Kong: Skull Island (2017) 3D YIFY Movie

Kong: Skull Island (2017) 3D

A team of scientists explore an uncharted island in the Pacific, venturing into the domain of the mighty Kong, and must fight to escape a primal Eden.

IMDB: 6.840 Likes

  • Genre: Action | Adventure
  • Quality: 3D
  • Size: 1.81G
  • Resolution: 1920*1080 / 23.976 fpsfps
  • Language: English
  • Run Time: 118
  • IMDB Rating: 6.8/10 
  • MPR: Normal
  • Peers/Seeds: 13 / 40

The Synopsis for Kong: Skull Island (2017) 3D

A washed up monster chaser convinces the U.S. Government to fund a trip to an unexplored island in the South Pacific. Under the guise of geological research, the team travels to "Skull Island". Upon arrival, the group discover that their mission may be complicated by the wildlife which inhabits the island. The beautiful vistas and deadly creatures create a visually stunning experience that is sure to keep your attention.


The Director and Players for Kong: Skull Island (2017) 3D

[Director]Jordan Vogt-Roberts
[Role:]Brie Larson
[Role:]Tom Hiddleston
[Role:]Samuel L. Jackson


The Reviews for Kong: Skull Island (2017) 3D


Reviewed byJohn AbuSaleemVote: 2/10/10

So it is like Ghostbusters 2016 all over again. On the day of releaseof another unrequested, unwanted, unappealing reboot a whole bunch ofaccounts appear and write super duper positive reviews. Well, they areall fake. Although these fake reviewers are getting more'sophisticated.' Look at tvsweeney-39052 for example, the account wascreated several months ago and give Village Road Show and Columbiareleases all 10/10, but has thrown in a couple of bad reviews of otherstudios' releases in the interim.

This movie sucks. The unoriginality stinks to high heaven The tokenChinese cow to satisfy Chinese investors and Chinese ticket sales isbeyond useless and cannot act and Kong is not even Kong (they don'teven want to call him King because he is so off). This is one of thosestandard cliché films where the grown up audience knows after 5minutes, that the target group is hacks. Even in the middle of thefilm's major actions scene, the whole logic pauses, as two supposedlycool characters have to talk, run and get into danger and make theaudience yawn, because it is just so bad.

Unlike many fantasy films, this film is not interesting at all. If someyoung script writer thought that it would be "cool" for a remote islandto be "interesting", then the accountants at the studio would writethis script for him.

Yawn

Sorry, there is no king here.Reviewed byDanielpotatoVote: 1/10

King Kong (1933) was a perfect movie in its proposal. A simple, direct and clear message. No remakes or sequels required. This is why all sequels and remakes are always inferior in impact to the original. Filmmakers always want to add anything new and unnecessary.

In this new film, Kong leaves the territory of quality and embarks on a trip to the territory of blockbusters, in other words, special effects and jokes (just watch the retarded and unnecessary joke scene about the Skullcrawlers name with Hiddleston, Larson and John C. Reilly) overlap the story, and so the film is passable and totally forgettable in a week.

Once again, Hollywood treats scientists as idiots when the character of Corey Hawkins can not even open a can of canned food and feels intimidated by a woman. Not to mention the macho colonel, who wants an unnecessary revenge with Kong, because Kong killed his men (in a casual meeting).

And not to mention the idiotic plans that Jordan Vogt-Roberts uses to focus the eyes of the Samuel L. Jackson character with the eyes of King Kong. It seems like the director Jordan Vogt-Roberts wants to make a kind of (unnecessary) fight in the old west style. Pure waste of time, as we know that the macho colonel, is no challenge for Kong, so why waste precious screen time with these situations? Because Kong's story can be told as in the original in just 90 or 100 minutes. And the filmmarkers have to put 2 hours of film and for this they have to put unnecessary situations and scenes.

