Kong: Skull Island

I was looking forward to a great chillout that was alluring me with its premise, digital effects and a mix of actors that under usual circumstances cannot disappoint. In this case the biggest problem lies in the fact that the scriptwriter didn’t properly work out the individual characters, so the only interesting one is Samuel L. Jackson, who really acts, and John C. Reilly, who has some cool lines here and there. Otherwise it’s a military slasher in a similar vein like the legendary Predator, the only difference is that nobody in this movie is able to hold a candle to Arnold Schwarzenegger. Catchphrases are missing, even the whole spirit of the movie is missing, so it is just another mediocre digital film from Hollywood. (10/07/2018)

You won't find a more fun adventurous expedition. Kong; Skull Island has the advantage of having a very good cast, something that can't be said much about competing blockbusters. Tom Hiddleston is a likable hero, Oscar-winning actress Brie Larson adds pizzazz, Samuel L. Jackson is once again a great psychopath, and even the wisecracking John C. Reilly is impressive. The biggest plus is the visuals of the breathtaking island and the monsters, whose appearance is one of the best we've seen so far. The spider scene is begging for a horror sequel, and it's a shame that the ants don't make an appearance. The biggest highlight is the final fight with Kong and the giant lizard, which was very spectacular. What disappointed a little that they didn't show more monsters, I believe this island had a lot to offer and the film runs out of breath halfway through, with the viewer just waiting for the finale. I was surprised that the film was quite gritty and uncompromising in places, I was amazed at how many kids were sitting in the auditorium. Personally, I wouldn't take kids to see it. The post-credit scene is a nice touch. 85%. (14/03/2017)

At first I was loving this romp unburdened by logic, and I wanted to come back to it repeatedly, but after a second date, the flaws in the form of the overly stylized script (as if the story was pieced together only around pre-conceived cool shots and scenes), the unfunny dialogues and the almost zero atmosphere don't do it anymore. I like the film as an ultra-loud, polished audiovisual spectacle, and for its sincere nature of a simple, fun blockbuster, the impressive 70s feel full of period songs, and the looks of the mesmerizing Brie Larson, but I can't forgive it for its reprehensible waste of a subject promising atmospheric goosebumps like Edwards' Godzilla. There are a few scenes that are genuinely hilarious and John C. Reilly steals the second half, but this could (and should) have turned out differently (and a little better). 70% (09/03/2017)

A rather weak screenplay, balanced by excellent tricks and fine actors. A movie buff’s enthusiasm is evident in Jordan Vogt-Roberts’ work as director, and lots of great ideas and situations are just what I hoped for. Unfortunately, some catalysts leading to these situations don’t make absolute sense (very conveniently located chains and ship’s propeller in the last fight, gas grenades and the simple stupidity of some characters). This is a great shame, because it really spoils the effort. Interesting casting is confronted by a screenplay where for instance the wonderful Sam L. Jackson’s behavior occasionally defies common sense. But all it needs is a little more depth to his motivation. (14/03/2017)

Kong is big, King Kong 2005 was great. The words are very similar, but from a filmmaker's perspective they are completely distant. Peter Jackson made films for the love of the material, Jordan Vogt-Roberts makes what the current mainstream is most interested in – mainly drive, dynamics, imaginative monsters of all kinds and great fights. The script is unfortunately pulled out of thin air, and if it weren't for the incredibly polished visuals and the fine 70's atmosphere with old music, it wouldn't have been much fun. Brie Larson is only here for her looks, and the ensemble cast is saved by the impeccable John C. Reilly. The 10 percent better visual effects aren't enough to trump the 50 percent better approach to the material of its predecessor. It is also puzzling that the only emotion is evoked by the closing credits. (18/03/2017)