Thursday, 9 March 2017

2017 Film Review: Kong: Skull Island (2017)

Directed by: Jordan Vogt-Roberts
Written by: Dan Gilroy, Max Borenstein, Derek Connolly, John Gatins
Starring: Tom Hiddleston, Samuel L. Jackson, Brie Larson

I completely and utterly love monster movies. There is no other type of movie that tugs at my nostalgia the same way; when I played with my toys as a kid, I imagined giant monsters fighting each other with their incredible weight and power, unmatched in strength as they clash a hundred stories above us. Seeing that brought to life on the big screen gives me more pure joy than any other kind of film can. As such, I am incredibly biased towards looking upon these types of films favourably; instead of trying to consider the value of a film based on its ability to execute its story, or how well the actors perform, or how the music and the tone and visuals all synchronise, there's always a part of me that looks at these movies purely for the colossal chaos that ensues from my favourite monsters beating the crap out of other monsters that are not my favourite monsters.

With this in mind, let me first act as I would if I were my child's self (Spoiler Warning)

THIS IS AMAZING, DID YOU SEE KONG THROW THAT TREE THROUGH THAT HELICOPTER? LOOK AT HIM BEAT THAT KRAKEN TO DEATH! WTF A GIANT SPIDER WITH BAMBOO LEGS, THAT'S SO CREEPY! AAAAH, KONG IS SO BADASS, HE JUST CRUSHED THOSE TWO SKULL CRAWLERS! YES LORD!! THAT FINISHER WAS INCREDIBLE!!! HE RIPPED THAT THINGS GUTS OUT BY THE TONGUE!!!

... And back to reality.

In truth, Kong is a surprisingly good movie, considering the quality people normally associate with monster movies, although it isn't flawless, despite what my inner child might say.

Bill Randa (John Goodman, appropriately wacky) and Houston Brooks (Corey Hawkins, a little stiff) have motivations to go to an uncharted island known in legend as 'Skull Island'. Brooks wants to confirm the 'Hollow Earth' theory, and Randa wants to prove that monsters exist. They need a military escort (led by Jackson), a tracker (Hiddleston), and a photographer (Larson). Brooks wants to use seismic charges to map the earth underneath the island, and Randa wants to flush out something big.

The set-up is unfortunately heavy, and weighs down the first act of the film as we're bombarded with character introduction after exposition dump after character introduction after exposition dump. To be honest, my first thought when considering this was how similar the set-up felt to Suicide Squad, and that is not a movie you want to be compared to. However, despite the rocky start, the film takes off with incredible pace as soon as the characters get off the boat, in to their helicopters and on to the island. Just a couple of minutes on the island, and Kong shows up, wrecks every helicopter, and generally shows how big and tough he is, while still reflecting that he is an animal rather than a monster (he injures himself on the rotors of the copters and a couple of explosions). With all the helicopter crashes and characters surviving helicopter crashes I was once again reminded of Suicide Squad, but thankfully this was the last time that horrid film entered my mind during my experience with Skull Island.

After the characters collect themselves in to small groups, they make their way across the island to a rendezvous point, while Jackson's Packard has his mind set on revenge against Kong. The soldiers, led by Packard, have a few monstrous encounters on their way, including a bout with a spider that  will not soon forget; rather more horrific than what you'd expect for this type of movie, similar in tone the bug scene in King Kong (2005). Hiddleston and Larson's group encounter Hank Marlow (John C. Reilly), who is undoubtedly one of the best human aspects of the film. He offers a hint of comedic relief tied to the sad fact that he's been trapped for 28 years on the island, and is one of the more developed characters in the film. Considering that, there's a lot more character work done here than is to be expected from a monster movie. They do just enough more than the usual minimum to make you want to see the characters make it out alive. Most are still fodder, of course, but Hiddleston for example, is such a logical character who makes correct, well-minded decisions that you root for him in every situation because he isn't losing his head and he treats the whole experience very cautiously. There are many situations that could've easily gone South had Hiddleston's character not been there. Larson is also a character to root for, compassionate and curious, but not always stupidly so. Reilly has enough for you to want to see him return home. It's not a whole lot, but it's a few little things to help make the overall movie better.

That's what the movie gets right, really, is the little things. They filmmakers didn't choose to force a romance between the leads, the motivations are clear, good decisions are rewarded and bad decisions are punished, a character trying for needless self-sacrifice dies in vain, a character bent on avenging his fallen brethren ends up getting more of them killed, and the constant references to other films like Apocalypse Now and Jurassic Park are appreciated. It's enough to make this movie more than its flaws.   

That said, I want to acknowledge the weaker aspects of the movie, because, they aren't small. As I said before, the pacing of the first act is pretty poor, meandering and filled with boringly delivered expositional dialogue. It's as if Skull Island is two-thirds of a good movie, and you need to sit through the iffy first act to get to the amazing spectacle. It's a similar problem that Godzilla had, only Godzilla's weak act was its second. There's also the matter of the film's dialogue; if the characterisation is deeper than the average monster movie's, then the dialogue is even more shallow than most. There are a few scenes that I found to be particularly bothersome, such as one scene involving the characters trying to talk down Packard so that he doesn't kill Kong. The dialogue in this scene is awfully abrupt and empty, as if there were blanks that they hadn't filled in yet. The scene is indicative of the issue with the dialogue that permeates most of the movie; unless it's banter between the soldiers, it's either expositional or mostly empty.

That said, what matters most when it comes to monster movies is the spectacle. While Skull Island has a lot more monster mashing than Godzilla, it's also not quite as impactful. The sense of scale is there, the monsters do indeed feel huge, but there's less weight to it. Watching is on the big screen in IMAX 3D, I had hoped that the experience would match the few showings of power from Godzilla, but the scenes where Kong fights Skull Crawlers (the big bads of the movie) aren't as heavy-hitting as the scenes between Godzilla and the MUTOs; I know they're on a different scales, but the creatures moved differently. Perhaps it's because they're lighter, I'm not sure. However, the actual choreography and animation on display are impressive to say the least. While the design of the Skull Crawlers are a little simplistic, the amount of detail that went in to them is pretty astonishing; you can see cracks in their hard heads, scales along their necks, the way their muscles move, there's a lot of effort put in to these things.

The Verdict: Speaking with a considerable amount of positive bias, Kong is actually a good film
overall, offering a lot more monster action than 2014's Godzilla, as well as a surprising amount of characterisation for a monster movie. The film is flawed in its pacing until the second act, and the dialogue is mostly empty, but the film offers a lot of little things that it does well, such as a strong rapport between the leads not ultimately turning romantic, and characters being punished for stupid decisions. If you see this, I must warn you to stay until after the credits; a moment of pure joy awaits.

*One more spoiler*

THE KAIJUVERSE IS COMING, GODZILLA WILL BE BACK! RODAN! MOTHRA! KING GHIDORAH! THEY'RE ALL COMING AND I CAN'T CONTAIN MY EXCITEMENT!!!

Rating: 7/10

Published March 9th, 2017

1 comment: