu-uckin' legendary, but I'd still find more hidden gems here than wasps on a lollipop. McConaughey's performance was as expected, but despite the undeniable quality of the other names, the remaining foursome more than surprised and delighted me: Hunnam crazy solid, Grant masterfully slick and reminiscent of Pacino in his elegance, Farrell maniacally moral, and Dockery rolling in sex appeal. This fit better than a biting insult.
()
It's as if some gentleman’s store with a men's boutique paid for this movie. All that was missing was free testicle perfume to go with it. It's an insane parade of manicured rich dudes in their 40s, so the target audience goes out the window. And I'm okay with that, because there's nothing like it around here yet. Admittedly, of the four Ritchie gangster flicks, this occupies the fourth/last spot with ease (in the following order: Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels – RocknRolla – Snatch), because it just feels more tired and uncertain compared to the previous ones, it relies more on actors than form, and the plot isn't terribly subtle, just terribly overdistributed. It works seamlessly in the individual vignettes though: I burst out laughing twice, which doesn't happen much to a man at home by himself, there are minor little diversions for fun (beating up six experienced stuntmen who are supposed to be guarding a grow house), it's got momentum, and above all Colin Farrell, who portrays his respectful, intelligent, street-wise, disciplined Irishman (whose Irish is the most fantastic perversion of the language, right up there with Kelly MacDonald and Ardal O'Hanlon) with such glee that he makes the others next to him look like ugly ducklings.
()
A great experience. Guy Ritchie finally returned to what he does best and made a film along the lines of Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels or Snatch. The biggest surprise was Matthew McConaughey, whom I had practically written off, as his ratio of terrible roles to good ones is about 7:1, but he nailed it with this one. Nevertheless, Hugh Grant stole the spotlight. He was simply perfect, and I really enjoyed his performance. And if that wasn’t enough, Michelle Dockery played a part, and she didn't have to play nice. I was highly satisfied.
()
One of the most stylish gangster films in recent years (and who else could have directed it but the master of the craft, Guy Ritchie). When you add to that a meticulously crafted script and a perfect cast, where every name holds weight in global cinema, The Gentlemen simply couldn’t have turned out badly. I was very impressed by the story, which was told retrospectively from Hugh Grant’s perspective; he thoroughly enjoyed his role. Of course, Matthew McConaughey as the main character again delivered a high standard performance, but let’s be honest, he no longer surprises me acting-wise because I know he’s among the elite. It was Charlie Hunnam who really stood out; his scene with the phones had me in stitches. Colin Farrell, though he didn’t get as much screen time as I would have liked, made the most of his presence and managed to elevate the film even further. There is no action here; instead, you fully enjoy the intricate, witty dialogues (where Guy Ritchie excels). And the ending, where the viewer truly doesn’t know whom to trust, was excellent. The rating on this site is completely justified. I give it 86%.
()
Guy Ritchie, in my opinion, is no longer the dude he once was, but with The Gentlemen he did much to make up for that, even if I got lost in the multitude of characters going through the plot. Of the plethora of big-name actors that the director engaged for his film, to my great surprise, I have to single out Hugh Grant in particular, who plays a smarmy and calculating bastard, something that I haven’t seen in him before as an actor and suddenly there is no sign of the overly handsome guy from those romantic comedies we’re used to. Way to go, Hugh. I like you much better this way. (85%)
()
Werbung