Kong’s God on the Island, But the Devils Live Below Us: Kong, Skull Island (2017)

Kong’s god on the island, but the devils live below us

So even though I am posting this first I actually watched it last of the three Monsteverse films. In April of this year I went to visit my niece in Georgia and she wanted to go to the recently opened movie theater and watch King Kong Versus Godzilla. I didn’t really want to watch it as one is a large mammal (Kong) and the other a giant radioactive lizard that shoots fire out of its mouth (Godzilla), so it SUPER obvious to me as to who has the real advantage here, but I love my niece and we did what she wanted to do. What can I say? I love my nieces.

Oh well…

When I was flying home to CA, I was planning on watching Emma (2020), but they didn’t have subtitles for the film and there was no way I would be able to hear what was going on with the air system, the engine, and all other plane sounds, so I kept scrolling. I spotted Godzilla: King of the Monsters, and decided to check it out and fill in the blanks that I had from the other film.

I wasn’t really planning on watching the Kong film, as I love the original and nothing can hold a candle to it, but when Redbox sent me a free rental I decided to complete the trilogy of the Monsterverse.

Here we go:

So we start with logos and planes shooting at something . What’s going on? Is this supposed to be the end of the original film?

Hmm…

Oh, it is the South Pacific 1944, this must be WWII fighting noises. Planes fall, crash, and burn but one man survives by parachute. But not for long as he is on Skull Island.

Looks like an enemy has also survived and the two continue to fight. But I am wondering why they are in the South pacific? I always thought Kong was in the Atlantic, toward Africa on the Madagascar side?

We then see the footage like in the horrible Godzilla (2014) but Kong was already big before the radiation? So that doesn’t really make ay sense to me, but they also say that they are putting up satellites and seeing parts of the world never seen before, so I’m guessing that means finding Skull Island.

We are now in 1973, but why doesn’t this take place in present time? Why would they set in the 1970s when the previous 1970s Kong sucked?

So Monarch is not doing well with the war going on, as they want to go out and do an expedition. John Goodman is the Monarch employee pushing the expedition as he really wants to go to Skull Island. He shows all these pictures of destroyed ships and all I can think is why would you want to go to an island that destroys ships and they were unable to kill whatever is out there with bombs? What do you think you will find that will really help humankind?

But they convince the senator to let them when they dangle that the Russians will want to go there and of course the senator wants to beat them They piggy back on an already planned operation and manage to scoop up a military escort to help them get there.

Army troops are chilling as they wait for transport to go home and we see the leader of this platoon is Samuel L. Jackson; he is the only guy I recognize, who are all these young guys? I must be getting old.

The Lt. Commander is having a hard time fought against the Taliban and then see that it was all for naught with all that is happening in the middle east. He gets the call to see if he will help lead them, and he readily agrees.

Meanwhile, John Goodman and his second are in Saigon looking for a tracker in a brothel. Weird choice, but whatever.

The guide is Tom Hiddleston who shows he is a worthy teammate as he fights off the guys he is pool sharking. He agrees for the right price, like always seen in movies. This film so far has been like a 100 others

And they play every ‘70s period drama soundtrack with war film/war tendencies issues. 

So annoying

Then we have Brie Larsen photographer, ugh I’m not a fan of the actress. She’s joining the crew as she senses there is something up. Conrad (Tom Hiddleston) and photographer Brie Larson have a moment when they know everything about each other why?

So far this feels like a mix between King Kong (2005), any treasure hunter movie ever, and King Kong (1976)

So far the only character I like is Chapman and I know he’s going to die soon. He has talked about his wie and son, he has a job all lined up for Delta after the war, he is the only one memorable

You are just asking to be killed.

Samuel L. Jackson does the usual hold on to your butts line as they head out in the storm. Of course there is a storm, as what would the movie be without a storm?

This whole thing feels very Jurassic Park as they come down the helicopters amazed at the beauty.

So far all the animals are regular ones, nothing “monsterverse-y” The scientists do something with seimic charges, they didn’t really explain why or what for but they see something special and important, what we don’t know. Again this film is really boring.

One helicopter is taken the down with a tree, the other a giant ape hand. The destruction has begun. I wonder if he is going to be obsessed with Brie Larsen or the biologist?

Kong be tossing the copters around like children’s toys, while everyone is trying to make sense of what they are seeing. They shoot at him, but that just makes him madder.

They are split into two groups-Hiddleston, Larsen, numbr 2 scientist, John Goodman, and an army guy. The other group has Jackson, Chapman, Cole, and Goodman.

