How good is King Kong (the movie)?

[Luke Skywalker 1,796]

I dont want to see it, really... I was just mentioning it.. what king of pervert you think i am?!

And the descriptions you made, realy i think it better as is 8O

BTW in proportion, i think gorillas are smaller than us

Thinking about this i think aslan is a lionesse too :?

[nightscape94 965]

I dont want to see it, really... I was just mentioning it.. what king of pervert you think i am?!

Hey, I'm not the one that brought it up. Though, it makes you think, is King Kong also King Dong?

Ah the questions that plague us....

Tim

[Luke Skywalker 1,796]

:roll:

[publicist 4,643]

After seeing 'Kong':

Great movie, if you like escapism like this, well-directed, apart from a few blunders, certainly not worser than any individual 'LotR'-film..even better than 'Two Towers', as i see it.

And my comment still stands: it could have much more impact if you wouldn't yawn through the whole story arc: 'I know what's gonna happen next! They catch him and he gets to New York'

My only hope is that they finally run out of stories to remake. A slim hope, i might add.

I see a major hit...for better or for worse. For worse, actually: Universal Pictures proudly presents: Stephen Sommers 'Frankenstein meets The Son of Kong'. Summer 2007.

[robthehand 3]

Wow. I just saw King Kong. I must say I absolutely loved it - my only problem was that the score sometimes seemed to drown out the dialogue (it's normally the other way round LOL). Was I imagining this, or did anyone else notice?

[Sandor 797]

Why did Kong only make 9.7 million on yesterday's opening?

Even Catch Me If you Can made MORE on a wednesday opening!

Confused...

[Jeshopk 8]

Nobody had the time after work. The people I went out to dinner with vetoed it yesterday.

[Sandor 797]

So why did ROTS make 50 million on opening day (thursday)? And why did Catch Me If You Can make MORE on a wednesday also (when people work too right?)

[Jeshopk 8]

Neither of those are more than 3 hours. And they both seemed invigorating, while people are expecting to swallow a meal of cotton, as they did with ROTK.

[nightscape94 965]

Just came back from seeing PJ's King Kong. It was fantastic. I can't believe the emotions they were able to bring out me through the course of the 3 hours. I wasn't bored, nor did I feel the film lagged a single minute.

I'll write something more substantial later, I haven't slept in 24 hours. Goin' to bed!

Tim

[dooku77 0]

I saw Kong Weds night, the theater was pretty full, the opening scenes in New York were perfect, but 2/3 of the scenes on the Venture almost made me feel I should walk out, aside from an awesome performance by Serkis as lumpy. Once they get to the Island this is the closest to cinematic perfection I've seen since the LOTR trilogy. The only poor effect was the dinosaur stampede, which ironically had the best action score, which was drowned out by effects. This scene is so ridiculous it's almost laughable, but it's also extremely fun. Kong's full reveal made the hair on my neck standup, it was like you were watching a real animal, it was great because the audience responded to him well laughing and such, this leads to the trex fight which is hands down the most realistic CG effects put on screen to date. This scene will make you want to go back 3 more times to see the movie. Also the bug scene had the most disturbing and realistic creatures, especially these pink tube worms. Kong's capture was beautifully choreographed also; the scenes when he's on the loose in NYC were tremendously fun, but didn't blow me away like Skull Island. Probably the greatest achievement is the silent love scenes between Kong and Darrow; Kong’s facial acting is exactly on par with Watt's. I have to see this movie at least two more times just to take it all in. The Empire State finale will be remembered for a long time including Howard's Kong theme. I didn't tear up because I was analyzing the score and awe inspiring effects, but if you let the film wash over you it's pretty tough not to be moved. Overall this is a classic film and well worth the ticket price, score CD purchase and likely 4 disc DVD. Can't wait for the Hobbit.

[Romão 2,274]

I saw it tonight with my brother. First of all, it's amazing how the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park still look better that in Kong, which were quite awful, IMHO. The action scenes were greatly overdone. They just went on and on and on, and they were completly gratuitous for the most part. Kong itself looked great though. The thing with most of the CGI creatures is that if the director wants them to look real, he should film them as he would with a real animal. The dinousaurs really were crappy. Lots of cheesy moments (the ice skating, Kong's encounter with Ann on New York), but also some pretty neat effects. As I said, Kong looked great, and so did New York seen from the top of the Empire State Building. This was the best effect of the film for me.

A fun movie, nice performances, some great effects mixed with some very mediocre ones. Very overdone in several places. Very far from being a masterpiece, but sill better than I expected.

JNH's score was much better than I expected. And did anyone spot Howard Shore?

[Olivier 5]

***** SPOILERS *****

Good movie.

Wonderful Kong effects.

- Negative points -

A few silly moments-- Ann doing her comic routine for Kong, for instance; it could have worked had it been presented some other way; right after he pushes her with his finger, for instance; reversing these (shoving, then routing) might have been more natural.

The stampede started like something exciting, but asked for too much suspension of disbelief and quickly became an incomprehensible visual mess when they tumbled over one another.

The dinosaur fight stretched it a bit too, especially in the vines; fun, but over the top.

The "cute" moments on the ice were a bit silly too, indeed; Ann's silhouette when she finds him in New York made for a nice picture, but, after so much mayhem and wandering, having her just happen to calmly down the very street where he is was again a bit too contrived.

The perpetual alternance "we're safe & cuddly and fine" / "gee, we're being shot at" at the end got tiring.

Even allowing a bit of time to wander around in the city, I found the night was mighty short: I suppose the Kong show was about 9pm at most, and yet, within a few minutes and little to account for time lapse, it was dawn and broad daylight.

Self-indulgence in some supposedly artful shots-- the warped slow motion when the name of the island is revealed, for instance; there were a few others.

- Positive Points -

The approach of the island was great; I love the odd skull-shaped rocks too. The village and its villagers were downright creepy (the make-up!)-- I suppose they keep in hiding for the rest of the movie, but one might wonder why they don't reappear, if only to observe from the jungle.

The bug pit was pretty creepy too; lots of tension.

I certainly wouldn't equal Jackson with Spielberg, though.

Also, as a story-teller, a director, and especially a tech-savvy director, I prefer James Cameron.

[robthehand 3]

OK, I've thought about it a bit now:

Spoiler Alert (but you all know the story anyway 8O)

Overall, I thought King Kong was brilliant - not as slow (or overlong) as I had expected - a very enjoyable three hours. People often complain about the pacing, but I never really had a problem with it - it sure didn't seem like an hour before they reached the Island, if I hadn't had my watch I'd have said it was half an hour at most. The main cast are all likeable, Jack Black surprisingly so, Adrien Brody well-suited to his part. What humour there was was carefully rationed, and humorously embarrasing (Ann's mistaking another crew member for writer Jack Discroll, for example). The first scene on Skull Island was actually a little scary - the makeup was absolutely fantasic, and the somewhat controversial shooting-the-natives highly effective. Unbelievably, Kong doesn't appear until about half way through. This was never a problem as far as I was concerned, but his lack of screen time immediately after appearing did bug me (haha) but I was happy that Jackson chose to go for long scenes with plenty of content rather than doing a George Lucas and feeling the need to cut from storyline-to-storyline every few minutes. There were, perhaps, a few too many nasty bugs and creatures, but they were all effective and... well... nasty. The dinosaur sequences were amusing, but the CGI was slightly dodgy when the film crew are being chased (although "special effects do not need to be convincing if they are effective" as Roger Ebert said in his review). I particularly enjoyed the multiple meanings of the line "I need to get you in the shot or people will think it's fake". The last scene on the island is also very emotional, as Kong desperately tries to fight the chloroform, before collapsing unconscious. I better mention something about the music: James Newton Howard did a remarkable job, especially considering the tight schedule. I've heard a lot better from him, and I can't imagine the album being a particularly great one, but the score did what it was intended to do (although the dubbing of it onto the film was far from perfect in places - instead of being drowned out as so often happens, it was actually too prominent in places, making some of the lines difficult to hear. Or am I going deaf?)

