King Kong

[Guest El Satanico]

The original film's effects are astounding for 1933.  Hell, I think those effects hold up better now that stuff like Clash of the Titans, which was made nearly 50 years later

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree that the FX in the original was amazing, and I meant no insult with my previous comments.

 

Was just pointing out that it's kinda silly to bitch about one type of imperfect FX, if you have no issue with other types of imperfect FX.

[Kardo 0]

I can't believe that they've made the movie three hours with just a basic premise for a story.

[CBright7831 0]

Less than a month away.

[Guest Duke_The_Dog]

Was turned on by the idea, until i saw CGI Kong jumping around NYC.

 

Pass.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Was turned on by the idea, until i saw CGI Kong jumping around NYC.

 

Pass.

 

What did you expect? Stop-motion? A guy in a suit?

[cabbageboy 0]

I got the Kong DVD box set recently and the original movie still rocks the world. I'd always wondered why RKO's resident hero Joel McCrea wasn't in the Driscoll role instead of Bruce Cabot, but watching it again I can't really see McCrea saying all the chauvanistic stuff. It's interesting though because McCrea and Fay Wray were in The Most Dangerous Game together and it was filmed on the exact same sets as Kong (right down to the huge log)!

 

There was a cool scenario type deal on the extra features about the original idea for a film called Creation, which would have used the same dinos that Kong had. It was a wild premise of a group of people ending up on the island after a shipwreck and encountering prehistoric creatures, which would kill nearly everyone but the main cast. Then one guy (Steve) steps up and becomes leader and uses his knowledge and skills to build a new radio and call for help before everyone else is killed. It sounded great, I wonder why it was never made after Kong's success?

 

Kong is also one of the few old movies I've seen in a theater reissue.

[Guest Frank_Nabbit]

Was turned on by the idea, until i saw CGI Kong jumping around NYC.

 

Pass.

 

What did you expect? Stop-motion? A guy in a suit?

 

I agree with Duke. Looked hokey to me. Not a fan of the CGI movies.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

I agree with Duke. Looked hokey to me. Not a fan of the CGI movies.

 

Not liking CGI films is one thing, but Duke said that he was excited to see it until he found it is was a CGI Kong. That's like looking forward to a Gene Snitsky match and then complaining about how bad it was. Did anybody seriously expect it wouldn't be CGI?

[Guest Duke_The_Dog]

Was turned on by the idea, until i saw CGI Kong jumping around NYC.

 

Pass.

 

I didn't like that he was jumping around, I'm okay if he plods along like a giant ape. It was the action they had the CGI ape doing.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Was turned on by the idea, until i saw CGI Kong jumping around NYC.

 

Pass.

 

I didn't like that he was jumping around, I'm okay if he plods along like a giant ape. It was the action they had the CGI ape doing.

 

Okay. I apologize then. I misunderstood you.

[2GOLD 0]

Yeah, I was fine with it until I saw the trailer. The giant bugs looked incredibly stupid, Kong just looks rather silly and Jack Black appears to be chewing scenery while Brody has looked bored to tears in every clip I've seen.

 

I'm sure it'll do well but it's not getting my dollars. Maybe for two dollars down the road but not the opening prices.

[CBright7831 0]

Judging by the production diaries, it seems WETA is working on Kong unti lthe last possible minute. Ironically, they did the same for LOTR.

[CBright7831 0]

King Kong (2005)

 

RATING: FRESH READING: 95%

 

(FRESH = 60% or Greater) Reviews counted: 22

Fresh: 21 Rotten: 1

Average Rating: 8/10

 

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/king_kong/

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

I cant believe some theatres are doing midnight showings.

 

It worked for LOTR cause there was a rabid fanbase.

 

Its a bad idea with a 3 hour long King Kong..

[SuperJerk 0]

This was the first movie I ever saw.

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074751/

 

I expect this version to be much better.

[spman 0]

They made us run midnights of both Narnia AND Kong where I work, susprisingly Narnia did better buisness, drawing about 60 people compared to the 25 that came out to see Kong. I didn't catch all of the movie, but the parts that I saw didn't really excite me. Too much CGI for one thing. The movie is also way too rediculously long, clocking in at well over 3 hours, nearly twice the length of the original, and from what I saw the film is heavy on extended scenes and sequences that are mainly for visual effects or minor chracter development, rather then giving the film any more substance. It's just long for the sake of being long. I did catch the full ending though, including the chase through New York, which again was fun, but not that thrilling to me.

