PDA

View Full Version : King Kong



Ravening Wh0re
14-12-2005, 18:56
So I just saw King Kong today. It was fun, looked pretty good and had nice fights.
But, a lot of scenes were just overly long! A bit more editing would have made this film flow so much better.
Also, Jack Black's character didn't really feel quite right. Maybe I expected something different (or maybe I expected him to shout "rock!").

I liked the fight with 3(!) T-Rexes and the Skull Island natives were truly savage and terrifying.

Anyone else seen it and agree?

TheSonOfAbbadon
14-12-2005, 19:04
[dino boffin]I haven't seen it, but they weren't T-rexes, T-rexes are smaller.[/dino boffin]

It looks like a good film and chances are I'll get it on DVD because I never leave the house.

Ravening Wh0re
14-12-2005, 21:04
[dino boffin]I haven't seen it, but they weren't T-rexes, T-rexes are smaller.[/dino boffin]

Yeah, Gorillas usually are smaller too :)
But we're talking about a film with creatures on a fantasy island.

ps, 3 Allosaurus (sp) doesn't have the same ring to it now, does it? ;)

devolutionary
14-12-2005, 21:09
Vatatosaurus Rex or something they're called. All the dinos are evolutions on older species. So they're technically V-Rexes ;)

I did not think it dragged in any way. If anything I thought some of the opening scenes in NY could have done to be longer, since it jumped a little to reduce time. Jackson told the full and complete story, which is what I wanted. Just don't go to it expecting solid action for 3 hours and you'll be fine. I rate it with RotK - less action, better acting.

Jack Black in a serious role was a bit disconcerting, but I think it worked well. He can pull off that disgustingly selfish work so well.

Cypher
14-12-2005, 22:22
I thought it was pretty brilliant. No other way to put it really. I could have sat there for another hour, I enjoyed it that much.

Only criticism was a few CG shots looked a bit weak, but they always do.

CELS
14-12-2005, 22:25
IIRC from the days of Jurrasic Park 1 and dinosaur enthusiasm, the allosaurus is smaller than the t-rex...

So, did anyone cry? Go on, you can tell me.

Inquisitor Engel
15-12-2005, 04:52
PJ's production diaries refer to it as a V-Rex.

Just got back from seeing it. WOW. Just wow. Amazing. There were just so many moments that were just awesomely jaw dropping, wickedly cool and heart wrenching.

Oddly enough, I didn't cry, although it was quite depressing when he died. The girl next to me sniffled a bit. I cried at various points in LOTR (Boromir and Gandalf's deaths because of the utter amazing portrayal and emotional impact, and the ride of Rohirrim and the coming of the Eagles just for the sheer cinematic beauty of it)

The fact that the movie is about KONG and not anyone else is also a credit to Jackson and his team's ability as writer/director/producers. The story is his, and doesn't have any dialogue for a good portion of it.

Jack Black was very impressive, even though his past work has to have you think "When is he going to say something funny?" he's completely in-character and totally there.

The illusion of him as a funny man drops away when he promises to make the film for Carl and donate the proceeds to Carl's family, giving the same speech as when Mike, the sound guy, died... they mean nothing to him. All he wants is the film and the fame...

Genius.

My full review will have to wait till January when it's published in the school paper I suppose, so I won't bother posting it here.

But wow, just wow. Easily the best film I've seen all year. The 30's titles and motifs, the early-cinema shots of extreme close-ups and easy angles across rooms, the startlingly accurate portrayal of depression-era New York (it wasn't all food lines and stock markey suicides!) everything.

Oh, and the V-Rexes make me long for a remake of the original Jurassic Park, with Spielberg, and as much of the original cast as possible. God that would be cool.

Kong is King. The end.

The pestilent 1
15-12-2005, 20:40
IIRC from the days of Jurrasic Park 1 and dinosaur enthusiasm, the allosaurus is smaller than the t-rex...

So, did anyone cry? Go on, you can tell me.


When the three Rex's were offed by that overgrown excuse for a great ape.
And those pathetic excuses for Raptors too, oh and the Saurapods.

Yeah, budding Paeleontologist :p

Scabby
15-12-2005, 20:51
and the coming of the Eagles .

