King Kong

→ in
Tools    





In the Beginning...
Originally Posted by susan
it was a good scene (the ice) but highly unbelieveable...if it was in a rink it would have been fine, but if he crashed through a theatre, then there was no way he could slide on the ice...and besides central park was way too empty...
I wouldn't sacrifice the scene, and what it made me feel, for the small shred of believability it was missing. I can suspend my disbelief when it pays off.

I'm guessing it was extremely early in Central Park (4-5am), since the sun started to come up as he scaled the Empire State Building. Given the weather, would there have really been many people in Central Park at that time? (And Central Park is a pretty big place, too.)

Originally Posted by susan
there was plenty of playfulness when after ann was doing her vaudeville act, falling down and standing up, then kong started to knock her down...
Still, the scene was important. The playfulness began on the island, but it endured even so close to the end (and was then a mutual happiness between them). I think that says alot about the validity and strength of Ann and Kong's feelings toward one another. It also, once again, showed Kong as more than just a surly ape - one who didn't just demand Ann as if she were a prize, but actually valued her as a companion.

It was like, he woke up in this strange, unfamiliar, terrifying place; and his mate had been taken from him, and he was completely lost and hopeless - and after fighting his way free and finding her, he was home again.



Thursday Next's Avatar
I never could get the hang of Thursdays.
I thought this was a great film - certainly surpassed my expectations. I liked all the build up on the boat, and the first few scenes on skull island were good. There was a little too much of one kind of monster to the next type action after this, though, as has been pointed out - as if more people than that wouldn't get trampled by those dinosaurs, and the really annoying bit where the kid who can't handle the gun shoots the insects off Jack without hitting him . The Kong on top of the tower bit was drawn out a little too much, I thought, and Jack going up in the lift didn't really go anywhere, but apart from that two giant hairy thumbs up!



Just saw it and also loved it. but im suprised nobody here mentioned the natives. that was one of my favorite scenes in the whole movie. It was kinda short but they looked damn creepy and I wish they were in more of the movie and less giant CGI bugs and water monsters
__________________
"A good film is when the price of the dinner, the theater admission and the babysitter were worth it."
- Alfred Hitchcock



Put me in your pocket...
Originally Posted by Twain
He became her protector. She was dead meat without him. Anyone who took on three Trexes to save me would probably get my devotion. And women love a misunderstood bad boy. Kong was the ultimate bad boy.
This made me laugh. I was thinking by the end of the movie that it would be hard for any man to fill Kong's shoe's in Ann's eyes. Killing 3 T-Rex's while also saving her from falling down the revene is a hard act to follow.

I liked King Kong alot and thought it was alot of fun. I loved the expressions of Kong...his movements were pretty amazing. I never warmed up to Jack Black in his role though...I'm not sure why...maybe it was Jack and Adrien together I didn't warm to. I could have done without the bug scene too.

And, I understand the need for some build up on the ship going to the island, but it was too drawn out....I would rather have seen some time spent on the voyage back home with maybe some character development on coping with what had happened to everyone. Also...I wish some time was spent showing how they even got Kong back to and onto the ship...I mean how on earth did they lug the big guy back and even get him on the ship?

I really liked it though...and even teared up at the end. As you said Twain...he was just a misunderstood bad boy who happened to kill a few people here and there.



Oh...I caught a little of the 70's version of King Kong the other night...the two Kongs don't compare. It even looked as if someone were in a gorilla suit as he was climbing the WTC. Thank goodness for modern technology.