The shift back to New York poses a few questions (how the heck did they get Kong back there?) but things pick up so quickly that it's easy to ignore things like that. This time we get a proper opportunity to experience Jackson's wonderfully reaslised 1930s New York City, and - it is wonderful. The scene with Kong chained up for the show is highly effective. The most fun (and also one of the sadder) scenes in the movie is when Kong breaks free and, basically, trashes New York looking for Ann. His discarding of the "wrong" girls is strangely funny. But the two most emotional scenes are still to come. Kong has found Ann, and temporarily escaped the guns. Following is a beautiful scene with Kong and Ann skating on the ice - at first Kong doesn't know what to make of it, but he soon gets the hang of it. The scene shows Andy Serkis' skills are still at least as good as when he played Gollum - if not better. When the pair are interrupted, it is one of the most moving parts of the film. Then, of course, comes the Empire State Building scene. This is incredibly drawn out - but it works. The only reason Jackson got away with this (in my opinion) is that people know what's going to happen - they know Kong is going to lose, they know the planes get him - and that makes the whole build-up even more tragic. There is a mercifully short "finale" after this (a blessing not granted to Return of the King), and the final line leaves a lasting impression (as expected). One thing to note: not a single person in the audience left before the credits were over.

[nightscape94 965]

The difference in the Carl Denham character from the original film and this one, make that last line into something completley different. I liked the way Carl is in this film, and I love the way Jack Black delivers the line, like he's trying to enable himself, trying to convince himself that beauty did kill the beast, when that's not the case at all. Jack Black owns that part, by the way.

Tim

[gkgyver 1,646]

So PJ does what he wants and is a great director and person.  

Now George Lucas does the same, and is a childhood rapist.  

Yes, since he's an ignorant a**hole. PJ is not.

Going to see it tomorrow.

[robthehand 3]

So PJ does what he wants and is a great director and person.  

Now George Lucas does the same, and is a childhood rapist.  

Yes, since he's an ignorant a**hole. PJ is not.

Going to see it tomorrow.

True. Remaking someone else's film is one thing (I rarely agree with it, but I trusted PJ on this one), but modfiying (for the worse) your own film and denying all access to the original version is just criminal.

[Quintus 5,399]

Fantastic film, I loved it. It didn't drag in the slightest for me. Yes some of the cgi looked a tad 'unfinished', but it didn't really detract from OTT (in a good Indy Jones kinda way) action, i just went along with it all. Besides, I'm guessing they may polish some of the cgi come the dvd.

The score was suprisingly very good imo. In fact it sounded very Howard Shore tbh. Newton Howard even managed to get a few little motifs in there and one quite beautiful love theme, played mainly on piano. Methinks he's had that little tune stored away in his notes for some time, waiting for the right movie to use it in. It seems simply too good to be thought up in the short time he had to compose over 2hrs of music. On the whole, Kong has a very good score that suits the proceedings perfectly.

[Olivier 5]

A few more (positive) points--

I haven't seen any of Black's movies; he was really good in this one; great casting.

The shots of New York are splendid-- and pretty dizzying at the end.

One of my favorite NY scenes is actually the one where Kong is wandering (with Ann?) is a dark street; there's nothing, no cars, no screaming people, no destruction, but a hapless, lost creature that doesn't know where to go nor what to make of this strange urban labyrinth. Nobody noticing him, "owing" and all that; no fancy shots; just a very nice shot in a relatively dark street. Excellent.

[Quintus 5,399]

One of  my favorite NY scenes is actually the one where Kong is wandering (with Ann?) is a dark street; there's nothing, no cars, no screaming people, no destruction, but a hapless, lost creature that doesn't know where to go nor what to make of this strange urban labyrinth. Nobody noticing him, "owing" and all that; no fancy shots; just a very nice shot in a relatively dark street. Excellent.

