Kong: Skull Island (2017) (NO UNOFFICIAL PHOTOS)

For the discussion of the Legendary Pictures MonsterVerse. This includes Godzilla (2014), Kong: Skull Island and any upcoming films under the MonsterVerse umbrella.
Forum rules
Please be sure to read the subforum sticky "Regarding: Monsterverse Leaks & Unofficial Photos [Updated 7/13/2018]", linked below. Thank you!

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=26327&p=1472505

Are you excited?

Yes!
248
86%
Meh
31
11%
No thank you
9
3%
 
Total votes: 288

User avatar
King of the Monsters
Yin-Yang Master
Posts: 305
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 1:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Kong: Skull Island (2017) (NO UNOFFICIAL PHOTOS)

Postby King of the Monsters » Mon Mar 19, 2018 12:43 pm

There were two straight-to-DVD spinoff movies made for the BKN Kong: The Animated Series released in the mid-2000's to cash in on the Peter Jackson remake. Both were musicals, and both were released on DVD by Warner Bros. Kong: King of Atlantis was the first one, which was animated in the style of the show, and Kong: Return to the Jungle was the second one, which was 3-D animated. I've only seen King of Atlantis, which let me tell you makes The Mighty Kong look like a timeless classic, but from what I've seen and heard about Return to the Jungle, it's apparently hilariously terrible.
Last edited by King of the Monsters on Mon Mar 19, 2018 12:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Bureaucrat on Wikizilla. No, not the site on Wikia.

User avatar
Shhh! The Octopus
Interpol Agent
Posts: 715
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 8:06 am

Re: Kong: Skull Island (2017) (NO UNOFFICIAL PHOTOS)

Postby Shhh! The Octopus » Tue Mar 20, 2018 5:08 am

Last edited by Shhh! The Octopus on Mon Mar 26, 2018 8:00 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
The One and Only
EDF Soldier
Posts: 3061
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 8:58 pm
Location: Jamestown, PA

Re: Kong: Skull Island (2017) (NO UNOFFICIAL PHOTOS)

Postby The One and Only » Wed Nov 21, 2018 8:47 pm

Fan video using the opening theme of the 2K KONG:The Animated Series with footage from SKULL ISLAND.
"All literature is one of three stories: a man goes on a journey, a stranger comes to town, and Godzilla Vs. Megashark. "-Leo Tolstoy.

User avatar
KaijuCanuck
EDF Soldier
Posts: 3445
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:12 pm
Location: The Milky Way

Re: Kong: Skull Island (2017) (NO UNOFFICIAL PHOTOS)

Postby KaijuCanuck » Thu Nov 22, 2018 1:52 pm

^that was skreeonking rad. Gave me the nostalgia feels. :)
Image

User avatar
Rhedosaurus
JXSDF Technician
Posts: 816
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2018 9:55 am

Re: Kong: Skull Island (2017) (NO UNOFFICIAL PHOTOS)

Postby Rhedosaurus » Tue Dec 04, 2018 2:51 pm

Just curious. Would this movie had made more money if dinosaurs were in it. I ask because I heard that this movie made a solid profit, it also slightly underperformed and I think that the choice not to have dinosaurs was the main factor.

Also, not sure if this is the right place to ask, but can somebody tell me the rights to Kong? Does WB/Legendary own them now or are they leasing him from Universal?

User avatar
UltramanGoji
Seatopian Daikaiju
Posts: 14018
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 11:40 am
Location: Western New York
Contact:

Re: Kong: Skull Island (2017) (NO UNOFFICIAL PHOTOS)

Postby UltramanGoji » Tue Dec 04, 2018 4:40 pm

Rhedosaurus wrote:Just curious. Would this movie had made more money if dinosaurs were in it. I ask because I heard that this movie made a solid profit, it also slightly underperformed and I think that the choice not to have dinosaurs was the main factor.


They were legally not allowed to use dinosaurs during production, according to a friend of mine who knows one of the creature designers. Apparently Jurassic World "owned the rights" to dinosaurs, so to speak so they couldn't use them.

Rhedosaurus wrote:Also, not sure if this is the right place to ask, but can somebody tell me the rights to Kong? Does WB/Legendary own them now or are they leasing him from Universal?


"Kong" is public domain. "King Kong" is not, IIRC. As for why, it's a huge debate that I can't be bothered to list out. You'll have to look it up on your own, sorry.
Image

User avatar
Godzillakuj94
Interpol Agent
Posts: 649
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 1:50 pm
Location: Some little town you have never heard of

Re: Kong: Skull Island (2017) (NO UNOFFICIAL PHOTOS)

Postby Godzillakuj94 » Tue Dec 04, 2018 4:49 pm

UltramanGoji wrote:
Rhedosaurus wrote:Just curious. Would this movie had made more money if dinosaurs were in it. I ask because I heard that this movie made a solid profit, it also slightly underperformed and I think that the choice not to have dinosaurs was the main factor.


