King Kong?

Standing in the Sunlight, Laughing

01-09-06

Originally Posted by thmilin

for the relationship between beast and woman, the very real emotional nature behind that relationship, the gorgeous action scenes, cinematography, set and costume design, special effects, and for the recreation and improvement in redepicting something already done - it vascillates between 7 and 8.

It is not, technically, putting a new spin on anything. It is also over romanticized. we get the bond between woman and beast without needing to be hit over the head with it.

case in point is what we saw happen between frodo and samwise to the point of people wondering if they were in love, we saw happening here with Naomi and King Kong. I do not need to see a prolonged shot of her exiting the mist of New York streets to return to his embrace. I do not need to see prolonged shots of her staring at him hypnotically in confusion and fascination and helpless connection. at some point, human beings stop losing themselves in the gaze of others. so do animals. we just don't need it hyperromanticized like that. i'm not saying romanticized in the "run off together and marry" sense; i'm saying romanticized in the literary, story-telling sense.

so, the director overdid it, quite a lot, and also let jack black run a little off his leash. i think he's perfectly capable of drama and drama mixed with comedy, but he needs to learn subtlety. naomi and kong managed to convey mounds without even speaking but his bravado rattatatt conveyed nothing new for 3 hours. or maybe he knows subtlety and the boss just didn't smack him and make him remember it.

anyhoo. enjoyable up to a point. if they'd cut out 30 min it would have a strong 8.

Spot on.
All the elements were there for a great film, but then there was 3" of icing on the cake, too.

__________________
Review: Cabin in the Woods 8/10

7thson

AMC Ape

01-09-06

This movie, for me, was wonderful to watch. It did drag on a bit at first, but I think not so much that I was bored at all. This is one of those movies that I will probably not be so excited when it comes out on DVD. Not that I will not buy it, I am sure I will, but it will lose a lot of the magic on the little screen vs the big one. If there were two catagories to measure this I would say as a theater experience it would rate a 9, and although I cannot say yet what I would rate it on DVD, I would have to say I know it is going to lose a lot for me. My first guess is that this is an A film in some ways and a C film in others.

__________________
�The gladdest moment in human life, methinks, is a departure into unknown lands.� � Sir Richard Burton

Darth Stujitzu

Sir Sean Connery's love-child

01-09-06

I went in with high hopes, but left dissapointed.
As I've stated before, I hate CGI, especially when filmakers overuse it to the point of part of the film resembles a cartoon.
Over-long, over-done, over-sentimental, and a huge dissapointment for me, there really wasn't much I liked about this film, might just be the festive season blues, bah humbug!!!

__________________
Hey Pepe, would you say I have a plethora of presents?

Toga, toga, toga......

Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbour?

Anonymous Last

Arresting your development

01-09-06

Originally Posted by Darth Stujitzu

CGI, especially when filmakers overuse it...

I agree here.

There was a part in the movie when I thought some polar bears were going to show up with a bottle of Coke Cola.

__________________

Our real discoveries come from chaos, from going to the place that looks wrong and stupid and foolish.

Embrace the chaos and sour adversity, for wise men say it is the wisest course.

Darth Stujitzu

Sir Sean Connery's love-child

01-09-06

Originally Posted by Anonymous Last

I agree here.

There was a part in the movie when I thought some polar bears were going to show up with a bottle of Coke Cola.

Apparently Lost has the rights to bad CGI Polar bears!!!!
Kate Moss has all the coke, hmmmm don't get that one!

coolbreeze

Wheely cool bike girl

01-09-06

There is something about a big screen and a big monkey.

Yeah, there are some films that need to be seen on a big screen.

I remember seeing the first, much anticipated, Star Teck film. Seeing the Enterprise loom ... high above... oh orgasmic.

King Kong ... Beauty and the Beast. Fantasy at it's best. And I will go see the next one, when they produce it, I am sure. Some things are ageless. I am an incurable romantic.

__________________
Success is going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm.

Thursday Next

I never could get the hang of Thursdays.

01-09-06

Originally Posted by 7thson

My first guess is that this is an A film in some ways and a C film in others.

...does that average out as a B grade?

Pretty much my view on it as well...

thmilin

Female assassin extraordinaire.

01-10-06

Originally Posted by Sleezy

But I don't think there is supposed to be anything subtle about a King Kong movie. It's a blockbuster picture, and that's the reason to see it on the big screen. The whole feel of the film is an old-fashioned one, which means plenty of romance. Many of those long "gazing" shots are straight out of old black-and-white romance films (all that was missing was the darkened edges framing the eyes). Some of the shots, I agree, were corny (like the "walking through the fog" Ann Darrow shot), but come on. This is King Kong. Old Hollywood, over-the-top, action/suspense/romance flair. I think Jackson made things believable enough with the attention to detail, but kept things just on the side of fantasy because he understands that the relationship between a woman and a giant ape is simply that: fantasy. The stylized romanticism needs to be there, because it gives us something outside reality, and because it makes the experience a timeless one. This isn't a subtle relationship. This is a once-and-for-all relationship.

the subtlety reference was to jack black. as for overall - you can't have "noise" without silence. you can't have "loud" without quiet. those romanticized moments could have been made a little quieter and done more for the film as a whole. i didn't say the film in itself should have been more subtle or that romanticism should have been done away with entirely.