Good I don't feel so bad. I cried too:cries: and felt like a big boob for it. Those poor little hobbits had gone through SO much:cool:

Inquisitor Maul
15-12-2005, 20:51
Hehe, Engel cries at movies :p

No offence ;)

Tom
15-12-2005, 21:56
Very, very good. IMO about half an hour too long (my **** fell asleep and when it does that for some reason it aches badly).

Jack Black was good, CGI was patchy but on the whole very good, and very, very well done in general.

4.4/5

TheSonOfAbbadon
15-12-2005, 22:41
Yeah, Gorillas usually are smaller too :)
But we're talking about a film with creatures on a fantasy island.

ps, 3 Allosaurus (sp) doesn't have the same ring to it now, does it? ;)

Yeah, but it's Kong, he has to be huge.

And CELS is right, Allosaurs are smaller, only one ton of meat on them compared to the 6 to 7 tons of a T Rex.

You can tell I spend my spare time, sitting at home watching Jurrasic Park 3 going "That's wrong, that's wrong, that's right... but that that and THAT, all wrong."

The pestilent 1
15-12-2005, 22:45
I sat and was awed by the Spinosaurus.
Considering all of about fourteen bones have been found it was pretty cool :D
And the grass, amazing how few people dont realise that grass didn't exist yet!

On a side note, why is it that the Spell-checker keeps denying me access on some days, but is fine on others? :eyebrows:

TheSonOfAbbadon
15-12-2005, 22:53
Is there a Spinosaurus in Kong? Or are you talking about Jurassic Park?

The one in Jurassic Park was far too big, and you'd never find something that big in a forest, and it wouldn't really pursue the humans that far.

Well, Jurassic Park was set in the present-day so grass does exist... but I would have reproduced the dinosaurs' environment almost exactly if I were running it...

I would have also used chicken DNA...

The pestilent 1
15-12-2005, 22:55
Jurassic park. :p
And jees did they thing go hell-for-leather to get them!
All that lovely prey, easily killed by somthing as big as he, and it chases a half dozen humans to hell and back? :wtf:
And theres a Fourth one on the way aswell i hear.

TheSonOfAbbadon
15-12-2005, 22:59
Yeah, and there were never terrosaurs[sp?] that big, and they'd keep well away from the water, and they wouldn't go after humans, and they'd keep under shelter when it's raining.

There can't be another one after all this time?!

We're getting off topic now...

The pestilent 1
15-12-2005, 23:07
Recent evidence actually shows that there were indeed "sky wales" (as the common folk have dubbed them ;) ) Absolutely bleeding massive if the estimates are correct ( a skull was found :rolleyes: )
Cant remember the wingspan exactly, but certainly bigger than my living and dining rooms combined!

And yes... err.
The film started a little slowly, but it was worth the wait!
I was whooping and punching the air when Kong got that first Bi-plane :p

Inquisitor Engel
15-12-2005, 23:14
Yeah, and there were never terrosaurs[sp?] that big,

Pterosaurs, Quetzalcoatlus had a wingspan of 40 feet, and Pteranadon (the type of Pterosaur the ones in JP3 are SUPPOSED to be) had wingspans between 25 and 30 feet.

That's big. Very big.

Oh, and the fact that Kong himself is fully CG is stunning - There wasn't one moment where I thought "Oh that's CG" even though I knew it was. He looked amazing and was utterly believable in every way, from hair to eyes to teeth, everything.

If you see it for anything, see it for Kong himself.

PSD
15-12-2005, 23:26
I cried at various points in LOTR (Boromir and Gandalf's deaths because of the utter amazing portrayal and emotional impact, and the ride of Rohirrim and the coming of the Eagles just for the sheer cinematic beauty of it)

You big girl.

Crazy Harborc
15-12-2005, 23:39
According to a couple of reviews I read/heard and a couple of promos....This remake/makeover is supposed to bring in some of the "flavor" of the original classic.

One reviewer commented about how long it was before Kong got on screen.:rolleyes: (It's likely the reviewer has never seen the original)

C. Langana
15-12-2005, 23:46
I like to enjoy films no matter how good/bad they are, should I see this before or after going to the pub?
It looks like I should start worshipping this Serkis chap in advance from what I hear, yay or nay?

