Throwback Thursday Review: 'The Avengers'

Sorry for the lack of Throwback Thursday Reviews recently, as well as the delay on this review, but I'm finding it increasingly more difficult to set aside time to write these in the final weeks of my spring semester as assignments, projects, and exams head my way. If you'd like to have an idea of upcoming content for the blog, read the next few paragraphs. Otherwise, go ahead and skip past to read my review of The Avengers.

I mentioned this in my last Throwback Thursday Review, but all my finals are scheduled the same week Avengers: Infinity War will be released, so there won't be any Throwback Thursdays for the remainder of this month. Reviews you can expect for the remainder of April include my thoughts on Rampage and Avengers: Infinity War, and I'll be writing a Triple-R for Avengers: Age of Ultron next week instead of a Throwback Thursday Review to tie into the Marvel motif. 

Speaking of which, I began my Marvel marathon to prepare myself for Infinity War and successfully watched all of Phase One last weekend (this means Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Iron Man 2, Thor, Captain America: The First Avenger, and, of course, The Avengers). I hope to watch all the Phase Two this weekend and get through Phase Three next weekend. I won't be re-reviewing all of them because that's a daunting task to complete before April 27th, but it's been a while since I last shared my MCU ranking so I'm reranking the films as I watch them to share my most accurate ranking with you all. However, I'm going to hold off till Ant-Man and the Wasp is released in July since that will be the twentieth installment to the Marvel Cinematic Universe and I like the idea of rounding out my list by ranking twenty rather than nineteen. I'll also have a better idea of where Infinity War fits by then, so it's truly for the best.

'The Avengers' Review

Nominated For: Best Visual Effects.

When Thor's mischievous, evil brother Loki gains control of the mystical, all powerful Tesseract, Earth is threatened by the prospect of alien invasion. In response, S.H.I.E.L.D. Director Nick Fury implements the Avengers Initiative and calls upon Earth's mightiest heroes to come together and learn to fight as a team to defeat this unprecedented threat. 

Believe it or not, but The Avengers is somehow the one entry of the Marvel Cinematic Universe that I have yet to review. I wasn't blogging at the time and hardly had any online presence aside from perhaps... Facebook? I was barely a freshman in high school and I'm now about to enter my Senior year of college. Nevertheless, I can remember my initial experience and anticipation going into the film vividly. This was among one of my first experiences watching a blockbuster that felt like a genuine event. It was the culmination of six other films that brought together characters on a scale never before seen or attempted for that matter. Sure, there have been other feature length crossovers before The Avengers, but never one that was THIS grand. It was like a comic-book crossover, but on the big screen. 

Comic-book movies had made big bucks before, but this was the first one to really break the bank as it emerged to be the third highest grossing film of all time worldwide with the highest opening weekend of all time at the time of release. It's since fallen to fifth highest grossing worldwide with the fourth highest opening weekend, but that's an impressive hold considering those above it are established franchises. I say all this not simply to tell you the film was successful, as you probably already know that, but to stress its importance as an instant worldwide phenomenon. B/C-list comic-book characters became easily recognizable and an integral part of modern pop culture in almost an instant. Anyways, enough about my attachment to The Avengers and its major success. You came here to read a review, didn't you?

The Avengers was written and directed by Joss Whedon, with Zak Penn co-credited for the feature's story. Say what you will about the man for his work on Justice League, but that was hardly his fault and there's no denying Whedon's got geek-cred when you look at his long list of writing credits. In fact, Whedon's ability to write quippy one-liners is undoubtedly his strongest asset as a filmmaker. I say this not because the lines are funny, but because they're genuinely quotable. I can recite an embarrassing amount of dialogue from The Avengers off the top of my head, and it's not just because I've seen the film countless times. It's because those lines are memorable and stuck with me through thick-and-thin for the last six years. While it may be a bit too early to cement The Avengers as a classic blockbuster, it's undeniably become a significant cornerstone of pop culture in the years since its release.

When you zero in on what Whedon brought to the project as a director, you'll quickly find that he handled tone and action remarkably well. The Avengers is equal parts serious, exciting, and immensely entertaining. A sense of stakes are integrated from the outset, it's a delight to see the heroes' personalities clash as they come together in middle, and the third act never ceases to amaze as I'm subjected to an overwhelming sense of awe and wonder with each and every viewing. I'm always particularly amazed by the tracking shot spotlighting each of the Avengers as they fight amidst the Battle of New York. The action spread throughout is all great though as some of Earth's Mightiest Heroes duke it out with each other before finally coming together for the greater good. One more element that definitely deserves a mention is the score composed by Alan Silvestri. Silvestri's score is really responsible for much of the film's gravitas, but is often overlooked in favor of complementing the film's other components. 

The Avengers is also one of many Marvel productions to have been nominated for Best Visual Effects by the Academy, and it's not too hard to see why. It's been six years since its release, yet the effects haven't aged a day. Go back to other effects-heavy blockbusters released in 2012 and you'll find that's not always the case. The respective designs for Hulk and Iron Man are among the best visual renderings of those characters to this very day. The Iron Man armor doesn't look too sleek and streamlined while Hulk isn't an odd rubbery-looking shade of green. They're each just right. 

If I were to nitpick, the first act doesn't lend itself well to rewatches in comparison to the rest of the MCU. However, the build-up is necessary and still entertaining. It's just a bit tedious as I always find myself eager to see the characters meet each other again, but the wait's always worth it because the character interactions are always incredible to behold. Just about every character thrown into the mix interacts with others in one form or another (whether it be verbal sparring or a physical confrontation). Which, in and of itelf, is kinda why The Avengers is still charming.

Of course, the film needed to assemble a worthy ensemble if this was ever going to work, but Marvel's casting department thankfully hasn't let us down yet! Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans, Chris Hemsworth, Mark Ruffalo, Scarlett Johansson, and Jeremy Renner are all the spitting image of their comic-book counterparts and embody their characters in a way that I can hardly see any other actors taking over in the future. I'm not going to get into the nitty-gritty for each character because you've probably heard me praise them all in other reviews, but Ruffalo in particular was a big step-up from Edward Norton's Bruce Banner/Hulk. Not that Norton's a bad actor, but Ruffalo has a better grasp on the character in my opinion. I think Ruffalo is a more believable scientist as Banner and better communicates the character's struggle and inner darkness in ways Norton just wasn't suited for. 

As for supporting S.H.I.E.L.D. agents, Samuel L. Jackson, Cobie Smulders, and Clark Gregg are equally perfect for the respective roles of Nick Fury, Maria Hill, and Phil Coulson. Jackson's got the grit for Fury, Smulders is sufficiently badass as Hill, and I can hardly end the review without taking time to spotlight Coulson. Clark Gregg was such a delightful presence in the cinematic side of things so, of course, that's how Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. came about. I really have missed the character in the films and am ecstatic about the recent news he'd be returning in Captain Marvel since that takes place in the '90s. However, I'd still like to see Coulson encounter the Avengers again sometime in the future.

Last, but certainly not least, would be the God of Mischief. To this day, I think The Avengers is Tom Hiddleston's best outing as Loki because he really gets to relish in the villainy before being relegated to an anti-hero in the next two Thor flicks. Hiddleston chews the scenery like there's no tomorrow and plays well paired against the likes of Downey, Jackson, and Johansson to name a few. All the while, Loki's end goal is maniacal, yet understandable due to his upbringing and that's why he's still one of the very best Marvel villains despite his later flirtations with the light side.

I'd daresay The Avengers is irrefutably a defining blockbuster for my generation. It exploded onto the pop-culture scene because it's epic, action-packed, and full of humor and heart. It's been six years, and I still get giddy staring at the above iconic group shot. Few frames have that effect on an individual. Much less the whole globe. 

Film Assessment: A+

'Thor: Ragnarok' Review

[This review was originally written in November 2017 and is now being published that my internship is over. For an explanation of this, visit my Fall 2017 Important Update post.] 

