Kong: Skull Island

A very well made but increasingly worse film as time passes. Alas. I was looking forward to it, and I can't say that I didn't get to see some good scenes (nothing beat the helicopter attack) and ideas, but somewhere after about half an hour the script got into a rather annoying loop of "period song - walking - monster appears - battle/escape - period song - walking - monster appears," very strange situations and scenes (the ship) and most of all I didn't care about almost any of the human characters. Why would I, when most of them were completely useless (Tom Hiddleston, for example, just walks through almost the whole film and doesn't do anything extravagant), unused (John Goodman, unfortunately) or downright annoying (John C. Reilly)... Seriously a shame. I wasn't expecting a second Godzilla, but at least some good fun. (03/11/2017)

I have an idea. Let's make another version of King Kong, but this time in a Vietnam War style. - All right, what's it going to be about? - That giant ape. - Wait, but the story... - Yeah, the story, it's secondary. If we don't know, we'll put Black Sabbath or Led Zeppelin in there and some silhouettes in the backlight. - Isn't that too little? - No! We'll put Samuel L. Jackson in there, too. He will always say some awfully deep things and look like a crazy Maca Wind. Something between Colonel Kurzt and Captain Ahab, but blacker. - Okay, but what if it has runtime of almost two hours? – Then we’ll put a lot of useless characters in there who can be eaten by some giant beast. - Fine, sounds fun, green light. (09/10/2017)

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. (03/19/2017)

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% (03/10/2017)

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%. (03/14/2017)