Kong: La isla calavera

Una versión abreviada de la película con todos los «wao» está en la sección de videos. Se llama «Trailer». Guión por 5 dólares. Godzilla era una película oscura que tenía estilo, Kong es una gelatina colorida. Sin una sola emoción o una pizca de tensión. El mono entra rápido en la escena, pero el momento de sorpresa lo mata el conocimiento de los avances. También el asombro de los monstruos pedorros que todos ya hemos visto. ¡Qué pena! Está aquí el intento de crear la atmósfera de mundos perdidos de los años 50 y 60, a Hiddleston le va muy bien lo de rastreador (con Brie Larson funcionarían si el guión fuera mejor) y John C. Reilly es el plato fuerte de la película. Solo Samuel Jackson no sabe lo que hace aquí con su chiflado militante, su personaje quedaría mejor si lo interpretara un villano como Stephen Lang de Avatar. (07.03.2017)

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)

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)

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. (10.09.2017)

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. (19.03.2017)

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. (10.03.2017)

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% (10.03.2017)

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)

I really love kaiju films, so I'm heavily influenced, but I had a great time watching Kong: Skull Island! Kong is excellent here, the effects are stunning, there are great monsters and incredible action scenes, and there are also interesting characters. Simply a thrilling spectacle for the movie theater. And to top it off, that fantastic poster with the green signal smoke! (12.03.2017)

A great example of how an inventive and imaginative creative team can turn a potentially flat digital spectacle into a hugely entertaining flick. Here the old truth applies that the presence of a more interesting character can significantly elevate even a genre this lowly. The holy war led by Samuel L. Jackson's character or the immensely likeable guide played by John C. Reilly fit this mold to a tee. And it doesn't matter how gracelessly they act (especially Samuel L. Jackson) because their characters simply have balls. I can hardly recall a similar film in recent memory that passed by so gracefully and yet still gave me a royal good time. Wickedly good CGI and great period songs complement this popcorn flick, which despite its objective B-grade qualities has a ton of A-grade attributes and is technically almost perfect. (26.01.2020)