|
|
Post by movieliker on Dec 7, 2019 17:40:04 GMT
It only got a 6.5 rating from viewers. About right. Good special effects and action. Brie Larson is fun to look at. But other than that, it's loaded with cliches.
- Samuel L. Jackson plays the same character he plays in every movie.
- The military is lampooned by liberal Hollywood as gun crazy morons whose answer to every problem is kill and destroy.
- The soldiers --- who supposedly just left the war in Vietnam --- are more afraid of Kong and his fellow monsters than any scientist or lay person (Consistent with Hollywood's position and message, "People good, science good --- military bad").
- Only the soldiers ever respond to Kong and his fellow monsters with "eyes as big as saucers, open jaws, paralized with fear, or screaming in fright as they brainlessly fire their little machine guns."
- This is another movie where the military continually fires pistols and machine guns at monsters bigger than a building. It has no effect in the beginning of the movie. And still no effect in the end (except to aggravate the monsters) --- but they keep doing it.
- This is yet another movie where people flying in helicopters think while fighting with King Kong, it's a good idea to fly within arm's length of Kong, so he can inevitably swat you out of the sky, while you inevitably react in fear and surprise that he would ever do that (What? You have never seen any other King Kong movie?)
The creators spend millions on star pay and special effects. You think they could spend a little something on writing.
|
|
|
|
Post by anthonyrocks on Dec 7, 2019 17:56:48 GMT
It only got a 6.5 rating from viewers. About right. Good special effects and action. But other than that, it's loaded with cliches. - Samuel L. Jackson plays the same character he plays in every movie. - The military is lampooned by liberal Hollywood as gun crazy morons whose answer to every problem is kill and destroy. - The soldiers --- who supposedly just left the war in Vietnam --- are more afraid of Kong and his fellow monsters than any scientists or lay person (Consistent with Hollywood's position and message, "People good, science good --- military bad"). - Only the soldiers ever respond to Kong and his fellow monsters with "eyes as big as saucers, and open jaws, paralized with fear, or screaming in fear as they brainlessly fire their little machine guns." - This is another movie where the military continually fires pistols and machine guns at monsters bigger than a building. It has no effect in the beginning of the movie. And still no effect in the end (except to aggravate the monsters). But they keep doing it.
"Samuel L. Jackson plays the same character he plays in every movie." ----------------------------------------------------
Not really, In this Movie he is basically playing Captain Ahab.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Dec 7, 2019 18:00:58 GMT
It only got a 6.5 rating from viewers. About right. Good special effects and action. But other than that, it's loaded with cliches. - Samuel L. Jackson plays the same character he plays in every movie. - The military is lampooned by liberal Hollywood as gun crazy morons whose answer to every problem is kill and destroy. - The soldiers --- who supposedly just left the war in Vietnam --- are more afraid of Kong and his fellow monsters than any scientist or lay person (Consistent with Hollywood's position and message, "People good, science good --- military bad"). - Only the soldiers ever respond to Kong and his fellow monsters with "eyes as big as saucers, and open jaws, paralized with fear, or screaming in fright as they brainlessly fire their little machine guns." - This is another movie where the military continually fires pistols and machine guns at monsters bigger than a building. It has no effect in the beginning of the movie. And still no effect in the end (except to aggravate the monsters) --- but they keep doing it. "Samuel L. Jackson plays the same character he plays in every movie." ---------------------------------------------------- Not really, In this Movie he is basically playing Captain Ahab.
He seemed to me to be a carbon copy of the guy he plays in Marvel's The Avengers. (I added more complaints to my OP since you posted.) |
|
|
|
Post by 博: Dr.BLΔD€ :锯 on Dec 7, 2019 20:41:59 GMT
I quite enjoyed it on a certain level.
I much prefer this type of Kong in this film.....looking like a 'movie' giant ape, as opposed to the too realistic ape in in Peter Jackson's movie......as much as I respect Andy Serkis.
I quite like Sam Jackson playing Sam Jackson.
Tom Hiddleston's character was amusingly inept for an SAS member.....more or less just telling people to run.
Didn't mind it though..... And thankfully no devastatingly sad ending with Kong being slaughtered .
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Dec 7, 2019 21:08:05 GMT
I quite enjoyed it on a certain level. I much prefer this type of Kong in this film.....looking like a 'movie' giant ape, as opposed to the too realistic ape in in Peter Jackson's movie......as much as I respect Andy Serkis. I quite like Sam Jackson playing Sam Jackson. Tom Hiddleston's character was amusingly inept for an SAS member.....more or less just telling people to run. Didn't mind it though..... And thankfully no devastatingly sad ending with Kong being slaughtered . So, you weren't expecting much. And you got just what you were expecting? |
|
|
|
Post by rogerthat on Dec 7, 2019 21:11:17 GMT
I don't know what anyone else was expecting but I was expecting a King Kong movie and that's what I got. I would never place King Kong or Godzilla movies in the realm of great writing.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Dec 7, 2019 21:15:28 GMT
The politics are pretty overt, yeah. The whole movie is a parable on Vietnam, with SLJ invading a tropical land and obsessively waging a war against a gorilla (GEDDIT) he can't defeat.