[DMann2003 0]

It was a beautiful damn film

 

I'd say more but it was a long movie and I'm tired

[Jorge Gorgeous 0]

It was a really, really good movie. There was a pretty good crowd for a midnight showing on a Tuesday for a 3 hour movie. Probably 50+ people. All I can do is echo the sentiment of Dmann and say that it was a beautiful movie. Visually and in how it was written and acted. Go see it in the theaters, as it deserves to be seen on the big screen.

[Mik 0]

I think Ebert called it the best movie epic in years.

[syxx2001 0]

Can I ask...whats wrong with CGI? It seems like its a prolem for everyone when Hulk came out, and now this. Would you have rather them use clay and a wire frame?

[2GOLD 0]

Can I ask...whats wrong with CGI? It seems like its a prolem for everyone when Hulk came out, and now this. Would you have rather them use clay and a wire frame?

 

There are time when that actually looks more realistic than some of the CGI nowadays. CGI has a tendency to look super fake in some scenes because they are trying to make it do too much. It's a useful tool when it's not overdone but the problem is they have started to go over the use line. I can stand a movie of CGI toons although I still have a place for the actual well drawn ones that Disney used to do.

 

But movies that are just CGI for the sake of using CGI, I've had enough. Star Wars Episode 3 with the CGI clones was the final straw for me. It just looked too damn fake to take seriously. The costumes and clay just can actually look more realistic with the camera tricks we have learned since the 80's.

[Use Your Illusion 0]

Saw it last night. Absolutely brilliant. Peter Jackson is an genius of epic proportions, guiding the audience through thrill and heartbreak and making them geuinely FEEL for a computer generated gorilla. The stronger and more powerful scenes lie in the few personal moments between Kong and Anne, often where nothing is said at all.

 

A gorgeous, beautiful, warm, funny, thrilling, heart-breakingly sad film that is an instant classic.

 

Go and see this movie and go and see it NOW.

[Robert 0]

This movie was great, and I'll see it agian. I could have mindless fun, and yet actually felt like I picked up new stuff that I haven't seen in the orignal. At imdb, I like the idiots that are trying to say that the '76 version was better than the original.

[CBright7831 0]

I like to think that the 76 version (and it's 86 sequel) never existed.

 

With that, I can proudly tell you all that King Kong is my best film of 2005.

 

Give this film an Oscar...or two...or six...or eleven.

[SuperJerk 0]

They made us run midnights of both Narnia AND Kong where I work, susprisingly Narnia did better buisness, drawing about 60 people compared to the 25 that came out to see Kong. I didn't catch all of the movie, but the parts that I saw didn't really excite me. Too much CGI for one thing. The movie is also way too rediculously long, clocking in at well over 3 hours, nearly twice the length of the original, and from what I saw the film is heavy on extended scenes and sequences that are mainly for visual effects or minor chracter development, rather then giving the film any more substance. It's just long for the sake of being long. I did catch the full ending though, including the chase through New York, which again was fun, but not that thrilling to me.

To be fair: there's a chance your opinion about the length might be different if you actually saw the entire movie, and your opinion of the sequences you complained about might be different if you saw them in context.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

I like to think that the 76 version (and it's 86 sequel) never existed.

 

With that, I can proudly tell you all that King Kong is my best film of 2005.

 

Give this film an Oscar...or two...or six...or eleven.

But its a remake! Best I can tell, the only "remakes" to win a Best Picture Academy Award were "Mutiny on the Bounty" (1935), Ben Hur (1959) and My Fair Lady (1964) and none of them really scream out "remake".

 

And I dont even see Peter Jackson getting nominated for Best Director, even though he was nominated for a Golden Globe.

[Downhome 0]

I saw this tonight, and I must say, it has helped me appreciate the LotR films and Peter Jackson himself, a hell of a lot more. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the LotR trilogy, but this film proved much more about Jackson, and it is truly set in stone that he'll be around for many years, producing fantastic films, he is among the ranks of the all time greats, and that he is most defiantly not any sort of flash in the pan. Here are a few random thoughts about King Kong:

 

-It is quite possibly the greatest remake of all time.

 

-It is a mix of just about every film aspect. You have action, adventure, comedy, romance, horror, and much more all rolled into one. I could see this being a date movie. I could see it being a flick that a group of friends go to check out together. I see the older crowd enjoying it just as much as the younger people. The kids are going to eat it up. I can't remember the last time a film, especially one of this quality, appealed to so many different people.

