tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post857728702021511558..comments2024-03-27T15:16:57.305-05:00Comments on F This Movie!: F This Movie! 377 - Kong: Skull IslandPatrick Bromleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00771837625286775607noreply@blogger.comBlogger57125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-30871929722583651572017-05-06T14:52:11.292-05:002017-05-06T14:52:11.292-05:00I'm always more comfortable when obnoxious fam...I'm always more comfortable when obnoxious families speak English in the movie theatre, too.<br /><br />Sorry to get my SJW on, Patrick, but really, the language these people were conversing in shouldn't be germane to your account of a bad movie-watching experience. Unless... there's something else you're trying to say.<br /><br />Would your viewing of <i>Kong: Skull Island</i> have been any more bearable if you understood Spanish or these people were being jerks using the English tongue?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03171919450410869053noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-74728760714358893342017-03-23T12:40:45.187-05:002017-03-23T12:40:45.187-05:00Haha - right on man. And hey, I'm at the stage...Haha - right on man. And hey, I'm at the stage where a few days at home without the wife and kid would be kinda awesome (for starters he's really quite pushy about not wanting me to play guitar, so I've got some catching up to do there) so try to enjoy it for me, huh?Solhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03114869401584310369noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-32647408584090137852017-03-23T08:04:53.019-05:002017-03-23T08:04:53.019-05:00Hey buddy, its going really well thanks. Having my...Hey buddy, its going really well thanks. Having my first time away from her at the moment (her and her mum are visiting family), so ill see how i go after a couple days. If Weekend Open thread has a heartfelt entry from me about Jersey Girl, then you'll know things aren't going well. Brad Lhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18426952757794850746noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-27453813079625943242017-03-23T05:45:58.488-05:002017-03-23T05:45:58.488-05:00Brad - I dare say you might be onto something! (Go...Brad - I dare say you might be onto something! (Good to see you - hope fatherhood is treating you well!)<br /><br />Michael - I believe that the concept was his and I believe it could have been a good one. I would also have to guess that at some point the studio chickened out and started meddling. I hope so for Vogt-Roberts' sake, otherwise I'd have to say he's a bit of a hack. There was a lot of playing it safe. I am grateful that it isn't strictly a King Kong redux - we certainly didn't need another one of those - but I still don't think it strayed far enough away from the formula to justify its existence. Other than setting up the franchise, of course. And look, like JB and Patrick were worried about, I do feel like a bit of an asshole shitting on this movie that a lot of people seem to like a lot - I don't want to rain on any parades. But I'm also not willing to compromise my personal expectations because I have seen a lot of really good big budget spectacle movies that work on all of the levels that matter to me.<br /><br />Daniel - I see your point but if I wanted to look at photographs of Brie Larson I would look at the creepy scrapbook I keep hidden in the crawlspace.Solhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03114869401584310369noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-63467071408822377772017-03-22T14:40:57.768-05:002017-03-22T14:40:57.768-05:00Confused how someone could possibly be bored of sh...Confused how someone could possibly be bored of shots of Brie Larson lookong pretty....Daniel Eplerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01866855763520017556noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-82487473875648170522017-03-22T14:19:26.062-05:002017-03-22T14:19:26.062-05:00I wont argue with you guys, because I know this is...I wont argue with you guys, because I know this isnt a "great film". But I went in with low expectations, and this turned out to be my second favorite movie of the year so far (behind Get Out). It was the best popcorn fun entertainment I've had in a theater in a long time!Daniel Eplerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01866855763520017556noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-43566923245534593602017-03-16T21:51:33.084-05:002017-03-16T21:51:33.084-05:00It probably also helps that the studio doesn't...It probably also helps that the studio doesn't have to pay a hotshot indie director the same kind of money they'd pay an A-list director. I can't speak for how the studio treated Vogt-Roberts during the production, but I do know the concept for the film was his and the studio went along with it. The studio initially wanted the film to be another redux of the classic Kong story. Except, of course, for the end. Michael Giammarinonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-91893450109095350912017-03-16T20:48:43.342-05:002017-03-16T20:48:43.342-05:00I dare say that the trend of Indi director given b...I dare say that the trend of Indi director given big budget is because they are easier to be told what to do/be pushed around by the studio execs. Brad Lhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18426952757794850746noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-7129085447290448812017-03-15T22:08:05.339-05:002017-03-15T22:08:05.339-05:00This movie is nothing if not all text. This movie is nothing if not all text. benpetersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02680256171903996080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-42703349295021048802017-03-15T19:14:05.384-05:002017-03-15T19:14:05.384-05:00Dennis, I was giving yours and JB’s point some tho...Dennis, I was giving yours and JB’s point some thought and here's what I've came up with:<br /><br />Kong ‘33 dealt with the whole beauty and the beast angle, so it's easy to see racial subtext there. <br /><br />Kong ‘76 was even more blunt with the racial subtext. <br /><br />Not as blunt as ‘76, I can still see there being racist subtext in Kong ‘05, though unintentional, due to the subject matter and adhering so closely to the ‘33 film. <br /><br />But I don't think Kong: Skull Island applies. Here's why:<br /><br />It's not a beauty and the beast story. There's no way I can see someone arguing racial subtext to the film, since there is no sacrifice, and no connection between a female character and Kong. Yes, Kong rescues Brie in one sequence, but it doesn't lead to anything that can be read into subtextually. <br />Sam Jackson's character has it in for Kong, and there is subtext to be gleaned from it, but I would argue it isn't racial. For Jackson, Kong represents Vietnam and the Viet Cong. Or Viet Kong, if you will. (That the natives are Asian back this up.) Kong is the war that must be won, and Sam and Sam’s company are damn well going to win this time. <br />Even if J.K. Simmons had been cast instead of Sam, I don't think a white vs black message could be read, because Kong would still represent Vietnam and the Viet Cong. <br /><br />If someone wanted to find a racial message in the film, based on what has come before in the franchise, I think it would be unavoidable, but that being said, I still think it'd be a reach. There's always people who read into films and read messages in the text that was not the intention of the filmmakers. I'll admit, I've been known to read into things way too deeply myself. That, or I've at least been accused of it. <br /><br />Of course, I could be totally wrong, but as of now, that's what I'm taking away from the film. Michael Giammarinonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-84608645291109428762017-03-15T12:57:03.386-05:002017-03-15T12:57:03.386-05:00Well done JB, you did it again?
"Would it b...Well done JB, you did it again? <br /><br />"Would it be less or more racist if the guy was white?"<br /><br /> My head has been all day thinking about this scene and what it means?Dennishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13900651640246375537noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-81651567879141869722017-03-15T04:04:39.372-05:002017-03-15T04:04:39.372-05:00For what it's worth, IMDb says Jackson's r...For what it's worth, IMDb says Jackson's role was originally going to be played by J.K. Simmons, but he had to drop out because of scheduling conflicts.<br /><br />Of course the role may have changed significantly since then. Mikko Viinikkahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16045016331246302112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-4150316752537044292017-03-15T03:38:50.389-05:002017-03-15T03:38:50.389-05:00Patrick, I had the exact same reaction regarding t...Patrick, I had the exact same reaction regarding the racial "issues". I'm putting it in quotes because I'm note positive there actually are issues, but I sure wondered if the sequence or even the whole Jackson plot would have been acceptable, would the character have been a white dude. I think that had to be a question at some point, and it would have caused way too much controversy (even with the best of intentions), and they couldn't possibly afford that risk.Ed B.https://www.blogger.com/profile/00692573300557594396noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-52768911993198026272017-03-15T03:28:46.966-05:002017-03-15T03:28:46.966-05:00YES that drove me insane. Why shoot it like a Supe...YES that drove me insane. Why shoot it like a Super 8 home movie when it so clearly isn't (and doesn't even try to be, except in the very first shot of the sequence)? This doesn't make any goddamn sense.Ed B.https://www.blogger.com/profile/00692573300557594396noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-71335426597338582952017-03-15T02:33:33.289-05:002017-03-15T02:33:33.289-05:00I had a good enough time with the movie, so I'...I had a good enough time with the movie, so I'll call it a good movie. Although, I saw it four days ago and have forgotten large chunks of it (listening to the podcast, several times I went "Oh right, that happened"), so I guess forgettable is the right word.<br /><br />Am I the only one who was bothered that the ending was shot like a home movie, but couldn't be a home movie inside the movie? There were shots from inside the house while Reilly still stood on the doorstep, and it was too well cut together.Mikko Viinikkahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16045016331246302112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-88722209352662778532017-03-15T01:52:21.991-05:002017-03-15T01:52:21.991-05:00In his book Nightmare USA, Stephen Thrower drops a...In his book Nightmare USA, Stephen Thrower drops a quote from Hershel Gordon Lewis, where he calls Jurassic Park an exploitation film. Yes, Jurassic Park! Here's the quote: “An exploitation film is a motion picture in which the elements of plot and acting become subordinate to elements that can be promoted. In that respect, I would regard Jurassic Park as the ultimate exploitation film. If you look at Jurassic Park with a cold-blooded eye, the acting level is junior high school. People read their lines as though they're seeing them on a Teleprompter for the first time.” Now, if you ask me, it's a rather