Yog Sogoth
16-12-2005, 04:02
Well done all around. The first few scenes were a bit weak but once it got going it was great, 9/10.

As to the dinos not being realistic:

Who cares? Common now folks...it's a movie!

Tyra_Nid
16-12-2005, 07:32
And those pathetic excuses for Raptors too, oh and the Saurapods.

Yeah, budding Paeleontologist :p

Budding Paeleontologist!? I hope you dont really think they were raptors... raptors were less than half the size :p.


I thought Kong was a fantastic movie. Had a big stupid grin on my face throughout the entire Kong v 3x V-Rex scene.

wilting_laughter
16-12-2005, 11:34
I cried in LotR Rotk.

Kong? Brilliant film. I thought Jack Black was great actually. And the action sequences were very well done, although I remember there was one shot of a random crewmember getting killed that was so short it was pointless, CGI was good ... but I have an in-built high expectation of it nowadays - it looked CGI and was dissapointing in that respect.

Exterminatus
16-12-2005, 11:54
I cried in LOTR when saruman died

Kittah
16-12-2005, 11:57
People gave me strange looks when I yelled "F***in owned!" when the Captain came in with pistol blazing as they were about to get captured/killed by the natives.

Overall, I thought it was quite good. Very emotional in some parts though I can't say I felt so in a teary way.

The pestilent 1
16-12-2005, 13:40
Budding Paeleontologist!? I hope you dont really think they were raptors... raptors were less than half the size :p.


I thought Kong was a fantastic movie. Had a big stupid grin on my face throughout the entire Kong v 3x V-Rex scene.


Utah raptor grew to some six feet thankyouverymuch :p
My favorite species and all.
(all hail Robert T. Bakker!)

Anyone care to say what they were actually supposed to be, i was too distracted by the totally out-of-proportion heads (which made me think it was meant to be some kind of "teh Supa raptor king!1!1!1!")

Samoth
16-12-2005, 14:31
Great film, however I tend to nitpick. It's the nerd in me. Two things, which might have been the cinema's fault: The sound. The guns, even the .30 cal's, sounded like pop guns. Also, whenever anything big roared, it sounded more like a cow's yawn. I'm comparing this to, say: Naomi's scream. So I'm pretty sure it wasnt just the cinema's sound system not being up to spec.

Secondly: The pilot's and gunners were pathetic. Shwing - and a mish. Shwing! And a mish. Rinse, repeat. Were those prototpye planes, and prototype pilots? Little details like that annoy me no end.

Still, great movie. Second best of the year. First was Kiss Kiss Bang Bang.

CELS
16-12-2005, 14:51
Not impossible that they were in fact using the sound from yawning cows. IIRC, the birdies that the Nazgul were riding in LotR were screaming sounds sampled from donkeys.

Samoth
16-12-2005, 15:55
*is not sure if self is being made fun of*

TheSonOfAbbadon
16-12-2005, 16:08
Pterosaurs, Quetzalcoatlus had a wingspan of 40 feet, and Pteranadon (the type of Pterosaur the ones in JP3 are SUPPOSED to be) had wingspans between 25 and 30 feet.

Yeah, but a Quetzalcoatlus had a body as big as a man's, if my memory serves me correctly, where as the big things in Jurassic park had bodies three or four metres tall.

magnificent*
16-12-2005, 20:38
And the grass, amazing how few people dont realise that grass didn't exist yet!




I thought the no grass theory had been abandoned.

google news search

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4443696.stm
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn8336

There is a 65 million year old indian piece of **** with bits of grass in it. paleontologists describe the dung as "good ****"

Inquisitor Engel
16-12-2005, 20:43
Yeah, but a Quetzalcoatlus had a body as big as a man's, if my memory serves me correctly, where as the big things in Jurassic park had bodies three or four metres tall.

Big Q had a body larger than an average man, simply to be able to support the muscles required for the wings to even allow take-off (after that it glided) but yeah, it wasn't as big as the things in JP3.

