Patman

I made note of the nod to Fay about 6 pages ago.

Zodiac_Speaking

Here's my take.

I kept an open mind, considering the '33 inspired me just as it did PJ. Leaving the theatre, my finace and I, were discussing on how it went sometimes referrring to the way the '33 version did it. Here's what we thought:

-The most glaring thing we didn't like was Jack Black. I like Black, but here he was awful. It was either him, PJ, or the script, but something made him horrible. All those damn close-ups of his eyes (which he never blinked once in 3 hours and 10 minutes), cuased him too over-act his part.
-I think PJ's undying love for the '33 version (which who doesn't love-I seen it on the big screen a decade ago!) was his undoing. He didn't add anything to new to it simple, original story. Sure we got to "know" the crew but who cares? The black shipmate and "Jimmy" were irritating and Jimmy had some dumb lines. Plus it bogged down the film and need to be gone; I don't think we would have cared about it seeing it as a deleted scene on the DVD. "Eh, nothing big." Is what most would've said. All the battles were too long. Instead of coming up with something new, he just twists what we've seen before. Instead of a Brontosaurus eating a sailor, we have a stampede (worst CGI of the film), instead of one T-Rex, we get three, ect. I expected something new, especially from a "visionary director". I hope this film brings PJ down to earth, because at times it was bloated, uninspired, and to much of trying to be cool when we've seen it before.
-The script had numerous problems. How did Jack find Ann and Kong so quickly? How did they get back to the gate so quickly? Where were the native when Jack got Ann and Kong was chasing after them? Once back to civilization, Ann's motivation to be with Kong was...? Wheres Jimmy, PJ, you brought him up? What! I thought this was Kong not a overly sensitive Koko. Why was Kong so mad at Ann for half the time they were on Skull Island, because she told him no??
-I love Kong (the character) but damn, when the hell was he going to fall off the Empire State builing?! Also, the impact wasn't there.

On the plus side, the CGI Kong was superb. There were some shots that made me glad to have seen it on the big screen. At times it was fun. I just hope PJ shakes his head clear of the last 5 years and stops making 3 hour long movies. After this what people said about him being visionary, brilliant, and winning the Oscar, I don't think after seeing this that his quite there yet.

Grade: C+

Zodiac_Speaking

This movie reminds me of THE HULK the way it's being talked about.
That movie cost a lot to make and got good reviews, but it didn't do the money it could have. And there was complaint on the lenth on that movie too.


Yes!! I expect it to do the same BO too, people were happy or cheering in my audience.

Shannon Nutt

The reviews on HULK were pretty mixed:
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/hulk/

The reviews on KONG are almost universally positive:
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/king_kong/

rennervision

Peter Jackson should have directed The Hulk.

rennervision

It's not so much that I thought it was cheesy, but rather, I felt it no longer fit. In the 1933 version, Ann chose Jack over Kong. The line makes more sense in that context. This time, the meaning feels a little forced. Since Ann clearly felt some affection for Kong this time around, I was hoping the line would be dropped and Jack Black would end up like Charles Grodin!

I wanted to scream back - "No it wasn't beauty that killed the beast. It was your irresponsibility !!!"

Chew

Why do we need to see the impact? We know he's dead. I think it was a great choice not to show it.

devilshalo

Only two things made King Kong enjoyable for me....

Kong (Serkis) and Naomi Watts. Everything else was just ok.

rennervision

In all seriousness, some posters really should work as test screeners before a movie is released, because I agree with some of the suggestions on what should have been edited. A few scenes did feel like stuff you would find on the deleted section of a DVD, added back into the film.

A few mentioned the dinosaur stampede was unnecessary. I seem to remember hearing that "Son of Kong" was going to have a dinosaur stampede, but the idea was dropped due to budget and time constraints. I'm guessing that Peter Jackson wanted to include a dinosaur stampede as kind of a homage to the Kong legacy. Since I felt like I was seeing something that had taken over 70 years to get presented on screen, it helped me appreciate it more.

Dr. DVD

Actually, that's supposed to be our reaction, or at least I'm pretty sure. PJ makes it obvious Denham is responsible for Kong's death, and at the end it's obvious from the way he walks away alone from the crowd that he is now a ruined man. That's more or less Denham trying to dodge his obvious guilt.

Orbi-Wan Techno

I personally thought the bronto (diplodicus?) stampede and pile-up was one of the coolest things I've ever seen. And the V-Rex/Kong fight. Can't wait to hear and see in DTS at home!

Sonny Corinthos

I just got back from seeing the film and all I can say is Bravo! It's one of the best movies I have ever seen. The three hours seemed to fly by. I loved it and can't wait until the dvd is released.

Giantrobo

agreed on all points.

