In 1933 New York, an overly ambitious movie producer coerces his cast and hired ship crew to travel to the mysterious Skull Island, where they encounter Kong, a giant ape who is immediately smitten with leading lady Ann Darrow.
A washed up monster chaser convinces the U.S. Government to fund a trip to an unexplored island in the South Pacific. Under the guise of geological research, the team travels to "Skull Island". Upon arrival, the group discover that their mission may be complicated by the wildlife which inhabits the island. The beautiful vistas and deadly creatures create a visually stunning experience that is sure to keep your attention.Written by
Kong shares his 2005 counterpart's love of natural beauty, as he sits enraptured by the Aurora Australis. See more »
Despite being an alleged former SAS member, James Conrad not only "sweeps" (passes the muzzle of his weapon across the bodies of someone he doesn't want to shoot) several people, he clearly fires directly over the head of Mason Weaver while she is standing within five feet of him. Any trained professional would avoid both of these as they could easily result in the friendly fire injury or death of a team member. See more »
Mark my words. There'll never be a more screwed up time in Washington. But we can't let it stop us.
See more »
The IMAX intro for the film features the statement "Kong is King", a trip through Skull Island vistas, and Kong's roar. See more »
I am not a movie snob and am easily entertained, but this movie was absolutely a complete and utter joke. It felt like a 3rd grader wrote the script. It contained every single cliché imaginable, from corny Platoon/Apocalypse Now-type one-liners to ridiculous slow-motion "sacrifice" scenes-- all incredibly cheap, contrived and void of any depth what-so-ever.
Absolutely NO PLOT-- not a single tangible, well-built contextual plot exists in this movie. John C. Reilly was the whole point of the movie-- it should be called "King Reilly and His Adventures"-- but then again, there really weren't any adventures to talk about...
The worst part of the movie was that I could absolutely not tell when the movie was supposed to be serious or a comedic parody, and folks, that's never a good sign, as it usually means the film is not good. And Samuel L. Jackson?? I think I just might use his appearance in future films as cause to not see them because he is clearly cast for his popularity and for a quick marketing boost for films that clearly need that extra kick. I am going to binge-watch King Kong (2005) with Jack Black until I can forget that I ever saw this new attempted failure to reprise Kong. Have our standards really fallen so far?? I honestly do not think there was a single frame that lasted longer than 2 seconds, I am not joking. Oh, the agony.
303 of 590 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this