 

-I have heard people complaining about the first hour or so, but I really enjoyed that part as well, as it was a great build to the action. I loved the representation of the Depression-era. The visuals from this part of the film were every bit as well done as the Island.

 

-I loved action scenes, and the CGI was fantastic. It really shows, once more, just how far we have come since Jurassic Park. I viewed Skull Island as a living breathing location, not to mention beautiful. Peter Jackson really brought the island to life.

 

-The relationship between Ann and Kong in this film, is much more defined and heartfelt, which makes for an even greater sense of love, understanding, as well as misunderstanding.

 

-All involved gave brilliant performances, and yes, even Jack Black. I could easily see him following Jim Carrey in terms of better, and more serious, roles.

 

-For a three hour movie, the time just flew by. If anything, it felt too short to me. It's just one of those movies that I was holding on to, not wanting it to end at all.

 

-It was the most breathtaking cinematic experience for me since the web-slinging scenes in Spider-Man.

 

-Kong himself was just as human, if not even more so, as the rest of the cast. Andy Serkis did a fantastic job of bringing Kong to life, making him out to be more of an actual character, almost human, with actual emotions instead of just a CGI creation.

 

-We all know the main story itself, and what can I say about that? It's timeless - it is just as emotional today as it was in 1933.

 

-This is one of those films I'll go to see once again, just because I don't feel like I was able to take it all in in a single viewing.

 

-To me, this is the best picture of the year so far that I've seen (I haven't seen many of the Oscar contenders yet though). Like Ebert himself said, it is truly one of the great modern epics.

 

I don't see why anyone would refuse to see this one. Do you enjoy action and adventure? How about thrilling horror? A timeless romance tale? Heck, do you just love to see movies with great special effects where a bunch of stuff is destroyed? No matter what your taste in film, there is something for the film lover in everyone.

 

10/10

[strummer 0]

Saw it tonight, absolutely brilliant, tremendous tremendous film. Best movie I've seen in YEARS.

 

Jack Black just had the role of his career and unless the academy poo poo's on his rep as a "wacky" comedian he'll get nominated for an Oscar.

 

 

Naomi Watts is stunningly beautiful and gives a very compelling performance.

[TheOriginalOrangeGoblin 0]

Saw it, loved it. Blew all 3 LOTR's out of the water.

[Guest Vitamin X]

I guess I'll be the first to somewhat contradict the crowd here and say that it was just simply alright. It was a pretty decent flick, but some scenes were just way too drawn out, especially the ones between Kong and Anne. What's with the bestialisty macrophilia submessage in the movie? (half-serious there).

 

Anyways, the first hour was extremely interesting, in the way the Depression era was brought to life. The second hour was AMAZING, everything on Skull Island just kept you on the edge of your seat, definitely the best part of the movie. Then, the third hour. I know that 1930's era New York was supposed to be kind of ridiculously overdone, but there were parts in the film where the CGI Kong got a little bit out of hand.. that the special effects weren't exactly perfect, to wit, I could almost immediately tell the difference from when Andy Serkis was hopping around like a gorilla on a model set and when it would switch to a set. I'm not sure if that was an intended effect or not, as maybe a bit of an homage to the original, but it was something that especially stood out to me during the New York scene at the end. And, oh god. The Empire State fall. Kong must have been hanging for dear life and him and Anne stared at each other for what must have been 20-30 minutes before the fucking ape finally fell. If there's one thing Return of the King taught us about Peter Jackson's style, is that he LOOOOOOOVES drawing out and emphasizing the ending.

 

Strangely enough, I felt one of the best parts of the film was Jack Black. I knew he had it in him to be an amazing dramatic actor, and that people weren't going to take him seriously ala Jim Carrey, but the guy had, without a doubt, the best and most memorable lines in the film, with an amazing delivery. I was fairly impressed with him as I was with Naomi Watts, even though as the film went on, her character kind of devolved, at least in my opinion.

 

I'd go see it for the Skull Island scenes alone. While watching this film, I saw the absolute worst way I would ever want to go out dying:

in the scene where the crew all lands in the black pits and those huge leech/lamprey things come out of the ground and slowly devour that one guy.

UGH that was one of the most sickening deaths I've seen in a movie recently, and I'm not easily sickened.