Thor: Ragnarok picks up about two years after the events of Avengers: Age Of Ultron as Thor is following up on the visions he had regarding the destruction of Asgard, also known as Ragnarok. After seemingly stopping Ragnarok for good, Thor returns to Asgard only to learn Loki has been impersonating Odin since the end of Thor: The Dark World. The two adopted brothers then journey to Earth in order to retrieve the Allfather, but things don't go as planned when Hela, the Goddess of Death, escapes her eternal imprisonment, destroys Mjionir, and the two brothers wind up on the gladiatorial planet of Sakaar. Once there, Thor is made one of the Grand Master's champions and pitted in battle against one of his fellow Avengers, the Hulk. Thor must then find a way to escape Sakaar alongside his friends and make it to Asgard to stop Hela from bringing ruin and destruction to the Nine Relams.

Thor: Ragnarok happens to be the seventeenth installment in Marvel's ever-expanding catalogue of superhero films on top of being the God of Thunder's third outing, so naturally Marvel would want to shake things up, and they have done just that by bringing comedic director Taika Waititi onboard. The Thor franchise honestly needed a facelift, and Waititi rejuvenates the mighty Avenger by infusing his own comedic sensibilities and an electrifying eighties-vibe while fundamentally deconstructing the titular character. Ragnarok effectively integrates the cosmic fun of Guardians of the Galaxy with the world first established in Thor. It's the Marvel cosmos meeting Marvel's take on Norse mythology.

This change-up is made abundantly clear once Thor's mighty hammer is smashed to smithereens, his luscious locks are snipped, and he's thrown into an arena to battle the Hulk. Thor's also traditionally been the straight-man, but someone over at Marvel must have taken note of Hemsworth's natural knack for humor, so instead he spouts quips from the get-go. This departure is a tad unusual and admittedly jarring at first, but you'll settle into the adjustments as the film proceeds. In fact, that won't take too long due to the lightning-fast pacing of Thor: Ragnarok's opening. 

Once the film starts, it doesn't take time to breathe, so the beginning portion of the film effectively feels very rushed with the intention of hurriedly sweeping many of the remaining franchise elements under the rug. For me, the film didn't totally find its groove till Thor arrived on Sakaar. At that point, everything slows down a bit and we spend some sizable time on a Jeff Goldblum-ruled, gladiatorial utopia, which is glorious. 

One of the film's other predicaments was simply some ill-timed humor. Serious moments aren't permitted to hold the expected weight or gravity because Waititi or one of the screen-writers thought it'd be funny to throw in a joke. I feel Waititi missed the mark on providing appropriately-timed comic relief to match the more serious situations. Instead of inserting jokes as a source of levity AFTER the event, Waititi chose to throw them straight in the midst of these situations. I think this film is the prime example of what most DC fans point to when they say they dislike the Marvel brand of humor. I think previously, these jokes were more subtly incorporated in appropriate situations as opposed to their overt inclusion here straight in the middle of an intense moment. 

In regards to action, Ragnarok is fairly low on that front when compared to the other Marvel-fare. The Thor-Hulk gladiator fight itself is enormously entertaining with a wealth of great moments, Hela invades Asgard in spectacular fashion, and the brewing third act showdown on Asgard has enough surprises and stunning spectacle to leave a favorable impression on viewers, but there simply aren't any other striking sequences in Ragnarok's arsenal. The film does however manage to make up for the lacking action in the technical arena.

Thor: Ragnarok is easily one of Marvel's most colorful films thus far with an array of splendid shots, wacky wardrobes, and some especially psychedelic sets tributing the considerably influential comic artist Jack Kirby. Mark Mothersbaugh also successfully composes one of Marvel's most diverse sounding film scores to date with both sweeping, grandiose themes and pulsating, electronic music to accompany the crazy cosmic side of things. The visual effects for the most part are also quite good, but there are a few noticeable inconsistencies (mainly some poor green-screening in moments), although casual viewers are unlikely to take notice of these insignificant imperfections. 

My only other significant issue lied with the characterization of Hela. Prior to seeing the film, I believed Marvel was overcoming their villain issue in their third phase, and I had high hopes that Hela would rise to the occasion and be one of the very best. While she certainly came across as intimidating thanks to Blanchett's performance and her demonstrations of power, Hela's motivations seemed to fall in line with simply feeling entitled to the throne of Asgard. Even though I understand her reasoning, I found it to be lacking and simply didn't deem her a compelling antagonist. There just wasn't enough to her character aside from the obligatory lust for power in my opinion.

