Kong: Skull Island Review

Kong: Skull Island is silly, stupid, and excessive, a Syfy original movie with the budget of a Hollywood blockbuster. It is the kind of wonderful experience that happens only ever so often on the big screen: the kind of film that makes the six-year-old-boy in me giddy with spectacle. This is the movie that "Shin Godzilla" should have been.

The film begins with a ten-minute introduction of our heroes, strung together by a threadbare plot that exists purely for the sake of establishing this "MonsterVerse," where in the future more American actors will be face-to-face with other famous monsters from the past. And I am okay with that; in fact I could not be happier. Instead of watching B-movies on the small screen, I can watch them on the big screen (I guess that is what "B" stands for now).

John Goodman plays Bill Randa, leader of an underfunded part of the government to study giant monsters (how do I get a job doing that?), partner up with Tom Hiddleston, their tracker, and Samuel L. Jackson, leader of a squadron of Vietnam pilots itching for one last mission. They make it to the island, the titular "Skull Island," where most of their helicopters are smashed by Kong. There are a myriad of other people along for the thrill ride, and Kong's large fists split our large cast into three primary groups: the military, lead by Jackson, a lone solider, played by Toby Kebbel, and the non-fighters, lead by Hiddleston until John C. Riley, playing a bug-eyed survivalist found on the island, stumbles onto the screen and steals it. The film bounces from action piece to action piece, and any slow moment has you leaning in your seat waiting for the next bizarre monster to attack.

Samuel plays Packard, who is more than ticked off at his men dying at the hands of Kong, with the intensity and insanity you expect from any so-bad-it's-good movie. But he imbues his role with the power that only he can bring. His eyes burn and he commands every scene he is from, even if his "Ahab" character is stale, he gives it everything he has; he clearly is having a blast. And why shouldn't he?! The action is grand and frequent, with giant, slimy creatures fighting each other, all gloriously clear even with the 3-D glasses on. The film is being fun without trying to be fun. Marvel, take notice.

But the cast has some wrinkles; while Goodman and Riley are an absolute blast to watch, Hiddleston struggles to carry the film, never doing much aside from looking pretty (which is easy, considering amongst all the blood and mud, his skin is always clear and his clothes are always nice and crisp). Platonic love interest Brie Larson, playing photojournalist Mason Weaver, is equally boring, a frustratingly average performance in a role destined for another character actor.

King Kong battle other monsters, as well as cause some welcome bloodshed from background characters, and that is the rest of the plot, reducing our hefty cast into a much more sizable one. Still, there is zero character development, but the niches are filled and performed (mostly) by actors obviously relishing the fact that they are in a Kong movie. But it is not a remake, sequel, or prequel; it is a reboot, by definition, with no previous knowledge of other films in the franchise need, though fans of those flicks will probably make up most of the audience.

It is what I call a "cocktail genre" movie, blending a monster movie with a jungle-expedition film together, with a splash of a war flick, just for flavor. Lush environments are a perfect juxtaposition to the low angles positioned to create a sense of awe and foreboding size for both the titular ape and the creatures he battles, including one with a towering spider that uses its long tongue to suck up unsuspecting secondary characters. Must be rough knowing that the only time you star along such big names your cinema fate is sealed by the long leg of a spider.

Look, good cinema this is not, but it is well shot, acted, paced, and directed, and for that it gets a recommendation. Actually, I guess that means it is good cinema, so then what can I rate it? Whatever the hell I want to.