oversimplified definition of what makes an exploitation film. I wouldn't even go so far as to call Jurassic Park an exploitation film. I don't think Sam Neill, Laura Dern, Jeff Goldblum, or Richard Attenborough are bottom basement actors by any stretch of the imagination, so to me all Lewis's quote proves is judging performance is just as subjective as judging anything else. I doubt they cost a lot to get, but that's not due to a lack of talent, but because they weren't big box office draws, and the bulk of the film's cost had to go to create the dinosaurs. I recognize its B movie roots, but an exploitation film? No way! But you know one thing that never prevented Lewis from calling Jurassic Park an exploitation film? The budget. Jurassic Park cost $63 million to produce. If exploitation films are based solely on their limitations, no one would know better than Hershel Gordon Lewis. If he didn't like Jurassic Park, that's fine, but if exploitation films were still determined by their limited on-hand finances, then the last thing Lewis would have called Jurassic Park is an exploitation film, no matter how much he disliked it. <br /><br />On the same page as Lewis's quote are three posters; the posters for Jaws, Carrie, and War of the Worlds. Here’s what the captions under the posters say:<br />“Jaws: If a poster nailed all that was exploitable about a movie's premise, this is it. Jaws, possibly the most iconic piece of mass-marketed ballyhoo ever designed. <br />Carrie: Brian De Palma’s stylish and compelling Carrie followed Polanski’s Rosemary's Baby and Friedkin’s The Exorcist into the ranks of classic Hollywood movies derived from modern horror fiction, and in the blood-drenched Carrie White gave the mainstream its first goretastic poster-girl. <br />War of the Worlds: A war indeed. The thrilling and massively expensive War of the Worlds sees Steven Spielberg's insatiable lust for exploitation glory continue…”<br /><br />So, why is Steven Spielberg getting so much attention in a book about Exploitation? If you'll indulge me one final time, I'll tell you, in two sentences:<br /><br />“The relationship between the majors and the (Exploitation) Independents changed forever with the advent of Steven Spielberg’s Jaws and George Lucas's Star Wars. Grisly shocks and fairground thrills were no longer the sole province of the Exploitation Independents.”<br /><br />So, after all that, is Kong: Skull Island a big budget exploitation film? Well, with its Vietnam allegory, habitual extreme close ups to eyes, and allusions to Italian violence, I might certainly call it a pastiche of the Macaroni Combat genre. The cast is chock full of actors who have starred in Marvel Studios films, what one might call big budget B movies, and the script might be thin on character, contain dialogue that simply exists to get those thin caricatures from Point A to Point B, if for no other reason but to move the plot so we can give the main attention to the giant monkey and lurid creatures, so it might meet other people's criteria of what makes an exploitation film. But is it an exploitation film? Maybe that determination is really just as subjective as whether the movie is good or bad. Michael Giammarinonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-16611898525897137862017-03-15T01:50:23.136-05:002017-03-15T01:50:23.136-05:00I don't think calling a big budget movie an ex...I don't think calling a big budget movie an exploitation film rationalizes something that might be bad. An exploitation film is an exploitation film. There are signifiers to recognizing an exploitation film, and it has nothing to do with whether the movie is bad or not. If that were the case, all the movies we watch during Junesploitation are bad, and we all know that's not true. That would again suggest that the long-standing opinion were true that the ‘B’ in B movie meant it was a bad movie, and that's not true at all. If filmmakers can make ‘B’ pictures with ‘A’ budgets, it's fully reasonable that exploitation films can be made on ‘A’ budgets as well. Because what is an exploitation film but a B picture containing exploitable elements? A low budget exploitation film has certain signifiers, and a big budget exploitation film has certain signifiers. Low budget exploitation films are/were subject to their limitations. Those productions don't have the biggest stars at their disposal, so they have to rely on exploitable elements. Big budget exploitation movies don't have those restrictions. Not only can they afford bigger stars, those stars are part of the package. The exploitable elements in the bigger budgeted films aren't due to limitations, but aesthetic and genre; the director's vision. With a big budget, a director can make an exploitation film because they want to, not because they need to. Michael Giammarinonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-445281293902582812017-03-14T19:45:02.665-05:002017-03-14T19:45:02.665-05:00Can you at least refer to this shared cinematic un...Can you at least refer to this shared cinematic universe by its actual name? It's called the MonsterVerse. That is a real thing. (Softly weeps)<br /><br />Loved the podcast! I actually liked the movie but I think it's only because I really like seeing giant ape monsters. #ImPartOfTheProblemMatt Sollenbergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02088555561067804979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-83196438443024367092017-03-14T10:53:25.423-05:002017-03-14T10:53:25.423-05:00I agree that this was absolutely a movie in the ex...I agree that this was absolutely a movie in the exploitation vein of the 70s and 80s. It's the spirit and vision of the director that is paramount rather than how much money may be at hand, and the direct homages to the genre sprinkled throughout the film are hard to deny. That said, sometimes I feel when listening to the podcast that the guys have a tendency to shape their opinions of a movie around whomever they are speaking with on the show, especially with certain pairings of podcasters. I'm not saying that's what happened here with Patrick and JB, just that it is something that may be at play when similar things are being said between the guys that end up being outside of the consensus view on the board itself.