I didn't say they were anatomically correct, I just said they were possible. ;)


I cried in LOTR when saruman died

OMG! Aren't you TEH SUPAR KEWL REBEL!!!!OMGoneeleven!11

:rolleyes:


Great film, however I tend to nitpick. It's the nerd in me. Two things, which might have been the cinema's fault: The sound. The guns, even the .30 cal's, sounded like pop guns.

Actually the guns sounded exactly like real guns sound. Like pop-guns. Movies have always had a problem making guns louder or "more manly" for decades. If a real gun went off in a store, most people would think it was a firecracker.

Cinematically though, it didn't work as well, you're right.


Also, whenever anything big roared, it sounded more like a cow's yawn. I'm comparing this to, say: Naomi's scream. So I'm pretty sure it wasnt just the cinema's sound system not being up to spec.

I don't think that's as large a fault of the movie, but the fact that we're all used to the eponymous Jurassic Park T-Rex roar. Kong sounded fine when he roared, but I was disappointed with the Rexes' roars.


Anyone care to say what they were actually supposed to be, i was too distracted by the totally out-of-proportion heads (which made me think it was meant to be some kind of "teh Supa raptor king!1!1!1!")

Neither the Rexes or the "Raptors" were supposed to be any particular kind of dinosaur, everything on Skull Island has taken a much different evolutionary path than it might have taken in a normal circumstance (ie, become extinct).

Then again Skull Island must really be MASSIVE to support (at least) three super-sized V-Rexes (descendents of T-Rex) an at least one entire herd of sauropods, and at least one giant ape. (Not to mention everything else on the island is massive!)

On the subject of support, did anyone else notice the numerous other "Kong" skeletons around his cave? I'd like to see more backstory there.

Did they just die peacefully? (In which case, why in full view, and why does Kong hang out there?) Are they his former rivals, whom he's killed? Is there another, female Kong elsewhere on the Island, to allow for procreation, or is he, through some fluke, the last Kong?

I'd like to go pickup the "Natural History of Skull Island" book now. :(

khyron
16-12-2005, 20:43
got a review for ya, as my duplicate thread was locked. http://www.khyron.net

The pestilent 1
16-12-2005, 20:51
Neither the Rexes or the "Raptors" were supposed to be any particular kind of dinosaur, everything on Skull Island has taken a much different evolutionary path than it might have taken in a normal circumstance (ie, become extinct).

Too true, i had not considered that (Bad Philip! No!)



Then again Skull Island must really be MASSIVE to support (at least) three super-sized V-Rexes (descendents of T-Rex) an at least one entire herd of sauropods, and at least one giant ape. (Not to mention everything else on the island is massive!)
Too be fair, those Saurapods arent around to compete for food anymore (was anybody else pissing themselves laughing as they fell over each other near the end of the chase? :D )



On the subject of support, did anyone else notice the numerous other "Kong" skeletons around his cave? I'd like to see more backstory there.

Did they just die peacefully? (In which case, why in full view, and why does Kong hang out there?) Are they his former rivals, whom he's killed? Is there another, female Kong elsewhere on the Island, to allow for procreation, or is he, through some fluke, the last Kong?
I had figured the the skeletons had been his family (we can assume that Kong is atleast faintly like his smaller cousin, the gorilla)
I don't really know why, but i had assumed that they were female as i looked at them, making Kong probably the last - and the sacrifices as some kind of attempt by the locals to "placate" his. Well. Hornyness.
If you notice, as he was swinging her about after initially capturing her, theree were many other skeletons with the same necklace on, maybe none of the other sacrifices had provided him with a good chase.
I almost can't belive im discussing the breeding habits of a Twenty-five foot gorilla.

Inquisitor Engel
16-12-2005, 21:18
I had figured the the skeletons had been his family (we can assume that Kong is atleast faintly like his smaller cousin, the gorilla)

It's possible, though I took away that there might only be a couple of Kongs on the island at one time, and the natives had been sacrificing people to the various Kongs, simply believing it was all the same being...

He is quite obviously a Silverback though.


I don't really know why, but i had assumed that they were female as i looked at them, making Kong probably the last - and the sacrifices as some kind of attempt by the locals to "placate" his. Well. Hornyness.

Possible. See above.