One very welcome change however, was a better balance between Thor and Loki. Previously, I felt Hemsworth was always overshadowed by Hiddleston, but I feel Waititi managed to successfully tip the scales in Thor's favor without undercutting Loki. On that note, Chris Hemsworth feels much more in his element now that he can hang loose and make full use of his comedic abilities. I wouldn't call this his best outing as Thor, but it's certainly the most fun. By his side, Tom Hiddleston continues to demonstrate Loki's reputation as the God of Mischief throwing tricks into the mix left and right. The duo's dynamic is just as charged as it has been previously, so any viewers craving more of the trademark witty bickering between the two will be more than satisfied.

Don't discount the big green guy though, because Mark Ruffalo smashes onto the screen with two-pronged portrayal of Bruce Banner and the Hulk. This is a very different Hulk than the one we're used to seeing as he speaks and throws tantrums like a two year old, which actually makes sense considering he's been Hulk for two years and therefore the Hulk's intelligence would have developed as such. Drawing ample inspiration from the Planet Hulk storyline in the comics, Waititi brings the mystery of what happened to Hulk at the end of Age of Ultron to a satisfying resolution and positions Hulk as a standout supporting character in ways previously unthought of. Ruffalo's camaraderie with Thor as both Hulk and Banner is one of the elements that really energized the movie. Otherwise, his take on Banner is rather relaxed when compared to his performances in the last two Avengers films because the script simply doesn't demand much from him in terms of acting. 

Rounding out the Revengers roster is Tessa Thompson's Valkyrie, who stands out as an impressionable newcomer and one of the coolest female Marvel heroes yet! Thompson remains a talent to watch as she adds Ragnarok to her list of standout supporting roles by granting Valkyrie an air of confidence comparable to the swagger of Han Solo. She also has great chemistry with Hemsworth, and I was relieved to see that a romance wasn't imposed on the two characters just yet, but I imagine I'd be accepting of it later down the line. 

As for the Asgardians, most are dismissed fairly quickly with scarce screentime or none at all, but Idris Elba's Heimdall is given some more prominence in the plot and Elba rises to the occasion. Honestly, the only other one worth mentioning is Anthony Hopkins, who once again imparts ancient wisdom on our characters. I will say that the dangling plot-thread regarding his character's disappearance was resolved a little too quickly, but Hopkins' status as an actor carries through and grants Odin the necessary gravitas as per usual. 

Elsewhere, director Taika Waititi voices the rocky gladiator combatant Korg. This is the character responsible for one of the most egregiously ill-timed jokes, but apart from that particular moment, Korg was a welcome source of soft-spoken comedic relief who would probably feel right at home in Waititi's other work (namely Hunt for the Wilderpeople).

All the while, Jeff Goldblum is clearly having a blast playing the Grandmaster as an especially over-exaggerated version of himself. If you love Jeff Goldblum, you'll be immensely entertained by his character because he's wacky, weird, and just about level of eccentric in between. Oh, I would also be remised if I failed to mention the wealth of easter eggs, references, cameos, and two post credit scenes lurking within Waititi's crazy cosmic comedy. Keep your eyes peeled, as per usual, and you'll be well rewarded with a Stan Lee appearance and substantial surprises.

On the antagonistic front, Cate Blanchett really elevates Hela through her performance despite the fact her character is especially underwritten. Blanchett ensures Hela is an imposing character, but the writing behind her character simply lacked the depth I was desiring. Karl Urban, on the other hand, interjects Skurge with a relatable viewpoint and surprisingly stood out alongside the superb supporting cast in a memorable stint. 

Thor: Ragnarok successfully stimulates the franchise with a bolt of electricity that should satisfy any who were displeased with his previous entires, but falls prey to many of the common criticisms associated with Marvel productions in addition to some poor pacing. Thor: Ragnarok may easily be the best Thor film yet, but it's far from thundering alongside the top tier Marvel Cinematic Universe installments in my eyes.