Bloody well spotted. I picked up on that too. PJ always seems to lace his movies with little moments like that. I'm guessing the shot probably went over the heads of the audience majority, but its nice that I'm not the only one who picked up on that thoughtful little sequence.

[Romão 2,274]

I cannot praise enough the views of New York from the top of the Empire State Building. Trully great effects.

[Morlock 11]

Saw the film. I don't really have an organized opinion about it. I'm really having a hard time with it. I know what I loved. I know what I liked. I know what I didn't like. But I'm not sure what I thought of the film as a whole.

Well, for starters, I strongly recommend the film. It is definately worth seeing. It gets it's first three stars automatically. The last star is the problem.

Let's get to it:

Kong was absolutely brilliant. Without a doubt, the greatest achievment of anything in this film. He looked great. You could see what he felt. You could understand what he was thinking. You really, really, really felt for him, his death scene is as emotional as they come.

I thought Watts did a great job. And she was absoultely stunning all the time. There's one close up of her that seems to go on forever, but all I was thinking about is that, she can own that close up.

Black was excellent. I really got that Orson Wells vibe from him (I presume intentionally).

Brody was perfectly fine, although the only time you really feel his presence is on the Venture, when the character is in his element.

The only other cast member really worth noting is Thomas Kretschmann, who did an excellent job as the captain. I've only noticed him in a couple of small parts (Der Untergang, U-571), but I really like him.

I didn't like the natives one bit. I think they were a bad choice. It's wrong for the film, it's out of another film. It was disgusting and disturbing and distracting. Mostly disctracting.

The cinemtography was good for the most part, and sensational for the rest of it. My only complaits- the ham-handed slow mowtion stuff in the early island scene. Very amatuerish. Jacksonused the same effect in LoTR, and it also looked terrible there.

The special effects were absolutely superb, in that practically everything in this film is a special effect, and the only ones I can specificaly comment about are Kong, who looked particulaly great, and the dinosaurs, who looked particulaly fake. They don't look nearly as good or believable as the JP ones.

Speaking of the dinos. I didn't like them at all. The stampede scene was, first of all, technically flawed. The dinos feat and the actors running from them often occupied the same space at the same time. Secondly, it was far too ridicules. It was comical, in a bad way. I was crackiong up at how stupid this is, all these huge dinos crashing into one another, pushing each other, falling down.....I didn't like it at all. But, mostly- I never, ever, ever felt that these dinos were in any way real. I never felt like they are physically capable of hurting are heroes.

Speaking of the dino pt 2.- the Kon-T-Rex fight. I didn't like it for the most part. It started out great. One T-rex. Than another. But when the third came along.....it just became lesson in overendulgance. It was unnessecary, and made Kong's fighting tactics far too implausible. And it just got more and more preposterous.....them all falling, the T-Rex getting caught mid-air, one of them still going after Anne....just stupid. The final showdown, though, was good. What the entire scene should've been like.

I loved the quiet moments between Kong and Anne on the island. Kong, in particular, was fantastic in those scenes. I loved the playing (though Anne was a tad overdoing it), loved the looking at the sunset. And that also introduced what is by far the greatest single piece of music from the score- that beautiful, gentle, piano theme (in the central part scene taken over by strings). I heard it in the behind the scenes, and was looking forward to it. Man, is it one pretty piece of music, and perfectly captures the tender love story.

The bug scene was far, far, FAR too much.

I loved how they lured and captured Kong, particulaly Denham.

The NY scenes looked fantastic in every way, from every angle. As was mentioned, I was particulaly struck by the shots of Kong going through the dark, empty NY streets. Quite an image. As is the frozen lake scene. While I think it is just a little but too fanciful , in nevertheless works brilliantly,is quite touching, and gives JNH another excuse to use that theme.