I don't see how anything that big can possibly see anything that small as a breeding opportunity though... Gorillas don't rape women simply because they're there. (Although there are extremely rare, and often unsubstantiated reports of this happening)


I almost can't belive im discussing the breeding habits of a Twenty-five foot gorilla.

I agree. And .... Sigged! ;)

The pestilent 1
16-12-2005, 21:26
I don't see how anything that big can possibly see anything that small as a breeding opportunity though... Gorillas don't rape women simply because they're there. (Although there are extremely rare, and often unsubstantiated reports of this happening)

No, but he did seem to calm down a whole lot with company of a species similar to his own.
(Okay, rather distantly)

And of course, the famous line of the film.
"And lo; the beast did look upon the face of beauty... and he was as one dead"
Well, I forgot the middle, and im not so sure on the wording, but you get the idea.

Edit:

I thought the no grass theory had been abandoned.
...
There is a 65 million year old indian piece of **** with bits of grass in it. paleontologists describe the dung as "good ****"

Ho. Ly. Crap.
Very late Cretaceous, but still, and important discovery.
ofcourse i doubt most people would see what's so interesting about fossilised grass, but meh.

Inquisitor Maul
16-12-2005, 21:48
Actually the guns sounded exactly like real guns sound. Like pop-guns. Movies have always had a problem making guns louder or "more manly" for decades. If a real gun went off in a store, most people would think it was a firecracker.

Errr. have you ever been in the same room as a gun? Expecialy a .30 cal? Those things make you halv-deaf if you're not wearing ear-defenders. Trust me, I've tried that and it's bad enough with protection.

A normal assault rifle (5.56 mm) can mess with your hearing aswell if you're unlucky.

Inquisitor Engel
16-12-2005, 22:02
Errr. have you ever been in the same room as a gun? Expecialy a .30 cal? Those things make you halv-deaf if you're not wearing ear-defenders. Trust me, I've tried that and it's bad enough with protection.

Something in a room sounds distinctly different some something in the open. ;)

magnificent*
16-12-2005, 22:41
I have heard shotguns and rifles (other than a 22s) in the open and they are undeniably loud, louder than childrens toys but maybe not the screaming brats using them. Maybe pistols and hence Tommyguns are not that loud I have never heard one.

I have found childhood memories of my crazy cousin getting a ridiculous amount of cap gun
"charges" and setting them all off at once with a hammer. Our parents thought we were firing a rifle.

Nineswords
16-12-2005, 22:59
IM looking forward to seeing it.

Incidentally, the phrase 'KONG MY WHOPPER' at participating Burger King (tm) branches in the UK is causing great hilarity.

The pestilent 1
16-12-2005, 23:00
IM looking forward to seeing it.

Incidentally, the phrase 'KONG MY WHOPPER' at participating Burger King (tm) branches in the UK is causing great hilarity.

I hadn't noticed that :D
It would almost be worth it to go to Chesterfield burger king...
No. Kerri (pronounced Kiri apparently :wtf: ) Works there.
She was rejected for a job stacking shelves at tescos.

Tom
17-12-2005, 00:35
No. Kerri (pronounced Kiri apparently :wtf: ) Works there.
She was rejected for a job stacking shelves at tescos.

But...


But that's impossible!

:eek: :cries:

Lavfluris
17-12-2005, 17:44
No one else noticed that the Rexes had three fingers instead of two in homage to the original 1933 movie? Shame on you all. ;)

Additionally, Peter Jackson has mentioned in a recent interview for Total Film magazine that Kong was the last of his species, which had slowly but surely fallen to the Rexes. The bones of his dead relatives were there to reinforce his loneliness and perhaps longing for a kindred spirit, i.e. Ann, who is also very much alone.

Anyway, enough twittering, Kong was a great movie and I enjoyed it. The graphics were flawless and are probably the standard for which Iíll measure all future movies against. The story was also believable and the characters likeable. If only the final scenes didnít start my vertigo off I would have loved it all. Ha ha. :p

Inquisitor Engel
17-12-2005, 22:43
No one else noticed that the Rexes had three fingers instead of two in homage to the original 1933 movie?


Which, whilst a nice homage, it makes no sense from an evolutionary standpoint, if the Rex arms were (apparently) shrinking and lessening in fingers, why would they grow another? ;)

But yes, homage, good catch Lav.