Film Assessment: B-

Throwback Thursday Review: 'Thor: The Dark World'

This review may wind up being published a little late due to all the World Series games I stayed up watching, my binge through Stranger Things, homework and work. This week I'm reviewing Thor: The Dark World to tie into the release of Thor: Ragnarok this weekend. The remaining November reviews I have planned are Throwback Thursday Reviews for Murder on the Orient Express (1974), Batman (1989), Ratatouille, and Pitch Perfect to tie in with Murder on the Orient Express (2017), Justice League, Coco, and Pitch Perfect 3. In the meantime, I'll do what I can to make some progress on the delayed Throwback Thursday Reviews of Inception, Stand By Me, The World's End, The Shining, the It miniseries (1990), Scott Pilgrim vs. the World, Risky Business (1983), and the Triple-R for Interstellar.

'Thor: The Dark World' Review

Thor: The Dark World finds Thor working to restore peace throughout the Nine Realms as a result of the widespread chaos enabled by destruction of the Bifrost in Thor. After successfully capturing Loki and retrieving the Tesseract in The Avengers, Thor must also grapple with the decision of succeeding Odin as king of Asgard while a cosmic event known as the Convergence aligns the Nine Realms. Meanwhile on Earth, Jane Foster accidentally encounters an ancient weapon, known as the Aether, that takes her as its host. This event then awakens an ancient race of dastardly dark elves lead by Malekith the Accursed who intend to wield the Aether to unleash havoc across the nine realms.

Thor: The Dark World saw significant shifts behind the camera as directorial duties passed down from Kenneth Branagh to frequent Game of Thrones director Alan Taylor. You'd think the pairing of a director accustomed to medieval surroundings with the world of Asgard would be match made in heaven, but only to a degree... The change-off in directors is especially evident in the production design and cinematography, because The Dark World looks drastically different from Thor. Taylor trades out the regal, otherworldly interiors of Asgard for a grittier, lived-in environment. On top of that, Taylor threw some sci-fi elements in the mix to show off the technological advancements of Asgard. It's almost as though someone meshed Star Trek and Game of Thrones with the pre-existing Asgard aesthetic.

The Dark World was a well-intentioned experiment for Marvel that shines in regards to the expansive, conceptual world-building, but fails in fleshing it all out. There are so many interesting notions sprinkled throughout Thor: The Dark World in the form of the Dark Elves and Asgard's weaponry/technology. Most action sequences are enjoyable, excluding the thoroughly average third-act showdown, and the film mostly looks terrific from start-to-finish. 

The thing about The Dark World is that the film safely walks through the opening of the gate, finds its footing in the midst of its jog, and then stumbles again on its way out the door. My analogy essentially means that the first act's formulaic, the second livens things up with one of Marvel's more emotionally-moving sequences and an electrically-charged team-up between Thor and Loki, and then the third act undercuts it all with a typical third-act battle where the fate of the universe is in peril... again... The high stakes action sequences are undoubtedly entertaining, but I'm becoming apathetic to the whole "I want to destroy the world" thing when the villain's motions remain entirely unclear...

The Dark World is stuffed to the brim with a copious amount of characters and overarching storylines, and it's Malekith that suffers from it most of all. The screenplay penned by Christopher Yost, Christopher Markus, and Stephen McFeely paints Malekith in a manner that he has no defining characteristics... There's almost nothing of substance to his character aside from the fact he's a dark elf who wants to spread... darkness... Boring!!! 

The film doesn't really take off till it around when it un-cages Loki, as the trickster proves to still be a valuable asset to the Thor franchise. Once Algrim becomes Kurse and the prison break sequence initiates, the film is instantly invigorated, and everything suddenly becomes so much more interesting.

**Spoiler Warning**

It's sounds strange to say, but the moment the film goes from good-to-great is when Frigga (Thor's mother) dies. It's so weird because her character was such an outlying figure in the franchise, yet her death feels incredibly impactful because of Hemsworth and Hiddleston's exceptional acting. Loki's reaction to learning Frigga died reveals a lot of the character's inner workings, communicating so much emotion through the slightest scene, and Loki is set on the path of a marvelous redemption arc as an enrapturing antihero.

