Leatherface
Member
I didn't think it was too good personally. It did however make me appreciate the Peter Jackson Kong movie much more. 
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Is Kong: Skull Island any good?
- Thread starter Machina
- Start date
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
It's a campy action flick that was unexpectedly funny and weird and I had a good time watching it
put me in the camp that thinks the movie is well worth the time. Sure, they don't use the actors very well and the tone can shift at weird times. but it's visually gorgeous and gives some campy monster fun.
I am unashamed to say that I enjoyed the part where Kong takes the tree and strips the branches off and uses it like a sword against the skull-crawler.
I am unashamed to say that I enjoyed the part where Kong takes the tree and strips the branches off and uses it like a sword against the skull-crawler.
The film really was shot quite well! It's a good looking movie.
Worst dialogue I seen for a very long time. It was incredible. CGI effects were ok, actors were bland, many action scenes were ridiculous.
Mediocre, even in the brainless blockbuster action flick category.
Mediocre, even in the brainless blockbuster action flick category.
We may differ on the "slightly", but yeah.
This movie was fun. Sure, the dialog was overly goofy, some of the plot contrivances were silly, and the movie is constantly mugging you in the face with how campy it gets.
But the point is that it's fun. Kong gets to actually do fun things. SLJ and Goodman get to chew the hell out of some scenery. The music was fun. Just, everything was so fun. I can forgive the flaws that are present because I was enjoying myself so much that it really didn't matter.
And it held up on a rewatch, too.
But the point is that it's fun. Kong gets to actually do fun things. SLJ and Goodman get to chew the hell out of some scenery. The music was fun. Just, everything was so fun. I can forgive the flaws that are present because I was enjoying myself so much that it really didn't matter.
And it held up on a rewatch, too.
Fallout-NL
Member
I really liked the Vietnam shit, was kinda hoping they'd lean into that a lot harder even.
Still, that shot with the sunglasses was good.
Still, that shot with the sunglasses was good.
Sgt. Kabukiman
Banned
Yes, it's very fun. Much better than I expected it too be.
Pretty much how I feel. It's just a really fun monster movie.
Zvonimir Boban
Banned
So barely a month after I typed out the post above, some friends came round and they hadn't seen Kong so we ended up firing it up and yeah, it's still meh. There are some legitimately gorgeous shots in the movie but then you have Tom Hiddleston who is SO bad. Not boring, he's just bad. Brie Larson was a bit better but that's not a high bar to clear.
John C. Reilly was still the best part of the movie, closely followed by Cole and I agree with this post:
I don't think I've seen him in anything before but in a movie full of performances that range from one note to straight trash, he somehow managed to create a person with emotions and character.
The movie would have been WAY better if rather than waste time on Hiddleston and Larson,
John C. Reilly and the Japanese pilot were both alive and spent half the movie bickering like an old married couple
For all its flaws (characters, writing) I will say I came out of it feeling a helluva lot more entertained than I did watching Edward's Godzilla. Now that movie bored me to tears. But yeah, gorgeous visuals, good action, John C. Reilly nails his performance with flying colors especially at the very end.
LiquidSolid
Member
I just watched it the other day and came away from it thinking it was middling but every time I've remembered it since then, it only seems to get worse. It sets so many things up and they almost all either go nowhere or end in complete disappointment. There's maybe two likeable characters in the entire movie. And there's some bizarre, campy shit thrown in there for no reason. It sucks.
Peter Jackson's King Kong, on the other hand, still holds up. Great Kong movie.
Peter Jackson's King Kong, on the other hand, still holds up. Great Kong movie.
So, like, I defended the hell out of Godzilla 2014, because I really bought into the narrative that monster movies need to show self restraint in showing the monster, because it's ultimately so much more satisfying when you get the one brief scene of the monster in full doing its thing.
Meanwhile, Kong opens up with Kong front and center, has him doing fun stuff all throughout the movie, and then ends on
Kong going fucking God of War on the Skullcrawler Queen
Now I can't ever go back to Godzilla 2014. It really was boring and we were just trying to convince ourselves otherwise.
I hope the approach taken to Kong is what will be applied to King of Monsters. With Godzilla, Rodan, Mothra and King Ghidorah all in the movie, you cannot hold anything back. Fire on all cylinders.
Geno Breaker
Banned
The best part of the movie (and one of the few good parts really) is definitely the post credits scene. I saw that part early since it was leaked but it was still cool in the theater.
And yeah, I think Godzilla was the better movie. Everything with Ford and his military travels are really boring, and the dialogue is hilariously bad sometimes, but the set pieces and cinematography are far better. They're both held back by flaws.
And yeah, I think Godzilla was the better movie. Everything with Ford and his military travels are really boring, and the dialogue is hilariously bad sometimes, but the set pieces and cinematography are far better. They're both held back by flaws.
Zvonimir Boban
Banned
Nonsense. The bit where Godzilla
's dorsal plates start lighting up before his first atomic breath attack
Edwards made a fantastic Godzilla movie which was as true to its roots as you could get from a big budget Hollywood version, Kong is just mediocre.
No way they go the restrained/cockteasing route with the next movie, we've seen Godzilla and other giant monsters now and it's time to go nuts. I think I'd still prefer Godzilla to have a relatively small amount of screen time but give us lots of Mothra, Rodan and King Ghidorah please.
^^^^^
Geno Breaker
Banned
Nah, Godzilla 2014 is nowhere near as thematically charged (or good) as the original film. The original Godzilla is a time capsule that perfectly captures the fears at the time with a very strong and urgent message. Godzilla 2014 brings in a mishmash of ideas to criticise the government but it's muddled by the characters and it doesn't have the same amount of urgency nor relevance. The closest movie by Toho that G14 could be compared to is probably something like Godzilla 2000 or some other post-1991 Godzilla movie that's not titled Shin Godzilla or GMK.
