Galahad still alive in Kingsman 2?

[Bob_McMillan]

<spoiler=Click to see image>https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cfc228_WwAARvI4.jpg:large

The image above was tweeted by Taron Egerton, who played Eggsy in Kingsman: The Secret Service, with the caption of "A message from an old friend".

The obvious choice for who this "old friend" is Colin Firth's character, Galahad. I suppose Valentine could also technically be a possibility, while Galahad did wear glasses with the same frame shape as the one in the picture above, I don't think he ever wore shades.

In any case, while I liked Galahad, I think his death was a great part of the movie. Bringing him back to life rubs me the wrong way a bit, but I also really like the character, so I'm pretty conflicted on this.

So would you guys feel if they did bring Galahad back to life? Or even Valentine, or anyone else who died in the first Kingsman?

 

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

If they bring him back, or anyone who died, I will be sorely disappointed. I mean, as light-hearted as Kingsman was, it treated Galahad's death in exactly the right way, for me. Having him be not dead would seriously stretch the suspension of disbelief (what, did Valentine miss a killshot from 2 inches away), but cheapen what I believe was the most powerful scene of the movie.

I really enjoyed Galahad's character, and Colin Firth was great, but this worries me. Especially because judging from the picture, they would be going with the "Oh, my eye was just shot out. I'm cool," approach.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I haven't seen Kingsman, but after watching the church fight on Youtube just now I'm 100% for giving this guy a Round 2.

 

[Zontar]

I haven't seen Kingsman, but after watching the church fight on Youtube just now I'm 100% for giving this guy a Round 2.

Pretty much this. Sure his death was dramatic, but if we're being honest so long as they don't harp on it too much and make it the focus of the sequel, having him around again would make things better due to the dynamic he had with the other three.

 

[sky14kemea]

I'm pretty torn on this, actually.

Galahad was my fav character (obviously). On the other hand, his death was like the entire driving force of the climax.

I don't see how they can bring him back without making it completely silly, like cloning or a steel plate in his head.

 

[Saelune]

Pretty much from the start they said they were considering bringing him back somehow. Its already a bit silly, as opposed to gritty realism, so reviving him somehow wont be the biggest stretch.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Galahad was my fav character (obviously). On the other hand, his death was like the entire driving force of the climax.

Much like Marvel resuscitated Coulson - whose death was the driving force of Avengers' climax - all they have to do is not care.

 

[Glongpre]

I wouldn't mind, as long as it is done well.

I think it would fit well with the theme of the movie being a kind of James Bond parody.

I think this movie would be better as a one off. The first was so surprising, that a second would lose some of it's teeth because we can assume the same kind of stuff will happen.

 

[Fijiman]

I'm with most everyone else on this one. While it would be awesome to see more over the top, ass kicking action from Galahad, bringing him back would not be a very good idea.

 

[Guffe]

It'll be interesting to see how they do this.... and who it finally is they're talking about.
I just hope it will be something silly, because the whole movie was, in a very good way. Enjoyed the whole movie hell of a lot!
If they can make another one, and if it is half as good as the first one, I will most likely enjoy it. Of course I hope they do a lot better than that.

 

[MCerberus]

Yes, but where do you go with this character?
Not figuratively, but literally.

A Trump rally?
The MS legislature?
an ISIS base?

 

[Spacewolf]

Considering that the worlds basically fucked at the end of kingsmen I'm not really sure you could make a second one without ignoring most of the first anyway.

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

I would rather they didn't make a sequel, but if they feel they absolutely must, then it would benefit from Firth's involvement, no matter how ridiculous. I mean, wasn't there a jetpack at some point in the first film? Not sure that consistency and realism was what held the film together.

 

[Dr. Thrax]

Why would that matter? The entire movie was just a troll on the audience to begin with. Wiping the slate and just cashing in again seems entirely in keeping with the first film.

How was the entire movie "just a troll on the audience"?

 

[happyninja42]

Considering that Colin Firth was the only watchable thing in the original, I'm sure that the producers realized what a piece of shit any sequel would be without him. It will be a piece of shit with him too of course.

Kingsman was fun for people who have no imagination at all.

Wow, love that insult directed at everyone who enjoyed that movie. You can't just dislike it, you have to shit on anyone who did. Classy.

OT: I don't mind him coming back, as I felt his death was a bit too cliche. Sure bringing him back is cliche too. But, honestly, for a guy who has a violent gag reaction to any blood whatsoever, and who they harp up as not being a violent person, yeah I could see him only doing a glancing blow to Galahad. No training, probably didn't hold the gun properly, first time shooting a gun, maybe flinching from the expected blood that would follow (which did, and he instantly started gagging). Lots of room there for missing a vital shot.