Unfortunately, that's all undone by the reveal Loki didn't actually die. I still have such mixed feeling about Loki's "fake-out" death. The twist that Loki is impersonating Odin remains one of Marvel's best cliff-hangers, and I'm absolutely excited to learn the inner workings of it all tonight when I watch Thor: Ragnarok. However, it completely undercuts his sacrifice, so his "death scene" loses its luster on rewatches. 

**End of spoilers**

Thankfully the cast are all-in though, as Chris Hemsworth proves once again to be terrific as Thor. Hemsworth is afforded more to do in terms of demonstrating his acting range with incredibly emotional outbursts, a cool, collected composure, and spurs of comedic fish-out-of-water moments. Opposite Hemsworth, Natalie Portman's certainly charming as Jane Foster, but the script doesn't really utilize the actress or the character to their fullest potential. Their romance also just comes across as bland, but the actors have convincing chemistry at least.

It's just so sad that Hemsworth can't catch a break from Tom Hiddleston's Loki though, because he once again is overshadowed in his own movie. All the while, Hiddleston makes a case that he only gets better in the role as time goes on as he invigorates the movie once he becomes more involved. I believe this to be Hiddleston's best stint as the God of Mischief yet, and his dynamic with Hemsworth is absolutely electrifying.

The other Asgardians are offered enough screen-time to impress audiences, but none of the characters are offered some radical role in the story. Anthony Hopkins' Odin walks with the weight and wisdom of a stately ruler, while Idris Elba gets one cool moment as Heimdall and once again gazes into the cosmos with the hope he'll get more to do in the sequel. Jaimie Alexander, Ray Stevenson, Tadanobu Asano, and Zachary Levi are each fun inclusions as Lady Sif and the Warriors Three, but also are only afforded with scarce screen-time in comparison to the other ensemble members.

On the Earth-bound side of things, Stellan Skarsgård gets to go completely kooky as Erik Selvig this time around, Kat Denning's Darcy Lewis is grating, and Jonathan Howard feels like he's purely there for comedic purposes as the bumbling intern-to-the intern, Ian. Each of these characters have a few funny moments, but nothing funny enough to justify each character's inclusion. 

As I alluded to earlier, Thor: The Dark World falls prey to the plague of mediocre Marvel villains that's lately started to be turned around by a string of more interesting antagonists. Poor Christopher Eccleston does his darnedest to make extract some menace from Malekith, but he's unsuccessful in the end. Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, who wound up over on the DC side of things as Killer Croc in Suicide Squad last year, leaves an impression as an intimidating henchman once he becomes Kurse, but he also isn't afforded much to work with.

Thor: The Dark World tried with all its might to be a worthy successor to Thor, and I feel it accomplished many of the goals Marvel had set for it, but the film just can't quite lift the metaphorical Mjionir with ease. The Dark World is buoyed by cool concepts, entertaining action sequences, a superb second act, and a capable cast made up of a likable lead, sturdy supporting players, and a scene-stealing God of mischief, but ultimately suffers from a slow start, an rather uninteresting central romance, an unexceptional antagonist, and a finicky finish.

Film Assessment: C+

'Kong: Skull Island' Review

Nominated For: Best Visual Effects.

In Kong: Skull Island secretive government organization Monarch sets off to explore the uncharted Skull Island, dropping bombs to map the island's terrain, only to have their expedition brought to a screeching halt when a 100 foot ape trashes their helicopter convoy. That ape is Kong of course, who happens to be the largest incarnation of the raging gorilla yet.

Kong: Skull Island is the second entry in Warner Bros. and Legendary's MonsterVerse which kicked off with 2014's Godzilla and is headed towards a monster showdown between these two versions of Kong and Godzilla (the reasoning behind Kong's size-up), and there are plenty of breadcrumbs sprinkled throughout the film hinting towards that confrontation including a post credits scene I highly advise you wait for afterwards. Kong: Skull Island is unique when contrasted to the other Kong flicks, its set in 1973 and takes place almost entirely on Skull Island once the crew arrives (Don't be hopeful for an Empire State Building standoff because you'll be severely disappointed).

