Going to the theater. Is this worth seeing? I've seen Godzilla

>>80892761
it's worth it, but it's not great. plot too simple and stupid, characters are mostly shit

>>80892969
tfw Samuel L Jackson did nothing wrong

>>80892969
Thanks, is Jackson's performance atleast entertaining?

It's a schlock b-movie. If you like that sort of thing it's worth a watch.

>>80893055
SLJ and john c reilly are kinda entertaining, but they could do more with them.

>Brie Larson's erect nipples during the finale

My dick

It's a monster movie that understands people want to watch monsters and not boring people, as in godzilla. It's big, loud and stupid fun.

it's was pretty fun i loved it

>>80893387
this

>>80893387
it's a problem when you literally don't care about what's happening. and the action wasn't even that spectacular.

>>80892761
Watch it. Understand from the very beginning, though, that they try to make Jackson's character a villain even though he did nothing wrong.

>>80893520
i care

>>80892761

It's pretty damn good. But oddly it would have worked just as well (possibly better) if they just completely removed King Kong from it. Which is odd as he's the titular character.

The island seemed fucking huge and not covered in a dense jungle. I liked the ISLAND in Jackson's Kong better.

>>80892761
not as good as 2005 King Kong

John C. Reilly's character was funny. If I could go back in time and get my money back I would.

>>80894912
Kek

So where is the screener of this bad boi

>>80893324
>>80892969
Jackson and Rielly are the driving portions of the plot.

As it is, Kong was a 6/10

If they left out the SAS guy, the pointless photographer, and the biologist, it would have been a 7/10

If they did all of the above as well as expanded Goodman's role, it would have been an 8/10.

The primary driving plot is Samuel Jackon's characters conflict with Kong; the ONLY character who would have or should have been cared for Kong was Rielly's character

File: 1485914398424.jpg (94KB, 635x600px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 635x600px

>>80895498
Right here homeboi

>>80893743
the cinematographer who worked on Kong, worked on most Snyder films; Larry Fong.

>>80893958
2005 King Kong was a top tier kino masterpiece compared to this.

File: kong handprint.jpg (60KB, 754x350px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 754x350px

>>80893387
I wouldn't say it's stupid, but I wouldn't say it's profound. It has some symbolism in it that is interesting and amusing to think about. It's not as dumb as a regular episode of Spongebob or much of the Transformers movies or something like that.

>>80892761
Me and my friends just watched it

It was absolutely GREAT, OP

Way funnier than I expected, some scenes were so hilarious we literally burst out laughing in the theatre. Doesn't help that we were a little high, but fuck...

More of a pulp movie than a King Kong movie but I fucking loved it all the same. Worth the watch