Additionally, Peter Jackson has mentioned in a recent interview for Total Film magazine that Kong was the last of his species, which had slowly but surely fallen to the Rexes.

Makes sense. I wonder how long he has been the last of his species...I still need to find the Illustrated History of Skull Island...


If only the final scenes didnít start my vertigo off I would have loved it all. Ha ha. :p

"Air" the Ride is calling Lav... you know you regret not joining us. ;)

I kid, I kid. :) Some of those shops were damned nutty looking, where he grabs the support strut of one plane and throws it into other, then we watch them fall... awesome.

Bitterman
18-12-2005, 00:01
First poster, loooooong time lurker here. I watched to it recently, and I really enjoyed it. The better part was when they were in the island, of course. After that, the movie was a bit like "well, letīs see how kong falls from the rooftop...:o".

I noticed the 3 fingers in the V-rex since the beggining :D. I loved how Weta workshop has designed their look, it looks a cross between a crocodile and a Tyrannosaurus, which makes it even more reptilian than the JP T-Rex, and also, more evil looking. But come on, 3 V-rexes were too much! I mean, they should have won. Of course, this would not happen, since it is Kongīs movie, right :p?. All in all, I loved that part of the film.

The movie has inspired me in converting a Great Knarloc into a Carnosaur...:evilgrin:.

cya!

Samoth
18-12-2005, 03:19
I sort of agree, I was really getting into the whole search/exploration/myster of/for the island. And the natives, of course. I really liked that first part of the movie, about half way through the ocean voyage, till they got kong to n.y.

The Dragon Reborn
18-12-2005, 04:12
All I have to say is Peter Jackson is a golden god, and I know I have just crossed into fanboy land but, WOW

great movie, hopefully we see more from tom hanks son and jack, they have orange county and kong together why not keep it going?

Slappy
18-12-2005, 08:12
I saw and thought it was the most predictable film I have ever seen. I dozed off about halfway through it thinking of some comics I had read earlier in the day.

The only parts I liked where the big nasty bugs and those uncurcumsized penis monsters. Other than that it was mostly a waste of my time and money. It just felt tired. Uninspired. Predictable.

At this point, I don't want Peter Jackson to make anymore films, but that's not gonna happen. He's part of the system now.

I want to buy jars of chloroform now and make bombs and stuff out of them.

hellbrecht
18-12-2005, 13:51
And of course, the famous line of the film.
"And lo; the beast did look upon the face of beauty... and he was as one dead"
Well, I forgot the middle, and im not so sure on the wording, but you get the idea.

I think it's "And lo; the beast did look upon the face of beauty, and beauty stayed his hand. And from that day forward he was as one dead."

Awesome movie, definately in my top ten. I am only 15 though, so I haven't seen a great many. The CGI was flawless, the characters well acted, and Kong, the greatest CG or otherwise monster I've ever seen.

I went to see it twice myself, once with my friends and once with my family. A funny thing was on both occasions, people in the audience clapped.

Now the next movie to be made here in Wellywood is Halo, and hopefully I will be able to be an extra in it somewhere.It's very funny watching you're tiny(by global standards) hometown become a moviemaking mecca.

The pestilent 1
18-12-2005, 23:08
I think it's "And lo; the beast did look upon the face of beauty, and beauty stayed his hand. And from that day forward he was as one dead."


Knew it was somthing like that, cheers. :D

redemptionist15
19-12-2005, 00:10
Originally Posted by Inquisitor Engel
I cried at various points in LOTR (Boromir and Gandalf's deaths because of the utter amazing portrayal and emotional impact, and the ride of Rohirrim and the coming of the Eagles just for the sheer cinematic beauty of it)

You big girl.

Agreed :)

Im looking forward to seeing Kong. I love PJ's work and Kong has always been a favourite character of mine.

Wiseman
19-12-2005, 01:44
i thought kong was great, saw it last night my biggest complaint was that it was promoting bestiality throughout the whole movie, did you see the look that she gave the monkey the whole time.

Inquisitor Engel
19-12-2005, 02:07
i thought kong was great, saw it last night my biggest complaint was that it was promoting bestiality throughout the whole movie, did you see the look that she gave the monkey the whole time.