They were legally not allowed to use dinosaurs during production, according to a friend of mine who knows one of the creature designers. Apparently Jurassic World "owned the rights" to dinosaurs, so to speak so they couldn't use them.

Rhedosaurus wrote:Also, not sure if this is the right place to ask, but can somebody tell me the rights to Kong? Does WB/Legendary own them now or are they leasing him from Universal?


"Kong" is public domain. "King Kong" is not, IIRC. As for why, it's a huge debate that I can't be bothered to list out. You'll have to look it up on your own, sorry.

That's so dumb they "own" the rights to extinct animals. Skull island could've designed much better Dino's than those Jurassic World films could.

User avatar
KaijuCanuck
EDF Soldier
Posts: 3445
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:12 pm
Location: The Milky Way

Re: Kong: Skull Island (2017) (NO UNOFFICIAL PHOTOS)

Postby KaijuCanuck » Tue Dec 04, 2018 4:57 pm

Godzillakuj94 wrote:
UltramanGoji wrote:
Rhedosaurus wrote:Just curious. Would this movie had made more money if dinosaurs were in it. I ask because I heard that this movie made a solid profit, it also slightly underperformed and I think that the choice not to have dinosaurs was the main factor.


They were legally not allowed to use dinosaurs during production, according to a friend of mine who knows one of the creature designers. Apparently Jurassic World "owned the rights" to dinosaurs, so to speak so they couldn't use them.

Rhedosaurus wrote:Also, not sure if this is the right place to ask, but can somebody tell me the rights to Kong? Does WB/Legendary own them now or are they leasing him from Universal?


"Kong" is public domain. "King Kong" is not, IIRC. As for why, it's a huge debate that I can't be bothered to list out. You'll have to look it up on your own, sorry.

That's so dumb they "own" the rights to extinct animals. Skull island could've designed much better Dino's than those Jurassic World films could.


I’m not sure this is right. I don’t think it is possible to trademark real world animals, I think Universal would only be able to trademark their own designs.

As for Kong himself, yeah it’s a whole mess. I won’t pretend to understand it all. At the end of the day we’ve got him and Godzilla sharing a continuity once again, and that’s all that matters.
Image

User avatar
SenseiTeriyakiV
EDF Soldier
Posts: 3209
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 12:37 pm
Location: Prancing in a field of goats

Re: Kong: Skull Island (2017) (NO UNOFFICIAL PHOTOS)

Postby SenseiTeriyakiV » Tue Dec 04, 2018 5:39 pm

UltramanGoji wrote:
Rhedosaurus wrote:Just curious. Would this movie had made more money if dinosaurs were in it. I ask because I heard that this movie made a solid profit, it also slightly underperformed and I think that the choice not to have dinosaurs was the main factor.


They were legally not allowed to use dinosaurs during production, according to a friend of mine who knows one of the creature designers. Apparently Jurassic World "owned the rights" to dinosaurs, so to speak so they couldn't use them.

Rhedosaurus wrote:Also, not sure if this is the right place to ask, but can somebody tell me the rights to Kong? Does WB/Legendary own them now or are they leasing him from Universal?


"Kong" is public domain. "King Kong" is not, IIRC. As for why, it's a huge debate that I can't be bothered to list out. You'll have to look it up on your own, sorry.

Jordan vogt Roberts said it was because he thought Kong 2005 already nailed the dinosaurs thing, and he wanted to be more original

Online
Tyrant_Lizard_King
Keizer
Posts: 9351
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2013 5:57 am
Location: The Planet Trade HQ
Contact:

Re: Kong: Skull Island (2017) (NO UNOFFICIAL PHOTOS)

Postby Tyrant_Lizard_King » Tue Dec 04, 2018 7:09 pm

I think it was more about differentiating itself from Jurassic World.
Rocker, paleo buff, cryptid enthusiast, Dragonball fanatic, and lover of comic book, video game, manga, & anime babes!
Follow me on Twitter, if you dare! https://twitter.com/TLK_1983
Image

User avatar
UltramanGoji
Seatopian Daikaiju
Posts: 14018
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 11:40 am
Location: Western New York
Contact:

Re: Kong: Skull Island (2017) (NO UNOFFICIAL PHOTOS)

Postby UltramanGoji » Tue Dec 04, 2018 7:27 pm

Tyrant_Lizard_King wrote:I think it was more about differentiating itself from Jurassic World.


Yeah, this is correct. Sorry if that was confusing, but that's what my buddy said.

