King Kong

I'd never seen this version up up until last night, and wasn't sure that I'd enjoy it anyway from clips I'd seen before the film aired at the cinema in 2005.

I stuck with it though and thought the special effects were spectacular!

I was hoping that the Gorilla wouldn't die in the end, but sadly just like in the original film he did. I was in flooRAB of tears.

I was hoping that he would get his revenge on Denham before he died.
 
Totally agree. I think the film is great, but the dinosaur effects were rubbish. Its a problem with filmmakers not knowing when to stop. One or two terrific CGI monsters is enough, but when they lay them on thick the magic disappears and the animation becomes sloppy. The whole Dinosaur rampage in the valley was terribly unconvincing (I know, I know it would never be real, but the green screen shots of the actors were so poorly merged with the animation).

In general the animation had that same comic book look like it does in the recent Star Wars films. After seeing how amazing Gollum was in the Lord of the Rings movies I was expecting more from WETA. But maybe they are just better at doing totally fantasy characters like in Lord of the Rings over those based in our reality.
 
I actually quite liked it up until Kong made its appearance, and the New York section seemed a bit tacked on.

The CGI stuff did lack a little though and for a time I thought it was watching The Phantom Menace judging by the way the actors interacted so poorly with some of the creatures. :D
 
I thought I was enjoying this until about half way through... when I realised it was only about half way through!

It just seemed to go on and on for far too long. In the end I gave up watching but on the whole it was a good film. Fairly decent CGI (though at times, the cast did look like cardboard cut-outs in front of it), nice scenery, great panoramic shots and the scenes in both New York (at the start of the film) and the tribal rituals were quite believable.

6/10... on what I saw of it. Will maybe be able to devote more time to it in the future.

--EDIT--

Oh yes and as mentioned above, the timing for advert breaks was absolutely awful. Terribly unprofessional, as if they'd just cut it at exactly 20min (or whatever) intervals, with no regard for what was happening in the film.
 
I watched it on DVD a couple of months back, and it is one of those films that it is best not to watch too frequently as you can become bored with it
 
Awesome in the cinema, not quite the same on tv. Jackson has to start nipping this "let's make this 3 hours long" obsession in the bud and fast.
 
This isn't the type of film I'd normally watch, but I did last night due to boredom. I really enjoyed it. I haven't seen the original but I thought they did a great job. I loved the length of the movie. It made it seem a lot more epic, and the scenery was fantastic.
 
That's my position too. I loved it. Really great remake. Didn't mind the length either. The missus said to me before we watched the DVD ages ago - "I don't want to watch a three hour movie about a big ape thanks", but I managed to coerce her into it and she ended up loving it.
 
Absolute dog of a film.:mad: It is totally embarrassing at times and those were just the scenes that made the final cut.

He obviously got really carried away by the success of LOTR and went to excess with this one.Talk about creating a monster.I dread to think what he's going to do next.

The Frighteners and Beautiful Creatures were excellent and underrated movies.I wish he would go back to making those kind of films.
 
ITV annoyed me too with their timing of advert breaks, they seem to cut it during the middle of an action scene...

And yes, it was a long film...do I remember rightly that kong doesn't appear until 50mins into the film?
 
Perfect film - I loved it. I think to attempt a remake of such an iconic film was very brave, and it really paid off.
Did the version they showed on TV include the lake creatures scene?
 
I tend to agree with you. It made perfect sense for the LOTRs films as they were based on a lot of detailed source material. But there realy was no excuse for KK. The original was less than 90 minutes. It was blatantly obvious where they were padding out King Kong. All those long gazes at each other and the camera were tedious.
 
A typical Peter Jackson film really, ie dull, overblown and overlong garbage with a naff plot and script.

The black & white original is no masterpiece (IMHO) but it's a damn sight better than Jackson's effort.
 
Back
Top