DVDTalker002

Terrible movie.

creekdipper

Just got back from seeing the movie. While we both thought it was well worth the money (bargain matinee with free popcorn) and really needs to be seen on the big screen, we agree with a lot of the assessments that it could have been better. My main gripe is that many of the CGI scenes, while thrilling, went on just too long. Tighter editing (maybe about 30 minutes cut) would have resulted in a better movie IMHO. The wife felt that there should have been more variety in the girl-ape interaction: too much sunset gazing and soulful glances. While I would definitely recommend the flick to anyone who enjoys epic action pics (liked it much better than the recent Harry Potter), there were some glaring errors. You can only push the audience's supension of disbelief buttons so far.

SPOILER ALERT!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tommyguns used to knock bugs off people? Ann being tossed about from hand to hand during Kong's battles...repeatedly?? The streets of New York going silent and empty during Kong's rampage?? Running under Brontosaures without getting squashed?? Many other later scenes in the movie belied the attempts to make earlier scenes as realistic as possible. Rather than seeing an extended version on DVD, I'd like Jackson to give us an edited version that increases the emotional impact while reducing the amount of screen time devoted to showing off the CGI. And I agree with the post that mentioned that it took Kong forever to fall off that building!!!! I'd give the movie an A- for technical achievement (while Kong was magnificent, some of the other CGI...especially that mixing humans with dinosaurs...looked fake in that it was easy to distinguish the humans from the backgrounds), but only give the story & acting a B-. I struggled to stay awake during the climactic scene even though I got a good night's sleep in anticipation. Oddly enough, I found the first hour to be the most compelling...and not a monster in sight!

Jason

I think (I hope) he meant the emotional impact, not the KER-SPLAT!

Fok

I thought it was good, but a bit slow in the beginning

Zodiac_Speaking

That's what I meant. I don't think PJ got it. in the '33 version, by that time you did feel sorry for Kong-that's why the film has an undying power and the PJ version won't be talked about in years to come (except being a BO failure).

Jazzbutcher

Personally, I thought it rocked. I especially loved all the nods to the 33 original.

Minor complaints:

Dino stampede seemed a little fake.
Kong walking down the Manhattan street--CGI looked like toy cars.
Hints at where Jimmy came from--no resolution
Heavy-handed use of Hearts of Darkness

iggystar

I thought that it was pretty good, but could have been trimmed by 30 mins at least--too long.

Kong and his relationship with Anne was movie perfection!

zero

I didnt think I was going to like this movie, but hey here I am! Saw it last night and it was great, well worth the price of admission.

Sunday Morning

King Kong was the best 10 minute movie i've ever seen. I can't vouch for the other 3 hours...I was asleep.

masbrad

Took my 10 yer old daughter and seven girls to see it for a birthday party. All of them were completely engrossed. When I told them how long the movie was afterwards they were blown away that it had actually been that long.


Personally I loved the film. It was easily my most anticiapted film of 2005 and after getting the recent 1933 release on DVD it made me anxious all the more to see it. Despite high expectations KONG came through.

I thought the first part was perfect not overly long, I loved seeing the 30s version of NY and thought the details here were amazing. I liked the slower pacing, character building. It seemed like the film continued to build momentum like a roller coaster going up the slow hill to start the crazy decent on the other side.

Visually I loved how Skull Island looked, I though the natives were scary as hell and so did the girls with me. The sets with overgrown temples, and long stairwells, added mystery and really help set the tone. I loved the updated wall.

The only thing I did not like in the movie was the stampede. It was just too much over the top. Almost to the point of being comical. After taking such measured careful buildup and setting such an awesome mood that scene just brought the movie to a jarring halt to me. It took away a lot of the mystery because it was the fakest special effects, very impossible in many ways, and a couple of times the dinsosaurs reminded me more of keystone cops the way they were sliding, falling, moving. I think cutting that scene out would have made the movie just flow better. Honestly i would have much rather had the rescue team tramp through the jungle more or maybe cruise through a ruin. Keeping up the tension and mood.

The only other aspect I wanted to touch on was the Haynes and Jimmy characters. I did not mind this storyline at all. I thought it gave a little depth to the crew so they were not just plain ol' cannon fodder or redshirts. Jimmy's character was also an example of a person "who was mostly wild" like an animal yet under tutelage was trying to improve himself. An example of how "a wild animal" could be tamed. Comparing that to either Denham or Kong is interesting.

Cancer Man

I came back from a screening of King Kong and I was very impressed by the movie, here is my brief review:

Special Effects

I thought the special effects were well rounded and nothing short of excellent. There were entire worlds that fully realised through cutting edge CGI and expert model work; Skull Island was a vibrant, exotic location, crawling with danger and terror, New York of the 1930s was well conceived and exciting. They had the architecture, costumes and vehicles of that distant time period down to a tee, and you could tell they put in allot of effort and research into making the Big Apple in the era of the Depression come to life. The locations of Skull Island and New York felt real and was made possible through the mind boggling combination of vast sets, CGI and models, brought together by the ever talented WETA Workshop; a special effects team that is now challenging the throne of the now tired and stagnant Industrial Light and Magic.

