Kong: Skull Island

Kong: Skull Island is very different than it is presented in trailers. It has much closer resemblance to a classic adventure film, and those expecting the seriousness and maturity hinted at in the trailers will not find it. That said, Jordan Vogt-Roberts, an debutant blockbuster director, occasionally delivers some very nice shots and handles the epic monster battles flawlessly, and there are more of them than you would expect. Unfortunately, when Kong disappears from the scene and it comes to the human characters, it becomes significantly worse. For a moment, the film tackles Samuel L. Jackson's war traumas from Vietnam very seriously (and quite impressively), only to change into John C. Reilly's comedic relief the next minute. And in the meantime, a boring Loki and a bunch of other people run around, whom you really won't care about. Overall, it's okay, but I won't deny a slight disappointment. I suppose I'll watch a compilation of the battles at most in a year, but the entire film will be quite difficult. (15/05/2017)

The new Kong offers a good dose of audiovisual orgy, which is nice to watch, but if you've seen all the trailers, the film itself doesn't offer much more, which is a shame. Personally, I was (pleasantly) surprised by Kong's fairly early arrival on the scene. The mysterious and almost inaccessible Skull Island offers a lot of giant, bizarre-looking and very dangerous creatures going after the "intruders from the other side". The action scenes all work well for the most part – the giant spider, the battle in the burial ground and the final fight. On the other hand, the plain and nonsensical dialogue, especially between the soldiers, was a real problem. Of the cast, I was most impressed with the unhealthily deranged Samuel L. Jackson and the healthily deranged John C. Reilly. In the end, this is a typical popcorn flick that you shouldn't expect too much from, because then you'll enjoy it all the more. Unfortunately, there were some expectations on my part. (20/03/2017)

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)

An abridged version of this movie with all the “wow moments” can be found in the video section. It’s called “Trailer”. A five-dollar script. Whereas Godzilla was dark and stylish, Kong is a mass of colorful gelatin without a single emotion or a hint of tension. The great ape’s entrance is fast and furious, but the moment of surprise is killed by the knowledge already imparted by the trailers. The same goes for the astonishment over the cool monster, which had already been revealed beforehand. And that’s a pity, as there is an attempt to recreate the atmosphere of the lost worlds of the 1950s and 1960s, Hiddleston’s tracker is good (he and Brie Larson would’ve had great chemistry with a better script) and John C. Reilly is the highlight of the film. Only Samuel L. Jackson does not know what to do with his militant lunatic character; a butcher like the one played by Stephen Lang in Avatar would have been better here. (07/03/2017)

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)