I kind of hated it. I'm also in the minority here, despite this board throwing a bitchfit at the slightest inkling of liberal agendaa in their movies. Maybe they just somehow missed the seething hatred this movie and its director have for the US military? Somehow.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Dec 7, 2019 21:17:32 GMT
The politics are pretty overt, yeah. The whole movie is a parable on Vietnam, with SLJ invading a tropical land and obsessively waging a war against a gorilla (GEDDIT) he can't defeat. I kind of hated it. I'm also in the minority here, despite this board throwing a bitchfit at the slightest inkling of liberal agendaa in their movies. Maybe they just somehow missed the seething hatred this movie and its director have for the US military? Somehow. I thought I was clear on the anti military agenda. |
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Dec 7, 2019 21:17:50 GMT
I don't know what anyone else was expecting but I was expecting a King Kong movie and that's what I got. Unless there's an extended version where he fights dinosaurs and falls for Brie Larson, a King Kong movie isn't what I got. |
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Dec 7, 2019 21:19:02 GMT
I don't know what anyone else was expecting but I was expecting a King Kong movie and that's what I got. Unless there's an extended version where he fights dinosaurs and falls for Brie Larson, a King Kong movie isn't what I got. Ha ha ha . . . |
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Dec 7, 2019 21:19:06 GMT
The politics are pretty overt, yeah. The whole movie is a parable on Vietnam, with SLJ invading a tropical land and obsessively waging a war against a gorilla (GEDDIT) he can't defeat. I kind of hated it. I'm also in the minority here, despite this board throwing a bitchfit at the slightest inkling of liberal agendaa in their movies. Maybe they just somehow missed the seething hatred this movie and its director have for the US military? Somehow. I thought I was clear on the anti military agenda. I was echoing/adding to what you said. |
|
|
|
Post by 博: Dr.BLΔD€ :锯 on Dec 7, 2019 21:21:22 GMT
I quite enjoyed it on a certain level. I much prefer this type of Kong in this film.....looking like a 'movie' giant ape, as opposed to the too realistic ape in in Peter Jackson's movie......as much as I respect Andy Serkis. I quite like Sam Jackson playing Sam Jackson. Tom Hiddleston's character was amusingly inept for an SAS member.....more or less just telling people to run. Didn't mind it though..... And thankfully no devastatingly sad ending with Kong being slaughtered . So, you weren't expecting much. And you got just what you were expecting? I have trained my small brain, M-Liker....to Never expect anything in a movie....or anything. Lessens the chances of being disappointed. Last time I did that.....was Zack's Man Of Steel..........'nuff said. Must be unbearable to be a Star Wars fanatic.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Dec 7, 2019 21:27:45 GMT
So, you weren't expecting much. And you got just what you were expecting? I have trained my small brain, M-Liker....to Never expect anything in a movie....or anything. Lessens the chances of being disappointed. Last time I did that.....was Zack's Man Of Steel..........'nuff said. Must be unbearable to be a Star Wars fanatic. I wouldn't say you have a small brain. I think that is kinda smart. |
|
|
|
Post by biker1 on Dec 7, 2019 21:52:56 GMT
I've seen it twice now. Yes, it is riddled with action thriller / military cliche, but I wasn't really expecting anything else. Action & visual FX fine. 5/10
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Dec 7, 2019 22:32:35 GMT
I dug the hell out of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by darksidebeadle on Dec 7, 2019 23:25:06 GMT
I think it was my bottom film of that year
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2019 4:28:30 GMT
I enjoyed it. John Reilly was the best part of this film.
|
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Dec 8, 2019 5:09:29 GMT
It's watchable but forgettable. basically one of those movies that did not waste my time but at the same time I could have never seen and I would not have regretted it either. 5/10 (Thumbs Down) p.s. because like I always say a movies true worth is whether it's a movie I want to re-watch from time to time or not. this movie is not worth re-watching. hence, it's ultimately a Thumbs Down (even though it's not bad). I tend to view IMDb average ratings about like this... 4.x/10 and lower = crap 5.x/10 = mostly negative opinions 6.x/10 = mixed opinions (with maybe slightly more positive or negative depending on which side of the 6's it's on) 7.x/10 = mostly positive opinions high 7's on up = the more praised movies (especially movies that have been seen by many people) but... I think it's getting easier for movies to get into the 7.x/10 range it seems as I think many people are a little too generous with their scores of movies as if people scored stuff a bit more honestly, as in 5/10 is middle-of-the-road/average and then scaled up and down fairly evenly from there, movies average ratings would be a bit lower than they currently are as I have a feeling many people score movies fairly high, like say 7-8/10, and then mostly forget about it and move onto the next movie. so if that's roughly true, that speaks volumes about what that person truly thinks of a movie in that it's nothing special which means more of a 6/10 MAX. with that said... a 6.6/10 average for Kong: Skull Island is a bit too high as a low 6's should have been the high end of it's average score. like say something like high 5's to maybe low 6's would be more accurate for a average rating or so. 博: Dr.BLΔD€ :锯 because if he tried not to be 'Sam Jackson' it would likely work against him. |
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Dec 8, 2019 5:35:28 GMT
The creators spend millions on star pay and special effects. You think they could spend a little something on writing. Their 'opening' sunset money shot was their first vision for the movie. The sun doesn't set for another 40 minutes or so, in fact it's blue skies until the village. #nitpick As it is, I really like it, easily one of the better crowd pleasers for the 2010's.
|
|
|
|
Post by anthonyrocks on Dec 8, 2019 12:40:34 GMT
I enjoyed it. John Reilly was the best part of this film.
Yeah, I liked him as well.
He was Very Good in it.
|
|