Plus, that image, shows a lens is out of the glasses. Considering this is the Kingsman (aka Bond with Fun), it's likely going to be "Oh yes, our special issued glasses. Come standard with video/audio recording, thermal scanning, data uplink and bullet resistant coating. What? You thought this was the first time one of our agents has been caught flat footed? Please Eggsy. We plan for every possible contingency. I was seriously wounded yes, hence the eye patch for my missing eye, but it was, thankfully, not a fatal blow. Bully yes?"

Considering every other unrealistic thing that happened in that movie for the sake of Fun, to say "there's no realistic way he could survive a shot like that" is a bit of a stretch. Because:

1. We have real life examples of people surviving shots like that. Rare yes, but it does happen, Malala Yousafzai for one. She even avoided any permanent brain damage, and she's not even a super agent!

2. "not being realistic" never stopped Kingsman in regards to anything else they did, so why should this be any different?

 

[Izanagi009_v1legacy]

Considering that Colin Firth was the only watchable thing in the original, I'm sure that the producers realized what a piece of shit any sequel would be without him. It will be a piece of shit with him too of course.

Kingsman was fun for people who have no imagination at all.

Wow, love that insult directed at everyone who enjoyed that movie. You can't just dislike it, you have to shit on anyone who did. Classy.

OT: I don't mind him coming back, as I felt his death was a bit too cliche. Sure bringing him back is cliche too. But, honestly, for a guy who has a violent gag reaction to any blood whatsoever, and who they harp up as not being a violent person, yeah I could see him only doing a glancing blow to Galahad. No training, probably didn't hold the gun properly, first time shooting a gun, maybe flinching from the expected blood that would follow (which did, and he instantly started gagging). Lots of room there for missing a vital shot.

Plus, that image, shows a lens is out of the glasses. Considering this is the Kingsman (aka Bond with Fun), it's likely going to be "Oh yes, our special issued glasses. Come standard with video/audio recording, thermal scanning, data uplink and bullet resistant coating. What? You thought this was the first time one of our agents has been caught flat footed? Please Eggsy. We plan for every possible contingency. I was seriously wounded yes, hence the eye patch for my missing eye, but it was, thankfully, not a fatal blow. Bully yes?"

Considering every other unrealistic thing that happened in that movie for the sake of Fun, to say "there's no realistic way he could survive a shot like that" is a bit of a stretch. Because:

1. We have real life examples of people surviving shots like that. Rare yes, but it does happen, Malala Yousafzai for one. She even avoided any permanent brain damage, and she's not even a super agent!

2. "not being realistic" never stopped Kingsman in regards to anything else they did, so why should this be any different?

You may have a point. survival of bullets through the head is rare but possible depending on how the bullet enters. An example is the famous Phineas Gage case where an iron rod was driven through a guy's head but it caused severe personality altercations even though he survived.

That actually sounds like perfect set up, the bullet was slowed enough to prevent death but not enough to prevent damage to personality and memory and so he returns as a different person and possibly a driving force for the movie.

As for what I personally expect from the move, i expect a massively goofy movie that has fun and loves the spy movies of the past and will be absurd fun. Galahad being alive or not doesn't matter because we have had Blofeld come back time and time again.

 

[happyninja42]

snip

snip

You may have a point. survival of bullets through the head is rare but possible depending on how the bullet enters. An example is the famous Phineas Gage case where an iron rod was driven through a guy's head but it caused severe personality altercations even though he survived.

That actually sounds like perfect set up, the bullet was slowed enough to prevent death but not enough to prevent damage to personality and memory and so he returns as a different person and possibly a driving force for the movie.

As for what I personally expect from the move, i expect a massively goofy movie that has fun and loves the spy movies of the past and will be absurd fun. Galahad being alive or not doesn't matter because we have had Blofeld come back time and time again.

Yeah, I mean Malala had (as far as I've heard) no long term mental problems from the attack, so it's plausible. And the "the bullet made me lose my memory" or "put me in a coma for months" would easily explain why he was out of communication for so long. They see him die on camera, and then are thrust into the "save the world" drama of the climax, so they didn't pay any more attention to him. But what likely happened, was the EMT's showed up, found him just barely alive, and carted him off to some hospital. Where he stayed in a coma for months or (whatever time frame the movie has elapse). He wakes up, and either knows who he is, or spends some time remembering. He eventually shows up at the Kingsman hub, and poof, the character is back. Assuming the teaser tweet is at all "in character" it would imply that Galahad initiates contact with Eggsy, and thus knows who he is. Of course, that tweet is just a tweet, and couldn't mean jack for the way it's handled in the movie. But it's feasible.