Not gonna deny that the set pieces in the movie are awesome. The airport scene and the Golden Gate bridge encounter are wonderfully well done. The fight with the MUTOs is pretty cool, even if there are too many cutaways to soldiers carrying a nuke around.
BurritoBushido
Member
I did not think it was very good.
crazy monkey
Banned
It is very fun B movie. It is how monster movie should be unlike 2014 godzilla movie where you can't see shit and characters are pretending to be serious.
Yep, it knows exactly what it is.
SolidChamp
Banned
I caught the first 20-30 minutes on a recent plane ride and have resolved to rent and watch it on bluray when I get back to Taipei.
I liked what I saw of it well enough to know I'll probably enjoy it on a visceral level.
I liked what I saw of it well enough to know I'll probably enjoy it on a visceral level.
Geno Breaker
Banned
I know I'm like GAFs biggest Godzilla fan and all that, but I don't really get this sentiment. The movies which have something beyond monsters beating the shit out of each other are always better their spectacle-only counterparts in my opinion. It's how Godzilla become a huge franchise and cultural icon in Japan in the first place and why most Western monster movies aren't remembered outside of late night marathons or cult fanbases. Kong has some cool action but I doubt anyone is going to talk about it outside of "that one part was sick" a decade from now.
JohnMatrix
Banned
I went in expecting a big dumb fun monster movie but I came out hating it, the way it was cut was really annoying and the jungle island setting ended up being totally bland and a missed opportunity with cliche Vietnam era stuff. The action was ok but filled with slo mo shots that took me out of it
The best parts were Samuel L Jackson and John C Reilly but that's just because they're Samuel L Jackson and John C Reilly
The best parts were Samuel L Jackson and John C Reilly but that's just because they're Samuel L Jackson and John C Reilly
I don't need, nor want every monster movie to be Gojira, and I appreciate a movie that knows exactly what it is trying to do. Kong was a throwback to old cheesy 50's B movies, and it was not trying to hide it. And I think this movie is defenitely going to stick with me man, so please speak for yourself. Skull Island was the most fun I've had in a theatre in years.
Everything with King is gold, and the visuals are impeccable. The rest ranges from tolerable to garbage.
Loki and Brie are both terrible here. They're completely miscast and under-written. Trying to make Hiddleston's crumpet ass a grizzled mercenary was straight up laughable.
The army dudes were alright.
I remember the first twenty minutes or so being pretty painful as well. The film could've started with the flight over to Skull Island without losing anything of merit.
Loki and Brie are both terrible here. They're completely miscast and under-written. Trying to make Hiddleston's crumpet ass a grizzled mercenary was straight up laughable.
The army dudes were alright.
I remember the first twenty minutes or so being pretty painful as well. The film could've started with the flight over to Skull Island without losing anything of merit.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
This movie has almost zero in common with 50s horror. It's certainly not a throwback to anything unless you think 2009's "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" qualifies as "Throwback"
It absolute felt like something akin to Them! or Invasion of the Giant Spider, and other cheesy american giant monster movies to me man. I've already read your thoughts on the film in the OT, and we just plain don't agree on anything regarding this film.
Fox Mulder
Member
Shin Godzilla shit all over it in a way only the Japanese can.
I don't remember shit about the 2014 Godzilla really, but his design was neat. It will probably be the same with Kong in a few years.
Still, it's the best time to be alive for the Godzilla franchise. These films will still go on my shelf next to all the others in the genre.
Fox Mulder
Member
Maybe there's a chinese cut of her saving the day or something.
Lumpy Onion
Member
It was ok. Some cool looking CG monster action and a plot that moved along at a nice pace. Sadly I never really connected with most of the characters and some bits that were supposed to be charming/funny fell flat. John C Riley's character was entertaining throughout though. Good but not great movie.
Geno Breaker
Banned
I didn't even have the original Godzilla in mind while writing that post. I specifically mentioned how I like the films that had something "beyond just monsters beating the shit out of each other" (in other words, I was talking about the sequels with themes). It's fine if the people behind a movie just want it to entertain people and have cool moments, and they do deserve praise for delivering on it. What I don't get is when people seemingly frame that praise as something that sometimes comes off as "these movies are inherently silly, so any attempts at substance are inherently bad thus I'm glad they didn't try it." It looks unreasonably dismissive, considering as some of the sillier, monster action packed films do have substance. For the most part, those are the ones that get loved and respected for decades. If I misundersood those posts, feel free to criticise me, but that's how they came off and that's why I decided to respond like that.
The Jazz Cabbage Master
Member
thoroughly enjoyed it. Pacing seemed really tight.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
This is a good post.
Not every movie needs subtext or social commentary, and there are plenty of movies that are fondly remembered that are just that. And honestly, Kong is the movie I wanted Godzilla '14 to be.
I definetly did not say that, nor suggest such a thing.
I liked it more than the peter Jackson one. Seemed much more charming. Loved the special effects. And the WW2/Vietnam vibe throughout the movie. Though it's much more cheesy, and the fight doesn't reach the same high as snapping trex mouths but it was consistent enough with its action imo.
Gaius Cassius
Member
Go live your life, kid.
Prof. Bathtub
Member
Going by the category of directors with filmographies of "comedy with Parks & Rec cast member -> giant monster franchise installment (with dull lead characters)", Vogt-Roberts is the better Trevarrow. Honestly enjoyed it more than the other Apocalypse Now + Apes movie of the summer.
The online film chat/critic community sometimes anoints entertaining dumb overblown actioners, but not this one it seems. Ah well.
The online film chat/critic community sometimes anoints entertaining dumb overblown actioners, but not this one it seems. Ah well.