When The Gentlemen was first released in the United States, it was projected to gross around $10 million in its first weekend. Not only did the film reach $10.6 million in the first weekend, it went on to receive another $6 million in the second weekend and an additional $6.9 million in the third and fourth weekends. Financially, the movie was a massive hit and a true testament to Ritchie’s popularity. However, critics were quick to analyze the moral ambiguity of the narrative, and multiple reviews have suggested a multitude of interpretations of the movie.
One review that offers critical insight is from Manohla Dargis, the chief film critic for The New York Times. In her extensive review, she explains how The Gentlemen is simply another example of a quippy, overly masculine, and chaotic story that Ritchie has trademarked. “The point is cleverness and looking cool… There’s not much else, which depending on your mood and the laxity of your ethical qualms, might be enough.” Manohla’s review suggests that the movie is to be taken lightly and that Ritchie’s narrative does not offer deep, essential questions to reflect on. However, it is clear that a meaningful analysis of Mickey Pearson’s world and his empire offers viewers a unique perspective on illegal drug industries, the celebration of illicit drug culture, and high society in the United Kingdom.
There are many suggestions why Ritchie’s film is not interpreted as an insightful look into a unique story of drug kingpins, violence, and crime. The apparent lack of diversity of gender, race, and ethnicity may deter critics and audience members. “As is often the case with Guy Ritchie, the dudes far outnumber the women, here by roughly six to one,” Dargis explains in her review. For critics who have followed Ritchie’s career, The Gentlemen is a clear continuation of his trademark narratives. They are “talky and twisty, as usual, but also exuberantly violent… and mischievously — or just aggressively — offensive,” says Dargis. It is important to evaluate Ritchie’s shortcomings. The lack of diversity and moral clarity certainly detracts from the narrative. However, viewers should also be encouraged to focus their analysis on the plot and explore how stories of illegal drug industries can be portrayed in various ways by various characters all around the world.
Ritchie’s popularity is a testament to his creative ability, and although his projects may contain flawed writing, characters, or composition, his stories can continue to provide insight into the specific subjects he chooses to explore. Through careful analysis, viewers can recognize what is at the core of his film: a story of a hyper-masculine drug kingpin whose personal interests conversely affect all those in his vicinity. Ritchie appears to tap into a common narrative when producing narco-related content.