•
Rating:
This MonsterVerse isn't bad at all, except for the name. After Gareth Edwards' good Godzilla, here comes Kong: Skull Island, by the not-too-experienced Vogt-Roberts. One must recognize a certain affinity between the two works: great care in visual components, streamlining of dynamics and plot in favor of impactful, astonishingly effective, memorable action sequences, reducing the pathetic element related to human destinies in favor of a focus (understandable in the context of the saga) on the battles between creatures. In the MonsterVerse, humans are increasingly spectators of titanic clashes between beastly deities regularly divided between good and evil, and less responsible for their fate, though trying to be.
If we wish, the moral issue underlying Kong's actions, king of the island and protector of animals and humans, makes the film less fresh and modern compared to Edwards' work. There, humans were truly useless ants that could do little to nothing in the face of the battles between Godzilla and the M.U.T.O.s, who in turn fought in total disregard for humanity. Here it is different: dimensions are reduced, Kong is soon identified as the force of good, while the underground monsters, the skull crawlers, are almost demonic, ruthless thieves, nearly uncatchable for the speed with which they move.
This however allows for a better delineation of the moral dichotomies, almost touching the configuration proposed by Miyazaki in Princess Mononoke: there is good and evil in the animal kingdom as in man. But obviously here it's all greatly simplified and stripped of the economic and social dimension. Nevertheless, the ability to carry on two different threads concerning the actions of men on the island and also offer a dual reading of Kong is appreciable: he is not evil, but in fact has massacred almost all of Packard's men, who cannot resign himself and wants his revenge. But even here, given the outcomes of the adventure and certain plot choices (which I won't reveal), it would be wrong to seek a too profound interpretation.
The main requirement in this film is the aesthetic one, which indeed is indulged with great attention. We are faced with a top-notch adventure, not too subtly inspired by Spielberg's first Jurassic Park: this is revealed by certain shots, like the one from above of a man who is then crushed by a big foot. But also the insistence on landscapes, often wonderful, evocative, or otherwise emotionally marked, the clear sequencing of human action on the island, the different tonalities of the atmosphere, and the various trials our characters must face. There is truly a lot of Spielberg, but all without ever becoming clumsy, without poorly copying.
Among the best aspects, I surely count the structure: two gigantic centerpiece scenes at the beginning and the end, with the adventures of the little men on the island, in search of salvation or revenge, in between. This linearity is apparent, enriched by various subplots, all well spent throughout the film. It is true, one of the screenwriters also wrote Jurassic World, but let's pretend we don't know that. Here the events have a fully effective pacing, perhaps even too well-oiled in some spots. There is certainly an underlying predictability, but it would be absurd to achieve the opposite: we are still facing a reboot. It's the style that rewards Kong: Skull Island. The apparent linearity is immensely useful for gradually channeling the viewer towards more complex but perfectly manageable moments. And so when the grand finale comes, the different factions on the field all have their strong motivations, even the vengeful Packard. Likewise, the decisive battle between the two gigantic beasts has a significant duration, but never descends into a chaotic accumulation of wild punches: there is a cleanliness in staging, the vision is immensely enjoyable and without hindrances.
This is no small thing in an adventure and action film: but numerous action-packed sequences stand out for their quality. From the misadventures in the cemetery of Kong's ancestors, to the arrival with helicopters on the island and the first tragic encounter with its guardian. And then spiders, octopuses, and gigantic buffalo intelligently incorporated into our characters' journey. In terms of runtime, pure action is not the main component of the film, but it's certainly the most emphasized one.
The rest, the adventures of the men on the expedition, certainly do not shine for depth, but at least avoid the usual clichés of this franchise and many films of this kind. The characters of Tom Hiddleston and Brie Larson are light, but less stereotypical than one might expect. Or rather, they are stereotypical on the outside, with muscles, grim looks, voluptuous chests, but not in their behavior, which is decidedly pragmatic. And even the classic moments where King Kong saves the beauty have a new aesthetic vitality, less romantic and more spectacular.
Rightfully space is also given to other figures, such as Randa, well played by John Goodman, or the cunning Packard by Samuel L. Jackson. However, perhaps the most convincing are Chapman (the soldier who wants to return to his son) and Hank Marlow (the WWII castaway): two textbook minor characters.
Finally, the choice to set the story in 1973 in the Vietnam area is another element that favors the aesthetic reformulation of Kong's story. Appreciable are some minor details like the Nixon figurine on the helicopter, or daring parallels like the napalm used against Kong, which inevitably calls back to Apocalypse Now, and so on. They remain aesthetic games, but quite enjoyable.
6.5/10
Loading comments slowly
