first: i loved it.
second: it has problems.
third: yeah so and?
which has pretty much been the consensus down the line: how do you classify a film that alternately contains extreaneous unresolved dangling plot threads
and the most incredible special effects and action sequences ever to be put on film? and not just 'wow, that looks cool' special effects, but along the lines of gollum, 'holy shit, that special effect not only has character, but it contains a human performance and is interacting with a human performance in a way that is so convincing that i'm actually beginning to take it for granted' kind of special effects. in short, you just can't not see it.
if you love movies, special effects, adventure.. this is the one. it made me feel like a kid again, watching 'temple of doom' or 'return of the jedi,' both deeply flawed films, but as a teenager, were my unequivocal favorites. i didn't care about the deeper complexites, better acting and tighter action to be found in 'empire' and 'raiders,' i just loved how 'temple' and 'jedi' were more complete, visceral stories.
i'm amazed at how long movies are getting - after uploading some of my favorites to itunes, where you see the running times displayed right next to each other, it's pretty arresting. all of the original star wars and indiana jones movies clock in at almost exactly 2 hours. we pretty much go to films now expecting them to be at least 2.5 hours. what seems to be happening is that films are no longer as disciplined. and with a little discipline, i think kong would be a stronger film. or, perhaps it's not running time that's the problem, but focus. it's clear that some sequences were already cut for time: filming on the beach at skull island (in the trailer), and the crew building a raft and being attacked by water creatures (as in the original).
it's all awesome, but the film, despite its length feels incomplete because not enough focus is given to its central, most amazing relationship - between kong and ann. to expound on the backstories of all the ship crew who will be picked off one by one anyway is subplot, and it's subplot that is at best tangentially connected to ann. it's like remaking star wars and spending most of the time showing us how aunt beru makes blue milkshakes. what we really need is more ann and kong, or more footage that deepens their relationship once they do meet. and those scenes are
so fantastic, it makes you wish the whole film contained as much simple joy.
kong will do anything to pwotect a widdle puddy.
Kong - forgetting plot holes and anything relevant to deep film discussion - was an enjoyable ride. I don't know of the last time a film made me feel like a little kid, this said by one who is soon to hit 32. The first 1.5 hours, pre-Skull Island, were some of the best I've spent in the theater in years. It was akin to the feeling of clinking up the big hill of a roller coaster. You KNOW what the big drop is like, but the anticipation is so much fun.
It was good old fashioned storytelling when the film crew was drifting toward the ominous island. Sure, it was great action and adventure once they chased the big ape around (or he ... they) but getting there truly was half the fun and more than half the movie.
Jack was excellent.
And the line, pardon me for not quoting verbatim, about film vs. theatre, spoken by Denham: "if you loved theatre, you would have jumped" was one of the best I've heard in a while from a film.
I won't see it again for enjoyment, but I may for further picking-apart. I felt like I was nine, and that was worth the admission and some of the cheesiness that was intrinsic to Jackson's storytelling.