As the disposable soldier of the colonel, who gets lost from the group, just to see Kong crush a giant squid (and then Kong eats it), then after some scenes, be killed by another giant monster. What could be an interesting conflict between the characters of Tom Hiddleston and Samuel L. Jackson, but that ends up in nothing. Because people are written from a stupid one-dimensional way (like the stupid macho colonel). That is, more movie time, for less story. This is because Kong never leaves the island in this movie, Kong will only leave the island in 2020 in the movie Godzilla vs. King Kong. Yes this movie aims to create another shared universe (MCU type of crap), and in the end this compromises the quality of this film. The filmmakers have their hands tied, because they can not put their best on this film, however they have to think how this movie will work with another movie from another guy, three long years into the future.

I went into the movie hoping to see a good and fun Kong movie, and I ended up seeing a crap and bad one, because of the ambition of the studio that compromised the quality of the movie, for the money. Not to mention, even as a fun movie, this movie fails so much.

You see, the scenes with special effects, you can see that the scenes were all filmed on a green screen. And the final fight between Kong and the giant lizard is even inferior to the T-rex fights in Peter Jackson's 2005 remake. Yes, the fights and clashes between Kong and the other giants monsters were better, bigger, more epic, more brutal and vicarious than in this pathetic 2017 movie. I'm not defending the Peter Jackson movie, that film obviously had its flaws, but in the department of special effects and action scenes (this department that does not save a movie, nonetheless) is vastly superior to this Jordan Vogt- Roberts movie. Even as an action movie and blockbuster, this movie fails in a big way.

But if you were disappointed, and if you were sad that you had lost money unfairly, you can wait until 2020 to see the rest of the film in Godzilla VS King Kong.

My God, that's why commercial filmmaking is in the mud. The commercial cinema has as main target children, teenagers and young people. And this is why the quality bar is so low.

Kong would regret being in this filmReviewed byJane ZhangVote: 4/10

I was confused about the purpose of this film, and sadly, I was still confused after watching the film. All the elements of this new version of King Kong have been recycled. Taking parts of the originals/remakes and hastily gluing them together again in a different way doesn't mean it is going to create an inventive artwork.

And I knew they would put a scene where Kong saves a pretty lady in his palm, I just knew it. All that's improved from the previous films is Kong's appearance. He is fluffier, angrier and more realistic. Some points must be given to the stunning visual effects.

The characters' names and faces have also changed, but their nature and characteristics are half dimensional and predictable. It is stereotypes upon stereotypes. It is a major waste of talent with Tom Hiddleston, Samuel L Jackson and Academy Award winner Brie Larson ("Room") struggling in the muddled chaos. You could see and feel the disappointment. Even Kong seems confused. The performances are half- hearted and there is just no substance for them to work with. I bet all they were thinking of while filming was 'get me out of here' – literally.

For the majority of the film, everyone says very few words to each other. The conversations are forced and laughable. It wouldn't have made a difference if they were just silent. It's so predictable that you would know exactly what the next line would be.

I thought while watching this, was this meant to be an exaggerated satire of King Kong? Or was it meant to be taken seriously? Even the execution of the film presents the same questions. At one point, it would be slow and mystic, and minutes later, overly upbeat music would hit your ears, and we are treated to magnified slow-motion action. It feels it is trying too hard to get our attention. And once it does, it doesn't know how to sustain it.

And finally, there are so many extreme close-ups of Samuel L. Jackson's face, it probably took up half the film. They did it to match Kong's face, so you can imagine how gigantic it was.

Maybe if Director Jordan Vogt-Roberts figured out from the beginning what type and style of film this would be, it would have been a better film. It seems like he had an idea but is unconvicted towards it, and instead keeps changing his mind to offer more 'fun'. The result that it is a jumble of various pieces that don't belong in the same puzzle.

Kong: Skull Island (2017) 3D Related Movies

Bulletproof (1996) Poster

Bulletproof (1996)

Blonde Fist (1991) Poster

Blonde Fist (1991)

Titanic (1997) 3D Poster

Titanic (1997) 3D

The Trial of Billy Jack (1974) 1080p Poster

The Trial of Billy Jack (1974) 1080p

Moana (2016) 3D Poster

Moana (2016) 3D

Avatar (2009) 3D Poster

Avatar (2009) 3D

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (2017) 3D Poster

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (2017) 3D

The Trial of Billy Jack (1974) Poster

The Trial of Billy Jack (1974)