<br /><br />Ah well, subjectivity and all that. We've all been in situations seeing a movie where a million different outside factors can be at play that can affect one's enjoyment of that movie. Michael Cathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14174910498419526755noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-65491283213022208872017-03-14T10:52:27.876-05:002017-03-14T10:52:27.876-05:00Thanks John but you should have prepared me for &q...Thanks John but you should have prepared me for "Blood on Your Thigh"! Dying here.Solhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03114869401584310369noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-31480151691270012812017-03-14T10:31:45.159-05:002017-03-14T10:31:45.159-05:00I appreciated your grasp on the biology of panic a...I appreciated your grasp on the biology of panic and anxiety. Michael Cathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14174910498419526755noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-14759307015864265992017-03-14T10:22:22.628-05:002017-03-14T10:22:22.628-05:00Prepare to have a lot of your feelings legitimized...Prepare to have a lot of your feelings legitimized. John Murphyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08810774557887719483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-41420785002235468102017-03-14T09:42:16.674-05:002017-03-14T09:42:16.674-05:00I haven't listened to the podcast yet, and I&#...I haven't listened to the podcast yet, and I'm pretty sure I don't need to to know how Patrick and JB felt about it. I was pretty disappointed - I saw it in IMAX 3D so I was impressed with the spectacle of it, but by turning Kong into a God, albeit a semi-benevolent one, they took away that relatable aspect Kong has always had. I can't feel sympathy based on smelliness and hairiness alone! Kong is less of a CHARACTER in this iteration than ever. Sad!<br /><br />A couple snarky musings:<br /><br />1. So many shots of Larsleston just looking pretty - yawn!<br /><br />2. I wish this was as good of a movie as it was an advertisement for the soundtrack of the movie. Or as it was titled in an earlier release: "All the Most Overused On-the-Nose Soundtrack Songs of the 70s"<br /><br />I'd like to use this comment to address Hollywood - I know you're reading - STOP handing over 100s of millions of dollars to indie directors if you're going to panic and meddle and fuck everything up. <i>Godzilla</i>, <i>Jurassic World</i> and the horrendously unpunctuated <i>Kong Skull Island</i> reek of fear. I find the odd, unsure mixture of tones in both JW and KSI particularly similar - there is no singular vision here. Go all in on these guys or hire the sure things that will let you sleep at night while they make the movie.<br /><br />Looking forward to the podcast - not looking forward to inevitably buying my ticket to <i>King Kong v Godzilla: Dawn of Monster Justice</i> when I know I'm punching myself in the dick.Solhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03114869401584310369noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-3752252374768882242017-03-13T23:43:52.876-05:002017-03-13T23:43:52.876-05:00I kind of loved this movie. There are definitely s...I kind of loved this movie. There are definitely some script problems; it is a little odd how quickly everyone got over what John Goodman did, but nothing that hampered my enjoyment or knocked the near permanent grin from my face. I loved that it wasn't afraid to be silly. Sometimes in a gruesome way, like the spider, but mostly just in a fun way. Like with everything John C Reilly did. Also, the look of the movie, both in the design and how it was shot.<br /><br />They did a great job of differentiating this version of Kong from Peter Jackson's. He is essentially a giant bigfoot instead of a giant gorilla. And he fights like a wrestler, which is a lot of fun to watch.<br /><br />I would argue the no memorable lines, but I can't quite remember the exact wording of one that immediately springs to mind. It was Whigham's character just after the first encounter with Kong, when's hes being completely nonchalant while everyone else freaks out. "That was an unusual (unorthodox? unexpected? un-something) encounter." I can't get it quite right, but that is more about my memory than the lines. Of course, the larger point about the terrible dialogue is inarguable. About half lines are not things a person would say. Honestly, though, it only added to my enjoyment. Scott Skocyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16481902978617982142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4217427319662074458.post-79144997299174365372017-03-13T20:42:27.041-05:002017-03-13T20:42:27.041-05:00Chaybee, the only difference here to this new stud...Chaybee, the only difference here to this new studio model of plucking indie directors out of the indie world to make these big franchise pictures is that Legendary actually asked Vogt-Roberts what he would do, after he turned down their suggestion to just do another slavish retelling of the original King Kong. He told them his Apocalypse Kong take and they said, "Okay, fine, let's do that."Michael Giammarinonoreply@blogger.com