Too few wide shots, too many close-ups. Spectacles in messy close-up don't work (Return of the King, anyone?), which is something that Jackson really needs to learn, especially since he's capable of some remarkably dynamic wide shots, as evidenced at certain points in this film: in certain shots during the ape/dinosaur battle on the vines, for example (not enough of them, however), the shot of Kong falling to his death, and so on. Meanwhile, I could watch Andy Serkis in anything. What a remarkable actor. And what a sexless movie. Kong is misunderstood by almost everyone in the film (Naomi Watts and Jack Black notwithstanding), but this fact is always abundantly clear to everyone outside it. We always know precisely how we're supposed to feel about the oh-so-neutered monkey. The film, in other words, lacks complexity. The original is a fever dream of ambiguity, this one really isn't. Kong isn't supposed to be a SNAG, he's supposed to be a potential rapist.

Meanwhile, talk about racist. Sure, the natives in the original don't exactly come off well or anything, but somehow Jackson actually manages to make them come off worse in this one...
__________________
www.esotericrabbit.com



Originally Posted by The Silver Bullet
Too few wide shots, too many close-ups. Spectacles in messy close-up don't work (Return of the King, anyone?), which is something that Jackson really needs to learn, especially since he's capable of some remarkably dynamic wide shots, as evidenced at certain points in this film: in certain shots during the ape/dinosaur battle on the vines, for example (not enough of them, however), the shot of Kong falling to his death, and so on. Meanwhile, I could watch Andy Serkis in anything. What a remarkable actor. And what a sexless movie. Kong is misunderstood by almost everyone in the film (Naomi Watts and Jack Black notwithstanding), but this fact is always abundantly clear to everyone outside it. We always know precisely how we're supposed to feel about the oh-so-neutered monkey. The film, in other words, lacks complexity. The original is a fever dream of ambiguity, this one really isn't. Kong isn't supposed to be a SNAG, he's supposed to be a potential rapist.

Meanwhile, talk about racist. Sure, the natives in the original don't exactly come off well or anything, but somehow Jackson actually manages to make them come off worse in this one...
I'd rather watch King Kong take a dump for 3 hours than watch Tim, or whoever, and Katrina Go Boating again. Next time you try to flex your muscles and impress yourself just don't.
__________________
MOVIE TITLE JUMBLE
New jumble is two words: balesdaewrd
Previous jumble goes to, Mrs. Darcy! (gdknmoifoaneevh - Kingdom of Heaven)
The individual words are jumbled then the spaces are removed. PM the answer to me. First one with the answer wins.



Originally Posted by Ash_Lee
I've never felt this way over a cgi character, or many others I might add. This is truly a masterpiece, and a classic at that.
I thought the same thing. It was the first time I became truly involved with a CGI character. Up til now, the best were Dr Ross from Final Fantasy and Gollum from LOTR...another Peter Jackson/Andy Serkis collaboration.

I happened to see the 1933 King Kong the day after seeing the new one. Of course, there's no comparison in realism. What a long way we've come. But I still love the original. In fact, there are a couple of scenes that I prefer in the original over Jackson's. The fight with a single Trex and the pteradactyl instead of the giant bats.

For lovers of the 1933 King Kong, Peter Jackson has given us a wonderful Christmas present.
__________________
My name is Maximus Decimus Meridius, commander of the Armies of the North, General of the Felix Legions, loyal servant to the true emperor, Marcus Aurelius. Father to a murdered son, husband to a murdered wife. And I will have my vengeance, in this life or the next.




i thought they did an excellent job with this remake while able to update with the technology and still stayig true to the original



A few comments:

First off I loved the scenes on Skull Island, I found them highly entertaining. The bug pit was one of my favorite scenes (except for the cheesiness of little Jimmy shooting the bugs of Jack, and the crazy way they were saved). It was creepy and sent chills up my spine...but maybe that's cuz I have a pretty bad case of Arachnophobia. Jackson was also right to put that scene in because the same scene was in the original one, but back then it was believed to be to gruesome for the movies.

Second: Why is there always one person who calls a film maker racist because he portrays fictional natives as vicious in a movie? It was the same with Pirates 2, a bunch of people apparently got upset because of the portrayal of some unknown tribe of people as cannibals. Film makers aren't racist when they do this. They're just making movies creepier. If it was specific that these people were a certain race that didn't act like that, then it would be racism. And by the way, I loved the scene with the natives...creepy!