i said it beat me over the head in some spots. to elaborate, it beat me over the head so it became more obvious it was trying to recapture "old hollywood" rather than in and of itself believably becoming old hollywood. it was caught up in itself. this happens often, and when it does, the film suffers. if a film maker is too in love with an idea, a character, or a vision, and he doesn't yoke it in, it loses something. try too hard and we can't take you too seriously.

i wanted to take this seriously. film should have the power to make me believe a relationship (romantic love or even just friendship) between a woman and a giant ape IS possible, and not ridiculous. i would have known it wasn't art, but for the 2.5 hours i was in there, i should have bought it. that's every film's promise.

i also said hyperromanticizing, not "remove romanticism." i think stylized romanticism is fine; if you thought the walking from the mist shot was too much, then it isn't really much of a step to say maybe they did it elsewhere in the movie, pushing themselves into "ridiculous" versus "romantic, sweeping, evocative of 1930s hollywood" which would have been a better result than "gargantuan, over the top, and brash" which it sometimes felt like. particularly with jack black's eyes spazzing out over a Joker smile. those moments made me wince and pull away from a story i was trying to embrace.

the other thing is, do you emulate just any old hollywood film? common hollywood era tricks? or do you try to emulate GOOD hollywood films? because the classics frankly wouldn't have pulled gaga shots like that. i'm thinking of films like The Big Sleep, one of my favorites. there was an intelligence behind the drama, the comedy, AND the romance. it knew we wanted dazzle in order to suspend our disbelief, but it didn't get so caught up in itself it made us go blind.

__________________
life without movies is like cereal without milk. possible, but disgusting. but not nearly as bad as cereal with water. don't lie. I know you've done it.

Twain

Maximus Movius

01-11-06

Originally Posted by thmilin

the subtlety reference was to jack black. as for overall - you can't have "noise" without silence. you can't have "loud" without quiet.

I thought the stampeding brontosauruses was a little over the top and I could have done with one Trex instead of three. But those are my only real complaints about "excess." I thought the acting and the dialogue WAS restrained. Jack Black was the most animated but even he was acceptable.

i wanted to take this seriously. film should have the power to make me believe a relationship (romantic love or even just friendship) between a woman and a giant ape IS possible, and not ridiculous.

I don't know if "take seriously" is the right term but I certainly was drawn into the fantasy. And I DID believe the relationship between Kong and Ann. It was by far the best relationship between Kong and Ann of any of the three movies. 1933 was a one way relationship...fearsome ape and frightened girl. 1976 introduced the reciprocal relationship (which was a great idea) but it was done in a cheesy way. Peter Jackson, Naomi Watts, the CGI team and Andy Serkis got it right. IMO, it was the best part of the movie.

those moments made me wince and pull away from a story i was trying to embrace.

I had no trouble embracing it. I do see some movies that ring false and it can ruin the entire experience. King Kong wasn't one of them. I went in expecting larger than life characters and fantasy pushed to the edge. I eagerly went along for the ride.

__________________
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.

Twain

Maximus Movius

01-13-06

Originally Posted by thmilin
I do not need to see a prolonged shot of her exiting the mist of New York streets to return to his embrace. I do not need to see prolonged shots of her staring at him hypnotically in confusion and fascination and helpless connection. at some point, human beings stop losing themselves in the gaze of others. so do animals. we just don't need it hyperromanticized like that. i'm not saying romanticized in the "run off together and marry" sense; i'm saying romanticized in the literary, story-telling sense.

Well, if a 25 foot giant gorilla was right in front of me, I'd have a tendency to stare too. Movie memories are about extraordinary shots that stay with us and that prolonged shot of Ann exiting the mist was one of them. If we can't lose ourselves in the fantasy of a fantasy movie, why even see them? Just stay home or wait for the next documentary about pesticides.

"Hyperromanticized" and overdone is what we had in the 1976 Kong. Jackson's version was a vast improvement. Ann and Kong are not likely to have any meaningful conversations so "staring with confusion and fascination" is what is left. And IMO, Naomi Watts, Peter Jackson and the CGI team did one helluva job.

Caitlyn

MoFo Patrol

01-21-06

Originally Posted by darkhorse

King Kong is a very watchable, well-made film, even though I find it to be somewhat dated.

It would probably qualify as a good date movie... if you happen to live in Mississippi!

This is the second time you've made a derogatory statement aimed toward the people in Mississippi� So I would like to ask you exactly what you are basing your opinion on? Do you actually know anyone from Mississippi and have you ever actually been to Mississippi? Ever studied anything about the state or its people from legitimate sources? I would also like to know if your remark was aimed at a particular group or at all Mississippians�

Sorry for the Kong interruption folks�

__________________

You never know what is enough, until you know what is more than enough.
~William Blake ~

AiSv Nv wa do hi ya do...
(Walk in Peace)

Caity's DVD Collection |Top 100

Anonymous Last

Arresting your development

01-23-06

Originally Posted by Caitlyn

Sorry for the Kong interruption folks�

No-no, not at all... but I think you scared me into studying up on Mississippi!

Reservoir Drought

Someone needs their fill.

01-23-06

Ok, stop with the Mississippi jokes...it's really not that funny.

Anyways, the King Kong in a respect is an homage to the origional, plain and simple. That's what Peter Jackson was attempting to do when the film was created and why he incorporated alot of things from the original.

The film, I felt could've appealed to a wider audience (if making money was their only intention) by cutting the boat scene in the beginning down as well as the scene with the giant bugs (though very well done). But again, that was not the film's task and in terms of a remake the film did amazingly well.

movie fiend