John Goodman’s character is insane. Samuel L. Jackson’s character figures out that he knows more than what he is saying and question him. It turns out that Goodman is like Quint from Jaws, he was the only survivor of a ship and knows it wasn’t destroyed in war but by a creature. He’s only there to get info, proof, and hunt it.

Liar, liar

The group with Hidleston passes by a pond and sees a guant water Buffalo, finally some intresting creatures.

I think it is interesting that one group has all the military and the other has only one with all the civilians. Seems rather impractical.

Hiddleston and co come upon some kind of monumnt, and discover the natives. The guy from the beginning (now played by John C. Reilly) is still alive and hanging out with the natives. He’s kind of crazy. He’s basically like Allen from Jumanji but not as cool.

Chapman goes to the river to clean up and get water, when Kong sees him. Chapman hides behind a rock, but Kong lets it pass as he is trying to take care of his own wounds. I guess this will be a bonding moment of some kind?

This movie is actually really boring, like what is even the point. There isn’t anything new or that different. We see Kong fight some squid like thing, which is weird that this giant creature could survive in the river. But like why did they bother making this? It isn’t interesting and there is nothing we haven’t seen in a previous adaption.

John C. Reilly’s character tells the others that on the island they live in a perfect world where they live forever and have no crime. But I’m like yeah, but you also live on a desertd isld with prehistoric creatures that has no modern ok so I don’t know if it is really a strong trade off.

Again, this movie is boring. I mean the 2005 adaption wasn’t good but it had a interesting world and there was stuff happenig. Nothing happens here but Brie Larson taking pictures and Samuel L. Jackson’s character is slowly losing it.

How much longer if this movie? It’s boring.

Oh no, poor Chapman was resting on a log and it turned into a killer walking stick, don’t die Chapman, don’t die. He shoots at the beast but it runs off as there are these other creatures here, Skullcrushers. OOOOOOOOOOOOOO he’s dead.

Brie Larsen wants to take a long exposure photo but her flashlight broke, Why are you wasting up your batteries on a photo when you have to cross a crazy island? This character is annoying and useless, I hope she gets eaten, but unlike Chapman I know she won’t. Hiddleston shares about his family and I think the two are supposed to be together, but they have zero chemistry.

Whatever I’m already checked out of this film. I mean Godzilla (2014) sucked because they didn’t put Godzulla in as much as they should have, but at least they tried something new.

This movie is two hours but feels longer.

So the both groups met up with each other and are reunited (minus a few that died along the way). Jackson doesn’t want to go to the meet up point because Chapman never returned from his, but isn’t it obvious-he dead.

One of the skullcrushers vomits dog tags and we learn that Chapman is dead (knew it). John Goodman character is dumb enough to try and take photos and gets eaten. Everyone is trying to shoot and sniper except Reilly who uses the katana, yeah that seems to be a better weapon.

The army decides to go look for him, ignoring Reilly even though he’s been on the island for the last 30 years and a soldier, you think they would listen to what he says. They find the Elephant graveyard, oops I mean Skullcrusher graveyard/boneyard. It is not only a dangerous place but full of gaseous material as it is hazy and red. Of course, the Skull Crashers are alerted (by a cigarette causing a blowup) and now we enter the trailer material.

All of a sudden we have flam throwers, why didn’t they use those earlier?

Reilly is like we need to get out of here, but Jackson won’t leave without Chapman, Hiddleston tells him he’s dead but Jackson won’t listem, he wants to get the weapons from the crash site and kill all the creatures on the island.

I’m like why are they even fighting, just leave and head for the pickup point. If Jackson wants to die he can. Like I’m not getting the conflict here.

It’s super obvious!

 

So Hiddleston and Brie run into Kong and Kong and Brie have a “connection”. Why? It doesn’t explain.

Instead of going to the pickup place they all decide to go back and try and save Kong from Jackson’s plan.

Kong and the army fight, but then mama skullcrusher comes and Kong fights her. I’m like too little too late. This is why every other Kong film has a cool epic fight earlier in the film instead if wasting time.

Kong wins. the remaining few leave on the boat and Kong goes back to his Kong duties.

But what about all that happened in the third film? How did the doctor find the island? What about the little girl from the island who could speak to Kong in sign language? How they build that giant enclosure for Kong where they watch him all day as if he was on The Truman show? What the heck guys? This movie was dumb and didn’t answer any of my questions! Ugh.What kind of stupid universe is this?

I’m so glad this was a free rental because if I had paid for this I would have been really, really mad.