Director Jordan Vogt-Roberts and cinematographer Larry Fong soak Kong's cinematic resurgence in 'Nam napalm to evoke Apocalypse Now's vibrant color palette, leaving Kong: Skull Island's stylistic aesthetic to be one of the film's highlights. On that note, Kong: Skull Island's quite impressive from a technical standpoint. It's got superb sound design and a rousing rock soundtrack but I found the score to be lacking. None of the arrangements from Henry Jackman were particularly memorable, something I found disappointing since I hold Jackman in high regard for his scoring of X-Men: First Class, Big Hero 6, Captain America: The Winter Soldier, and Captain America: Civil War.

The various creatures brought to life by the team of visual effects artists assembled for the feature are absolutely incredible though, with the great ape standing chief among them all as the film's crowning achievement. Kong manages to simultaneously exhibit inspiration from cutting edge motion capture animation work showcased in recent Planet of the Apes films while paying homage to the look of the model utilized in the 1933 King Kong production composed of rabbit fur, rubber/foam for muscle structure, and a metal mesh skeleton. It obviously looks much better than that original model but I noticed a few similarities when looking at Kong from a distance that I'm sure were intentional. One thing that annoyed me to no end about 2014's Godzilla was how long it took for director Garth Edwards to show the King of Monsters in his full reptilian glory, I understand the visual effects required to render the beast are expensive but consistently playing with your audiences expectations by teasing the beast's emergence only to cut away was downright cruel.

Thankfully, Kong: Skull Island doesn't suffer from this issue as it doesn't take long for Kong to trample onto the scene and Vogt-Roberts lets you back in his glory once he shows up. Kong's fight sequences against the other monsters are magnificent to say the least. My screening was in IMAX 3D and I can say in these moments the experience payed off, largely due to the larger screen and fuller sound, but overall I'm not quite sure it would be worth the uncharge. However, Kong: Skull Island does have story and character vulnerabilities that somewhat drag it down. Admittedly, that's not exactly what one would come to a monster movie like Kong: Skull Island to see but it doesn't hurt to have characters the audience will actually care about. I legitimately can't remember a single character's name and couldn't tell you any character traits beyond their corresponding skill set, appearance, and occupation for a vast majority of the characters.

This largely derives from the screenplay penned by Dan Gilroy, Max Borenstein, and Derek Connolly featuring a story from John Gatins. The script just has too many characters to juggle so the result is that virtually all the characters are underserved. On the flip-side, I was pleasantly surprised how the screenwriters toyed with genre conventions and cliché moments leading to some fantastic situational humor (I'm not even sure I was supposed to laugh at these moments but I relished in the irony). Otherwise, the plot of Kong: Skull Island is fairly paint-by-numbers so don't expect anything too abrupt.

Kong: Skull Island's cast is stacked with plenty of prestigious talent as well as names you may recognize from a genre film or two. Tom Hiddleston, Brie Larson, John Goodman, Corey Hawkins, Jason Mitchell, and Shea Whigham all do the most with what's provided to them but but it's Samuel L. Jackson and John C. Reilly who were able to flip things around and make the most of meager caricatures. Oh and Tian Jing shows up out of nowhere and literally adds nothing of significance to the story just so Warner Bros. and Legendary could shoehorn in an Asian actress and cover all demographics I guess?

Really just about every cast member but Jackson and Reilly are wasted space, something I'm disappointed to say considering their show of talent elsewhere. Something interesting to note though is that Tobey Kebbell has a small live action role and provided the motion capture performance for Kong, along with Terry Notary, similarly to how previous Dawn of the Planet of the Apes costar Andy Serkis was utilized in King Kong (2005). It's funny how the two were rival characters in the Dawn of the Planet of the Apes and have become the pillars of motion capture acting today. I rarely see motion capture performance driven films today that don't take advantage of all Serkis and Kebbell have to offer.

If you're looking to take a trip to the theater this weekend, I'd prioritize seeing Logan over Kong: Skull Island. However, if you're looking for a dumb popcorn blockbuster then Kong: Skull Island should suit your mindless monster movie needs. Sadly, the vague strokes of characterization hold Kong: Skull Island back from its true potential but the impressive effects work, adrenaline-fueled action sequences, and stylish visuals help position it to be an entertaining monster flick.

Film Assessment: C B-