The creature effects are nothing short of stunning as well; the V-Rexes are very good CGI creations alongside Kong himself. The fight sequence between Kong and a pack V-Rexes is the high point of the movie. The dinosaur stampede is good silly fun. And who could forget the truly harrowing bug pit sequence?! And King Kong looks and acts like a real gorilla, and it looked like Peter Jackson wanted to put as much warmth and personality into Kong as possible, with the help of Andy Serkis of course.

I thought the native inhabitants of Skull Island were cool as well, with the Weta production team making them look like Pacific Island people gone wild on crack. It's really creepy that the production team hint that the Skull Island tribe are into mass cannibalism and bodily mutilation. I also liked the set design for the S.S. Venturra, with it's creaky Indiana Jones style charm.

Cast

I thought the cast was very solid, including the unfairly maligned Jack Black. The supporting cast is very good as well, with Andy Serkis (Lumpy the cook) and Thomas Kretschmann (Captain Englehorn) nearly stealing the movie, despite their comparatively small screen times. I liked Adrian Brody's role as Driscoll despite not being leading man material as such and the very talented Naomi Watts (Ann Darrow) proved to be the heart of film as she formed an emotional bond with the child like Kong. King Kong himself, however, is the real main character and not Driscoll. Part monster, part ape god, part lost, lonely and frightened child, King Kong is a "monster" you really feel sympathy for. I was close to tears when I saw the downtrodden Kong in chains in Carl Denham's gruesome and exploitative stage show in the New York theatre.

But at the same time, even though Jackson provides sympathy for Kong, Jackson does not shy away from the destruction Kong creates in his rampage through New York; at least thirty to forty bystanders probably died, either trampled under Kong's feet or crushed in the automobiles that Kong tossed around like toys. But I get the impression that Kong does not kill out of cruelty and spite, he kills like any terrified and cornered animal that is desperately defending itself in a hostile environment. King Kong is not a real monster, he is just some 25 foot tall gorilla with the emotions and mind of a small three year old child, who is frightened by the foreign surroundings of New York.

You could tell that Kong is a gentle and playful animal at heart, in the way he coddles Ann like a small kitten, sharing two sunrises with Ann and playfully sliding across a frozen lake in Central Park with Ann in his arms chuckling to himself, until Kong's last moment of happiness is ruined by a explosive shell "donated" by the National Guard. I was totally crushed when Kong finally plummets to his death from the top of the Empire State Building.

And I even liked Jack Black as the highly driven and exploitative Carl Denham. There is allot of controversy surrounding Jack Black's performance in King Kong and Jack Black's casting has split the critics and audience down the middle. Some people felt Black was miscast or acted poorly, while I thought he was a solid cast member that was well suited to the Cark Denham role given to him. I thought Black was perfect as the emotionally glib, deceitful and outright sociopathic Carl Denham, a very ruthless movie "director" that is purely motivated by profit and ego.

It is Carl Denham that is the real monster of King Kong and I suppose that is meant to be the whole point of the film. He fits the profile of a sociopath since he is a compulsive liar and natural charlatan that runs rings around his colleagues, plus he is a man that lacks any real compassion. Denham does not care about the safety of the Venturra sailors or even his own film crew, in his self motivated quest for Hollywood glory. And it's truly despicable in the way he captured and humbled a noble creature such as Kong, and then put Kong in some sordid freak show for the entertainment of New York's decadent elite. I was amazed that Carl Denham did not meet justice at the sole of Kong's feet, since I felt he had it coming. Carl Denham's reprehensible behaviour as King Kong's main villain made me ashamed to be human. I thought Jack Black did well and I would like to see him in more serious roles, but with more toned down characters, however.

Final Comments

I felt King Kong was well worth the admission price and I am surprised that it is doing relatively slow and low takings at the box office. I felt King Kong was faithful and respectful to the 1933 original and combined the best elements of more recent movies such as The Green Mile, Jurassic Park, any Indiana Jones movie and Titanic. To cut a long and rambling review short, King Kong is good; go an see it.

Mr. Cinema

I agree about Denham being the real monster here. I mean Kong is just an animal. Yes, he's a 25 foot animal, but still. He's taken away from his home and used as some sort of sideshow attraction.

Regarding the box office. I still have hopes it will end up with a hefty total. It has a worldwide gross of $160 million in 7 days. If it holds up well this weekend, then it'll have legs. The main competition is Fun With Dick & Jane, which is getting mostly negative reviews. The trailer didn't look that good either. Jim Carrey is usually a top opener, but I hope Kong can prevail.