For more on King Kong, go to Oh No, It Wasn’t the Airplanes. It Was Beauty Killed the Beast.: King Kong (1933)

For more monster movies, go to Zombie Pirates and Werecats: Scooby-Doo on Zombie Island (1998)

My Regency Gown from MadsenCreations

So I don’t know about you all, but I’ve been wanting a Regency inspired gown for quite a while now.

I had planned to have one made for Modesto Jane Con but time ran away with me and we didn’t get a chance.

But this time I was ready. I put an order in early with Madsen Creations and was determined to have my Regency gown for my birthday party.

Now I don’t know about you all but I’m one of those people who I need to see something on me and struggle at looking at fabric and seeing the end result. Oftentimes I don’t know what I want and kind of hem and haw about it all. This time I had seen lots of Regency gowns in different films and had a better idea of what I really wanted. Of course I really wanted a coat like Catherine:

But that is too, too hot for CA spring.

Instead I really wanted a blue gown, as blue always looks good on me, and after searching through many gowns the biggest influence was the cut of Lydia’s gown in Pride & Prejudice & Zombies and the style of Daphne’s gown in Bridgerton.

I haven’t actually seen this show, but I loved the pearls on the dress.

After the gown was selected we went on a trip to the fabric store. Originally we were going to find a lace to add on top of the gown, but there was no fabric that I really liked and time was limited. Instead we purchased blue linen, blue thread, pearl buttons-and swapped out the plans for an overlay for an applique (being inspired by Emma (2020).

I also needed a new fan, as my pride and joy is a red fan from Spain that my brother and sister-in-law gave me, and would clash with this gown. I needed a few supplies from the dollar tree and found a blue fan that matched the fabric for $1.

From there my work was done and Madsen Creations took over. She made this dress in a week, yes one week! Isn’t that amazing?

She ended up using a lace overlay with pearl buttons she had leftover from a previous costume she made. She also said that if it wasn’t for the trickiness of the pearls in the overlay, the dress would have been completed in two days.

My dress was absolutely beautiful, a perfect dream and I looked great in it.

If you are looking for any custom work, definitely check her out.

We are almost done with my party plans. Can you believe it? Just a one more thing to share and then I’ll be back to our usual book reviews and such.

For more on Madsen Creations, go to Jane Austen Runs My Life Collaboration with Madsen Creations!

For more Madsen Creations products, go to I Tried Madsen Creations’ Reusable Cloth Teabags

For more Jane Austen products, go to Marrying Mr. Darcy: The Pride and Prejudice Card Game

Modesto Jane Con: Gowns & Groans, A Costumer Looks at Regency Costumes on Film and Stage

So Modesto Jane Con was this past weekend. From January 10th-12th there were all kinds of workshops, activities, movies, an opera, and even a fashion show!

I, unfortunately, could only go on Saturday, but I had so much fun and I can’t wait until the next one! If there is a next one…

So your $30 ticket allowed you to attend the workshops (BOTH DAYS) and see one showing of Mansfield Park Opera (your choice of Saturday or Sunday).

I dressed up for the event (I’ll post on that later) and brought a reticule my sister made. Reticules are tiny, so I couldn’t pack everything in my bag-just the essentials. Debit card, credit card, ID, fan, gloves, pens, glasses (as I was wearing contacts) and a handkerchief. I wasn’t too worried about the size of the reticule though, as I had planned on purchasing one of their cute tote bags.

I also brought my notebook, as I planned on taking notes and later posting them (as I am now).

Our group was traveling from 1.5-2 hours away (depending on that CA traffic) and left around seven and arrived a little after 8:30. We actually headed to the theater as I was looking at the wrong event. You know me and navigating, I always get lost!

I then redirected our group, and we went to the library. We easily checked in and finished just as they announced the first workshop: Gowns & Groans

So of course, we were excited about this workshop. We wanted to learn more about the Regency gowns and who can resist the chance to snark about costumes?

Let the snark begin!

This workshop was run by Kristine Doiel and Hillari DeSchane

“Costumes have a coded language all their own. They can transport us back to Austen’s time and speak volumes about the characters, or they can be a constant distraction and prevent us from losing ourselves in the unfolding drama. Join veteran costumer Kristine Doiel on a lively, and likely to be controversial, stroll through this Regency costume Hall of Fame and Shame.”

Kristine Doiel is a costume designer and theater educator with over 50 theater and dance productions to her credit. A lecturer at Fresno State since 2017, she has taught costume and theater classes and mentored student designers. Awards include the UC Davis Provost’s Fellowship in Arts, the Princess Grace Foundation Theater Grant and a Dramalogue Award for costume design for The Rivals in Santa Barbara.