Honestly, I'm fine without the dinosaurs. I think the Skullcrawlers were a much more interesting opponent.
Image

daveblackeye15
G-Grasper
Posts: 1293
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 12:45 am

Re: Kong: Skull Island (2017) (NO UNOFFICIAL PHOTOS)

Postby daveblackeye15 » Tue Dec 04, 2018 7:44 pm

I was fine without the dinosaurs since he added new stuff especially the Skull Crawlers. Love the oxen.

User avatar
GalacticPetey
Futurian
Posts: 1671
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 10:25 am

Re: Kong: Skull Island (2017) (NO UNOFFICIAL PHOTOS)

Postby GalacticPetey » Tue Dec 04, 2018 9:43 pm

Yeah, dinosaurs have been done to death in Kong films. The Skullcrawlers were a breath of fresh air. Even the minor creatures, like the Sker Buffalo and the Mire Squid gave at least something else to flesh out the environment and make it feel more varied. Much more interesting than a big T. Rex. Unless the T. Rex is rearing back on his tail and doing kangaroo kicks, I'm not interested.
I can't believe that Godzilla was the only surviving member of its species, but if we continue conducting nuclear tests, it's possible that another Godzilla might appear somewhere in the world again.

MorgansTShirt
Yojimbo
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2019 7:17 am

Re: Kong: Skull Island (2017) (NO UNOFFICIAL PHOTOS)

Postby MorgansTShirt » Tue Mar 19, 2019 12:58 pm

(sorry for resurrecting an old thread. I wasn't sure where else to post this!)

I just saw Skull Island for the second and probably last time in my life. The first was when it was released in theaters, and although my opinion of its characters and story wasn't very high, I still enjoyed it for the monsters.

But after seeing it the second time, even after so long, I'm not just disappointed with it, but also kinda annoyed. The whole movie was flat, fake, and obnoxious. The characters were all clichéd trailer fodder, especially that supposedly-funny survivor guy whose role is mostly just exposition dispenser. And I didn't feel comfortable with the way he sort of just marginalized the actual island natives, as if the writers thought we couldn't identity with them if they didn't speak English and amuse us with Marvel humor. A whole new, richer, and legitimately progressive story could have been made if the natives got to be characters themselves rather than props illustrating a point.

I'm also not a fan of the movie's heroine. She's a likeable person sure but also a bland mouthpiece for the writers. She didn't even leave much of an impact on my memory until that really ridiculous scene where she pulled off those nonsensical heroics, shooting that Skullcrawler in the eye. If she had missed that insane shot, what would she have done? Just stood there watching it devour her companions?

I also have a difficult time figuring out how the themes of war, peace, understanding, and vengeance tie into the whole conflict with the Skullcrawlers, or with the fact that the movie practically exists to give people a quick action fix. All the violence is pretty darn cool for a movie trying to make violence look bad.

Overall a sad experience the second time. Even the novelty of the monsters couldn't save it.
Last edited by MorgansTShirt on Tue Mar 19, 2019 1:09 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
_JNavs_
E.S.P.Spy
Posts: 5248
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2019 7:59 pm
Location: ニューヨーク

Re: Kong: Skull Island (2017) (NO UNOFFICIAL PHOTOS)

Postby _JNavs_ » Tue Mar 19, 2019 3:34 pm

The Natives were always characters that illustrated a point. Not everyone needs to raise their hand, jump up and down and say "I'M HERE I'M HERE, YA SEE ME YET? I'M INCLUDED"... They're meant to show the island as a prehistoric land that time forgot.


Brie Larson is just generally uninteresting, her character was drab and bland. Would've preferred the charismatic white dress beauty that killed the beast in the other Kong films.


There was nothing flat about SLJ and John C Reillys performance or even the Monarch assistant tbh.

John C Reilly was on the island since the war against the Vietnamese. Of course he's going to have a social stigma towards the natives, even though I don't recall him saying anything beyond "The Natives here speak of yaddayaddayadda"
Last edited by _JNavs_ on Tue Mar 19, 2019 5:39 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Image
Sith Apprentice.

User avatar
gottatalktothefake
G-Grasper
Posts: 1228
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2018 11:49 am

Re: Kong: Skull Island (2017) (NO UNOFFICIAL PHOTOS)

Postby gottatalktothefake » Tue Mar 19, 2019 4:23 pm

The movie was an allegory for the Vietnam War, it was a bunch of outsiders getting involved in a conflict they had nothing to do with and making things worse.

The natives were there to show the people being affected by the conflict and the intervention of the outsiders.
Smuggers wrote:How could Dougherty do this to us bros... he's defiling our beloved monsters right before our eyes, charging $15 a pop and getting millions in the process... I thought he was a trufan? I guess this was all some sick joke orchestrated by Thomas Tull for almost a decade...