Great movie, imo.



Originally Posted by The_Walrus
A few comments:

First off I loved the scenes on Skull Island, I found them highly entertaining. The bug pit was one of my favorite scenes (except for the cheesiness of little Jimmy shooting the bugs of Jack, and the crazy way they were saved).
I wasnt too fond of that part either. A couple scenes he went waaaaaaay over the top on and that was one of them that irritated me.

I loved the scene with the natives...creepy!

Great movie, imo.
I just thought the natives there were too scummy looking along with where they lived. It seems like being natives of that island and I'm assuming for a loooooong time, they would have learned to have built something a little better than that. I was comparing them to the 70's version so it caught me by surprise there.



www.forumninja.com
I loved this film, but primarily for the last chapter (NYC), which seems to redeem the entire film. Whereas a great deal of the first half of the movie is entirely forgettable, the image of a sullen Kong and Anne looking out on to the NY skyline will never leave me.

Jackson knows how to craft memorable imagery... whether it's drinking puke out of a punch bowl, two wicked children in a bathtub, the grim reaper being shot by a ghostly cowboy, or a white horse descending into a cloud of blackened orcs.



Originally Posted by KnicksRIP
I loved this film, but primarily for the last chapter (NYC), which seems to redeem the entire film. Whereas a great deal of the first half of the movie is entirely forgettable, the image of a sullen Kong and Anne looking out on to the NY skyline will never leave me.

Jackson knows how to craft memorable imagery... whether it's drinking puke out of a punch bowl, two wicked children in a bathtub, the grim reaper being shot by a ghostly cowboy, or a white horse descending into a cloud of blackened orcs.
Ya gotta love his old horror films!

I just hope he does The Hobbit next...it wouldn't be the same with a different director...and they gotta do it before Ian McKellan dies too.



I really thought the film was good. The visually were the best part and Adrian Brody was the best character in my opinion. It was kinda hard getting used to jack Black in a role that is so out of his character range, but all together he did a pretty good job as well.
__________________
See Ya In The Movies



You gotta give some credit to Jack Black...afterall many actors don't wanna be remembered as a funny moron...Tom Hanks turned serious and look what that got him...he's like the most famous actor in the world...Jim Carrey did it and recieved a ton of praise for his work as a serious actor.

He may have failed to some people, but I loved the character.



8.5/10

I wished they had made it shorter so when you just get bored and want to watch something without surrendering to much of your time, kong is the way to go. Sometimes it just was too hectic, besides the scenes with kong and Ann.
__________________
I can't help anyone...
Not my family...
Not my friends...
No one...



i just saw the new king kong on dvd and WOW what a great movie...im very happy i bought it. two thumbs up here



i mean, it was kinda long.... actaully, it was really long. two movies in one actually. but still, i thought it was a cool movie up untill he came to new york. and there was too much pre-story. but then again, it was well worth it just to see an 80-foot pissed off gorilla beat the **** out of a T-"rex". he was drop-kicking him to the face, performing professional whestling moves that he SOMEHOW knew, and all in all pwning them like an eight-foot tall soccar hooligan in a mosh pit with a bunch or dorks at a weezer concert.

heh... moshing to weezer....



Celluloid Temptation Facilitator
This movie really surprised me. Who knew it had Jurassic Park in it?

It was so over the top, but man, it was fun to watch the over the top parts.

Of course just once I'd like to see King Kong NOT get killed. Wouldn't that be radical?

Jack Black did a good job in it. I found way more movie here than I expected, waaaaay more.

Yes, it was long. I didn't fall asleep though.

It was another one of those "OMG, you have to see this scene thing" with my husband.

You know the scene where the dinos, King Kong and the girl are all "swinging?" Wow.
__________________
Bleacheddecay