Hillari DeSchane is a JASNA life member and a board member of Opera Modesto. Her pre-show opera talks have become audience favorites. DeSchane’s first Regency pet cozy: A Christmas Tail: A Regency Holiday Mystery received a Certificate of Merit from the Cat Writers Association hillarideschane.com

Picture by Arnold Chavez

So Doiel started off the workshop talking about her background; moved onto the judging of the film depictions, finished with her experiences in costuming the Mansfield Park Opera, and concluded with a Q&A.

Part I: Doiel’s Background

Doiel shared that didn’t have a background in Regency wear, and had to do research on it-being an archeologist, literary analyst, and art historian all in one. I enjoyed this aspect of her talk as you don’t really think about that when watching a film or performance, that not only do the clothes have to be accurate-but they have to reflect the action of the scene, the context of the characters, and the literature of the piece.

That’s a lot

It reminded me of when I studied art history and how you looked at the art and what it was saying, but at the same time also looked into what was happening at the time and how that influenced it. There are many layers you have to work through-such as a self portrait of an artist wearing red, blue, and white takes on a different meaning when it was created post-French revolution, such as to show liberty, fraternity, that is one of the new citizens, etc.

Part II: Gowns & Groans

The next part of the discussion was Doiel reviewing the clothing choices in Mansfield Park (1999), Mansfield Park (2007), and Pride and Prejudice (1940).

So to start with, I do not like Mainsfield Park (1999). 

Not for me..

Eventually I will review it, but as for now-we will get back to the clothes.

Gowns:

Doiel felt that quite a bit of the costumes in here were accurate. Lady Bertram wore flimsy, lacy gowns that looked like something the wealthy class would wear, but older-late 1700s and post-French Revolution. It fits as Lady Bertram wouldn’t be at the height of fashion, but wearing something more her time. Maria, Julia, and the men were all accurate.

Groans:

So here is the good part, let’s start talking trash! J/K, Doiel was very kind in her remarks, trying to not be too judgmental and try to reason why a certain outfit would have been picked.

The first offender: Fanny Price played by Frances O’Conner

So in this Fanny wears a lot of what looks like a jumper or vest over a shirt. This is not accurate at all. Instead the film, which is one reason why I can’t stand it, doesn’t follow the book at all when it comes to Fanny’s character. Instead, they turn Fanny into Jane Austen, and emphasize the writing aspect, dressing her in this more masculine, “writing type” outfit. I call it a “writing type” outfit as when I saw this the first time it made me think of Jo in the 1933 version and she was a writer. It also is similar to what Jo wears in the 2019 version of Little Women.

The other offender: Mary Crawford.

All of Mary’s clothes were too contemporary. I mean look at the dress above, it is something that we were wearing at the start of the millennium, rather than 185 years earlier. I remember wearing sleeves like that on my clothes.

She also has an outfit with a giant collar, that is just what? Doiel pointed out that the person in charge of wardrobe would have the resources and done the research on what was accurate and somebody (whether them, the studio, actor, or the director) picked this for a purpose. Doiel didn’t know why, but guessed that either the director or actor wanted something more modern to relate to audiences.

Mary’s outfits definitely were the worst.

So Mansfield Park (2007) is not the most accurate of films, as they cut a lot out to keep it at standard movie time length-however I am apparently one of the few that actually enjoys it.

Gowns: 

She didn’t talk about any she liked as it was time to move onto the next section.

Groans:

The offender here was Billie Piper as Fanny Price.

So Doil noticed that Piper wore a wide range of styles and thought maybe it was so varied as the production wanted her to be wearing hand-me-down gowns. There is a diamond dress that she wears that is completely inaccurate to the time period. Also her hair is one hundred percent wrong, as it is too modern, and she would have had it pinned up as she isn’t a young child. I think that is an interesting comment in light of the Emma Vogue photo shoot. 

The other outfit that Doiel pointed out as wrong was the white wedding dress Fanny wears at the end of the film. White wedding dresses only became popular after Queen Victoria, prior to that they were colored dresses. I disagreed with this as I thought the white dress was more a comment on Fanny’s innocence, sweetness, and morality versus being white to be in with what is in fashion today. I mean, after all this takes place after an affair, a love proved false, and all the manipulations by the Crawfords. Plus, it is a foil to Maria’s dress who had opulence (check out that hat) and color, Fanny’s being plain not because of what she was forced to wear (as I am sure Sir Thomas would have bought her a different dress), but a testament to her character. But that’s just my thoughts…

The last one we looked at was Pride and Prejudice (1940) a film I love, but apparently a lot do not.

Gowns:

Nothing was accurate.