Everything on the Empire State Building was perfect, an absolutely classic piece of film, starting with the ascent of Kong. And once he was up there, it was just perfect. I'm dying to know how they made NY, it just looked stunning from every angle, down to the most minute detail.

The repeated attacks of the planes were also done fantastically. I loved how the element of Kong's chest beating was used almost as punctuation to the scene.

And, as I said earlier, his death scene is as sad and emotional as they come (well, I haven't seen Elephant Man yet). And nothing is left hanging- his actual death and descent are perfect.

I think that the very last scene was not as good as it could've been. I don't think Black said the line with enough gravity, and he wasn't covered as dramatically as I would have hoped.

So, after these words....why am I not sure how much I liked the film? I obviousely loved a great deal of things about it.

I think that one of the things is it's extravegance. It is taken too far at certain points, and much, much too far at others. Like the dino stampede. Like the T-Rex fight. Like the bugs. Like the native scenes. And it is just a general feel I got from the film- not enough time spent on thinking things through, often scenes seem to become whatever is funniest, or biggest, or most disgusting. I didn't like it. That is what I think calssifies as sloppy filmmaking. I think that Jackson took this idea to something like 85% of what it could've been, but stopped short of putting in the time and hard work required to make it a perfect film going experiece (for me, at least). It gets Kong perfectly, and just about everything directly related to him, hence the third act is practically perfect, as it is all directly about Kong. However, the rest of it.....it's the Peter Jackson I love from Forgotten Silver, Meet the Feebles, and The Frighteners, but working with a story and budget from the Peter Jackson of the LoTR films. It's that uneasy blend.

[nightscape94 965]

I don't think Black said the line with enough gravity, and he wasn't covered as dramatically as I would have hoped.

I wrote this at the Kong IMDB board, and I didn't really word it the way I wanted to, so I'll try it again here. I think that Black delivers the line perfectly, and as a result, drastically changes its meaning from the original. First off, the characters are completley different anyway, so I guess that's inevitable, but I feel that Black did it right. He's so defeated and empty when he says it. It's spoken so quietly that he plays it more for himself, like he's trying to convince himself that beauty did kill the beast (which isn't the case at all). Denham wants to enable himself and make it seem like he had nothing to do with Kongs downfall. At the end, he's like a shell...there's nothing left inside of him.

Moving in a different direction, I like the bond between Ann and Kong. In this version, Kong sees Ann as someone that tries to understand him. When she looks in his eyes, they hold that connection and there is beauty in the beast itself. Ann, in the biggest sense, gives Kong a purpose for the first time in a long time. He now has something to do after being alone since the rest of his species has died out. Kong's part in the relationship is to offer Ann the demanding role of protector, someone that will never leave her. Don't forget the old guy in the beginning, how he says that everyone in her life has left her when she needed them the most, and he says she needs to fend for herself. She's afraid to trust anyone. Kong provides that. It's a mutual understanding, and it makes it that much sadder when he dies, and she looks in his eyes one last time.

Tim

[Josh500 1,615]

Is it any good? Has anyone listened to the score/seen the movie?

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

The best part of the movie is when Howard Shore is conducting the orchestra in the theatre and up comes Max Steiner's original King Kong music! That was an unexpected cameo. Hearing Steiner's 3-note Kong motif displayed how suitable and bold that theme was, but this Kong is more complex, which would require something slightly longer, which was what Howard delivered, even if it's more streamlined and needs an open ear to be fully recognised. It could be possible that Shore's music might have sounded too much like Steiner's approach, which would be a big no-no in today’s themeless Hollywood.

That aside, James Newton Howard's replacement score was pretty good, it sounded a bit Shoresque anyway. The music for the Empire State Building sequence was surprisingly bold and tragic, not a dull moment there. Howard's piano-based theme for Kong and Ann was quite adorable and strangely suitable, and was especially pretty during Kong’s butt-ice-skating towards the end.