Oh well. Guess I won't see the movie for myself and form my own opinion, I've basically already seen it in my mind from what I've read online and I know a lame duck when I see one. Time to whip out the 'ol 12 gauge

User avatar
Mr_Goji_and_Watch
G-Force Lieutenant
Posts: 2711
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 4:34 pm
Location: キノプレックス
Contact:

Re: Kong: Skull Island (2017) (NO UNOFFICIAL PHOTOS)

Postby Mr_Goji_and_Watch » Tue Mar 19, 2019 4:28 pm

Deep as f*ck
Moogabunga wrote:Ive said it before and I'll gladly say it again, this is going to be the best Godzilla film ever and more importantly, its going to be the film that truly makes Godzilla mainstream (and cool)

SoggyNoodles2016 wrote:I'm glad to be a fake fan.

MorgansTShirt
Yojimbo
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2019 7:17 am

Re: Kong: Skull Island (2017) (NO UNOFFICIAL PHOTOS)

Postby MorgansTShirt » Tue Mar 19, 2019 5:34 pm

I'm sorry for my rash review. I'd delete it completely but then it would undermine your own posts. I'm kind of an idiot at times.

User avatar
UltramanGoji
Seatopian Daikaiju
Posts: 14018
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 11:40 am
Location: Western New York
Contact:

Re: Kong: Skull Island (2017) (NO UNOFFICIAL PHOTOS)

Postby UltramanGoji » Tue Mar 19, 2019 6:11 pm

MorgansTShirt wrote:I'm sorry for my rash review. I'd delete it completely but then it would undermine your own posts. I'm kind of an idiot at times.


Don't be sorry. You gave a unique perspective that I'll keep in mind when rewatching the film myself soon. You shouldn't feel ashamed to voice an unpopular opinion.
Image

MorgansTShirt
Yojimbo
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2019 7:17 am

Re: Kong: Skull Island (2017) (NO UNOFFICIAL PHOTOS)

Postby MorgansTShirt » Thu Mar 21, 2019 2:39 pm

_JNavs_ wrote:The Natives were always characters that illustrated a point. Not everyone needs to raise their hand, jump up and down and say "I'M HERE I'M HERE, YA SEE ME YET? I'M INCLUDED"... They're meant to show the island as a prehistoric land that time forgot.


I wasn't asking for every single native to be a deeply fleshed out character with a dozen lines. I was suggesting that instead of Reilly's role of obvious exposition dispenser, we could have gotten a potentially more unique and fleshed out story (because no matter its metaphors or allegories, it all leads to a simplified "war/vengeance is bad" message) and a brand new point of view by connecting more with the natives rather than the easily identifiable white guy. Of course, I understand that by doing this it would change the movie significantly from what it is now, but since I don't like what it is now, I wouldn't mind that so much.

Brie Larson is just generally uninteresting, her character was drab and bland. Would've preferred the charismatic white dress beauty that killed the beast in the other Kong films.


It kinda feels sad agreeing with this point, but yeah. Aside from being another bland example of a badass heroine who gets raised as the film's monolith of morals, there really isn't much to her.

There was nothing flat about SLJ and John C Reillys performance or even the Monarch assistant tbh.


I'll admit I may have been mean by calling them flat, and I also have to admit they're the two most interesting characters in the movie. Not that I think they're great characters; they're still shallow and in Reilly's case I just find him annoying. But since most people don't seem to mind the exposition and the humor like I do, I guess it's fair to say maybe the writers were onto something and it just wasn't for me.

John C Reilly was on the island since the war against the Vietnamese. Of course he's going to have a social stigma towards the natives, even though I don't recall him saying anything beyond "The Natives here speak of yaddayaddayadda"


I was confused by this statement at first, and because my feelings are too easily hurt and I too easily discredit myself, I backed down immediately without comment. But now that I've read this with an analytic mind, I see that I didn't make myself clear earlier. I meant that Reilly's character marginalizes the natives as characters. A whole unique world is just summed up by him rather than actually explored, and I'm just not a fan of that writing practice.

I guess in the end, I'm just being unfair to this movie. I really don't like most movies; I just have a special soft spot for kaiju. And even then, I've gotten pretty bored of epic action scenes. Maybe this movie has more to it than I gave it credit for, and I was just too uptight to enjoy it for what it was. I still think this movie was pretty lame, but maybe I just have a crappy opinion of it. I'll accept that.
Last edited by MorgansTShirt on Thu Mar 21, 2019 2:50 pm, edited 2 times in total.


Return to “MonsterVerse (2014-Present)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Gojikong 5433 and 4 guests