Groans:

The film was set in the 1830s instead of the Regency period and no one quite knows why. Some say it was because Gone With the Wind was so popular and they wanted to use costumes like that. Others say it was because the Regency gowns seemed too plain. Others believe it was more cost effective to use these gowns than create new ones. Doiel thought that they might have picked such extravagant costumes as England was having to o with sparse materials, “mend and make do” as the slogan goes, and seeing such fun fabric and opulence would raise spirits. I don’t know if we will ever know…

Hmmm

Doiel said that she felt that this style works for Mrs. Bennet, Kitty, and Lydia as it is extravagant, frivolous, oversized, and fits their characters.

However, with Elizabeth, it works against her.

*Sigh* Laurence Olivier looks great, but he is wearing pants instead of breeches (as are the other men (see below on the view of pants) and Colonel Fitzwilliam wears a kilt (?).

That’s where we ended, although I wished they had discussed Mansfield Park (1983) as that one has some doozies in choices. I mean look at their hair.

From left to right: Edmund Bertram, Mary Crawford, and Mr. Yates

Part III: Costuming Mansfield Park, the Opera

So Doiel said that when costuming something that takes place in the past, buying the right type of fabric can be a problem. You need something that looks right on stage, fits together as a whole (in color and style), and needs to be accurate as to something they would wear.

Doiel did say that she was fortunate in this Opera to be able to reuse costumes from an earlier production, Miss Bennet: Christmas at Pemberley that had been done in December 2019.

She brought swatches in of the different fabrics for each characters costumes, and me and my group really liked that. We all enjoyed the closeup look and when we watched the performance later in the day, looked at the costumes and remembered what we had seen earlier in the workshop. We also loved that her mom, who helped her sew and cut things out, was there. It was so sweet how she helped hand out the swatches and supported her. I had tried to take a picture of the one for Fanny, but the people in my row wanted me to pass it along and the pic came out blurry.

But Lynne Marcus, one of the organizers from Modesto Jane Con, sent me a pic a friend of hers took.

Doiel’s favorite dress of the production was the gray number that Mary Crawford wears in Scene 5: Chapter Five. In the Wilderness. It was originally worn by Anne de Bourgh in the Miss Bennet: Christmas at Pemberley. I tried to get a good picture, but this was all I got.

She also loved the Navy suit that Edmund wears as she made it.

Part IV: Q & A

Doiel ended the session by answering questions and talking about Regency wear. Breeches were standard menswear. Pants, or pantaloons as they were called, were not to be worn by the upperclass. They were said to cause a scandal because they showed everything too well-even though in reality breeches showed more. But you know how I feel about that!

This should say breeches instead of pants, but I didn’t write this so it gets a pass. It was an instagram answer from a question I asked my followers.

She said that pants were worn only by the lower class workers, so wearing them was seen as trashy.

Someone asked about the muslin we have today versus then, and she said it is different. The muslin sold in stores today is mostly white and work wear, instead of dress wear. Back in the Regency period it would be block printed, decorated, different colors, and came from India. The muslin was semi-sheer and lightweight, like cotton. Of course whenever I think of Muslin I think of:

India greatly influenced what people wore-in colors, patterns, and of course ladies adopting the use of a pashmina. I had noticed that when I was trying to find something to wear to Jane Con.

From Emma (1996)

Women and men always wore gloves when going out of the house. Doiel mentioned how they weren’t doing that in the Opera as it was too difficult with all the clothing changes. That means that that hand clench scene in the 2005 Pride and Prejudice never should have happened as both Darcy and Elizabeth should have been wearing gloves.

One woman asked about lace, and lace was very in fashion. It came from India or France (probably not as much from France at this time as England and France had been fighting) and was used on hemlines and sleeves.

My book club + sister really enjoyed this discussion. We wished that Doiel had judged the costumes a bit more, (as who doesn’t like a good rip ?), but understood that she was trying to be fair.

We loved that she stayed on topic-discussing only the clothes instead of the actual films. We would have liked to hear her thoughts on more films or more on costuming the show, but understood we only had an hour and had to be a bit limited to have enough time to cover everything.

DeSchane did a great job moderating the workshop, with her interesting questions and keeping an eye on how much time we had.

We loved it and learned a lot. In fact, later we watched the 1983 Mansfield Park and discussed what we learned in this when we looked at the costumes.

This workshop.

For more on Regency clothes, go to Muslin: The Fabric of Jane’s Life

For more Mansfield Park, go to Rational Creatures: Fanny Price & Mary Crawford

For more on Jane Austen, go to Praying With Jane: 31 Days Through the Prayers of Jane Austen