The film itself was a spectacle. But as much as I like it, it was just too damn drawn out, especially during the island segment. There was so much useless filler that wasn't needed, including the bugs, the third T-Rex, Bruce Baxter and Ann talking to themselves in the mirror, the establishing shots of Depression Era New York, etc. Jackson may be a good filmmaker, but he’s a not a very choosy editor.

[Justin 2]

A fun popcorn movie. Nowhere near any of the LOTR films. I'd give it a 7/10.

Fun and entertaining in a "slightly less mindless than most" way.

Justin

[Ollie 1,059]

Got back from the film and all I can say is bravo Peter Jackson.

The film flew by, didn't notice the length at all. The only problem I had with the bronto sequence is how it ended, that was kinda silly and I really never bought Driscoll and Ann's love.

It was a beautiful film visually and well cast in my opinion.

It certainly took the bad taste out of my mouth from the 76 garbage

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

The film is apparently underperforming at the US box office. I have a bad feeling about this.

[bondo 33]

I think the extended length of the film raised above the average summer blockbuster fare. The time and place were well established in the beginning, with most of the characters fleshed out better than average (come on, not every character needs a complex background). The romance did feel rushed, but it didn't feel like 3 hours to me. This is the movie Godzilla should have (but never could have) been.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

This is the movie Godzilla should have (but never could have) been.

Never could have been under Roland Emmerich, you mean.

[Jeshopk 8]

Did anyone else find the typerwriter scene to be hilarious?

[Romão 2,274]

Yeah, in the wrong way.

[A24 4,348]

How is King Kong doing at the Box-Office? Is it breaking all records? Does anybody know?

[robthehand 3]

I don't think it's doing very well, but thinking about it - I really don't care - I (and most other people) don't want a sequel, don't want an extended version - so what difference does it make to us, the viewers, whether it's a box office success or not? If it's a good movie (which IMHO it is) that's enough for me.

[A24 4,348]

Well, I heard that King Kong (because it's not doing well in the States) started a debate on whether these extreme expensive movies ($200 million) should still be made. Major studios are getting into financial trouble and no longer want to take a risk like that in the future. Oh sure, robthehand, you may not care now, but if big budget monster movies are your thing, and if what I hear is true, then big FX movies might soon become a thing of the past.

----------------

Alex Cremers

[robthehand 3]

but if big budget monster movies are your thing

Thankfully, they're not. Except for the odd one or two maybe.

Is KK really doing that badly?

[nightscape94 965]

How is King Kong doing at the Box-Office? Is it breaking all records? Does anybody know?

According to boxofficemojo.com, the film has made $66,200,000 domestically since its release. Of course that is still a good number, but everyone is comparing it to LOTR:RotK, which is slightly unfair. I don't know how it's doing overseas.

Tim

[robthehand 3]

How is King Kong doing at the Box-Office? Is it breaking all records? Does anybody know?

According to boxofficemojo.com, the film has made $66,200,000 domestically since its release. Of course that is still a good number, but everyone is comparing it to LOTR:RotK, which is slightly unfair. I don't know how it's doing overseas.

Tim

I agree. Not only did ROTK have much more hype (and was probably better known), lots of people will probably avoid KK simplly because it's a remake.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Well, I heard that King Kong (because it's not doing well in the States) started a debate on whether these extreme expensive movies ($200 million) should still be made. Major studios are getting into financial trouble and no longer want to take a risk like that in the future.

Interesting, King Kong could be the new Cleopatra.

[Luke Skywalker 1,796]

So PJ does what he wants and is a great director and person.  

Now George Lucas does the same, and is a childhood rapist.  

Yes, since he's an ignorant a**hole. PJ is not.

Must be a personal opinion, you know, since i think the contrary...

[robthehand 3]

So PJ does what he wants and is a great director and person.  

Now George Lucas does the same, and is a childhood rapist.  

Yes, since he's an ignorant a**hole. PJ is not.

Must be a personal opinion, you know, since i think the contrary...

You think PJ's an ignorant a**hole and Lucas isn't?

[Quintus 5,399]

How is King Kong doing at the Box-Office? Is it breaking all records? Does anybody know?

According to boxofficemojo.com, the film has made $66,200,000 domestically since its release. Of course that is still a good number, but everyone is comparing it to LOTR:RotK, which is slightly unfair. I don't know how it's doing overseas.

Tim

Boxoffice Mojo puts its worldwide estimate at $146 million. Not a exactly bad weekend eh? Quite the opposite. Its doing far better over seas than it is domestically. Kong will have legs. Word of mouth will see to that.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=kingkong05.htm

[Luke Skywalker 1,796]

So PJ does what he wants and is a great director and person.  

Now George Lucas does the same, and is a childhood rapist.  

Yes, since he's an ignorant a**hole. PJ is not.

Must be a personal opinion, you know, since i think the contrary...

You think PJ's an ignorant a**hole and Lucas isn't?

I dont think either are, but if i have to choose sides, i prefer George Lucas by the mile.

[Orson 1]

I saw it yesterday afternoon and absolutely loved it. What I was really looking forwrd to seeing was the time period and I might say that Jackson captured it absolutely brilliantly. In fact, as good as the effects were on the island, I thought the Manhattan sequeces just showing the city was even more impressive. I thought the film moved along at a great pace as there were no real slow spots for me. I haven't walked out of a theater that wowed in a long time.

Two thumbs way up.

I'm curious if anyone else thought that perhaps Jack Black was reminiscent of a young me? I of course am much better looking, but I could see the energy and the look being what Jackson may have had in mind whilst casting him. Just a thought......

[robthehand 3]

I'm curious if anyone else thought that perhaps Jack Black was reminiscent of a young me?

From the Empire magazine this month:

[Jack] Black's Carl Denham is partly based on the exuberances of a young Orson Welles as well as expeditionary filmmakers of the 1930s who sought out forgotten tribes with a mixture of National Geographic science and pure exploitational zeal.

So yes.

[Olivier 5]

Did anyone else find the typerwriter scene to be hilarious?

Not even that. just plain over-the-top ridiculous.

Oh, and I didn't like the first frames. Showing a chimp (a chimp, not an ape!) right at the beginning, in the city, was silly-- to obvious; had it been to introduce the Venture, okay, but it was just random.

The introductory montage, however, was very good period at setting up the time & place.

[gkgyver 1,646]

I dont think either are, but if i have to choose sides, i prefer George Lucas by the mile.

Sometimes I feel so tiiiired ... (Lucas too, obviously)

[Orson 1]

I'm curious if anyone else thought that perhaps Jack Black was reminiscent of a young me?

From the Empire magazine this month:

[Jack] Black's Carl Denham is partly based on the exuberances of a young Orson Welles as well as expeditionary filmmakers of the 1930s who sought out forgotten tribes with a mixture of National Geographic science and pure exploitational zeal.

So yes.

Jackson's stock just went up.....

[Jeshopk 8]

It was good clean fun. My friend and I were laughing at some of Jackson's decisions, like awful, framey shots and the typing of "S! K! U! L! L! I! S! L! A! N! D!"

Even though some of the movie looked like it was directed by a high school cinematography class with no experience, it was a fun ride.

[Morlock 11]

I don't think Black said the line with enough gravity, and he wasn't covered as dramatically as I would have hoped.

I wrote this at the Kong IMDB board, and I didn't really word it the way I wanted to, so I'll try it again here. I think that Black delivers the line perfectly, and as a result, drastically changes its meaning from the original. First off, the characters are completley different anyway, so I guess that's inevitable, but I feel that Black did it right. He's so defeated and empty when he says it. It's spoken so quietly that he plays it more for himself, like he's trying to convince himself that beauty did kill the beast (which isn't the case at all). Denham wants to enable himself and make it seem like he had nothing to do with Kongs downfall. At the end, he's like a shell...there's nothing left inside of him.

This hadn't occured to me at all. I like it!