That's an extremely immature way to look at it.

She tried running away ad nauseam until he saved her life and did everything to save her, even putting himself in dire danger.

Ann loves Kong in the same manner an owner loves an extremely loyal dog, one that has saved his life. Whilst Kong might have an infatuation that's a tad more primal than Ann's (although as I said earlier, I doubt he has any desire to mate with any human), its still the same kind of extreme dog/pet/owner loyalty and love.

Wiseman
19-12-2005, 02:25
That's an extremely immature way to look at it.

She tried running away ad nauseam until he saved her life and did everything to save her, even putting himself in dire danger.

Ann loves Kong in the same manner an owner loves an extremely loyal dog, one that has saved his life. Whilst Kong might have an infatuation that's a tad more primal than Ann's (although as I said earlier, I doubt he has any desire to mate with any human), its still the same kind of extreme dog/pet/owner loyalty and love.
I was only mucking around Engel:p

The Native
19-12-2005, 02:28
Great movie. One of my favorites, instantly, but I'm bias I assure you.

I knew the basic plot but hadn't see the original so I feared it would be an hour of getting Kong then 2 hours of him swinging around NY. Thankfully, it was the other way around.

Not to sound too partisan (who am I kidding, I'm as partisan as they come towards my country!) but people who dislike it because it was "too long" or "too predictable" should actually get a clue and look past the face value of the film. But I doubt they will.

Slappy
19-12-2005, 06:31
look past the face value of the film

Well that's hard to do when it was almost 3 hours of computer animation, people running around and yelling while being chased, and stuff being destroyed by giant monsters. Yea, real deep film. I guess I'm just too stoopid to see past the "face value."

Man, I'm 24 years old and I have seen a gazillion movies. If your going to take $8.50 of my money and 3 hours of my life, you better show me something completely new and unique, something different. King Kong was the complete opposite. It's a story that's already been told, with special effects we have already seen a hundred times, and a directing style that got old in the 10th hour of the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

I thought maybe, just maybe, there would be something in it worth seeing and there was. The uncircumsized penis monsters.

Not to mention all the dumb stuff in the film, like them shooting King Kong with guns and him not dying. Like them running underneath those Saurpods and not getting trampled. Like a V-rex going after the girl WHILE he was scrapping down a big meal. Like when the guy shoots the little bugs off him with the tommy gun. I felt like I was watching a cartoon at points. So unrealistic it hurt. I can suspend belief up to a certain point in a film like this and then once it crosses the line I just lose respect for it.

When the movie ended, some kid put his hands in front of the projector and made stupid little animal shapes with moving mouths and stuff. We laughed our asses off while he was doing it. So worth it just for that.

The Native
19-12-2005, 17:13
Man, I'm 24 years old and I have seen a gazillion movies. If your going to take $8.50 of my money and 3 hours of my life, you better show me something completely new and unique, something different. King Kong was the complete opposite. It's a story that's already been told, with special effects we have already seen a hundred times, and a directing style that got old in the 10th hour of the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

Then why go see it then? It’s been said it’s a homage to the original, people know Petter Jackson uses a lot of CGI and if you’ve seen the 10th hour of the LotR trilogy then you’ll know what this movie will be like.

Do you stick pins in your eye just to see if it’ll hurt?


Not to mention all the dumb stuff in the film, like them shooting King Kong with guns and him not dying. Like them running underneath those Saurpods and not getting trampled. Like a V-rex going after the girl WHILE he was scrapping down a big meal. Like when the guy shoots the little bugs off him with the tommy gun. I felt like I was watching a cartoon at points. So unrealistic it hurt. I can suspend belief up to a certain point in a film like this and then once it crosses the line I just lose respect for it.

You’re not very bright are you? How can you expect realism from a genre like that, a movie like that and a director like that? If you want realism go to a documentary festival.

You’re poking holes in the movie just because you feel pissed that your excitement gland wasn’t massaged.


When the movie ended, some kid put his hands in front of the projector and made stupid little animal shapes with moving mouths and stuff. We laughed our asses off while he was doing it. So worth it just for that.

You should go back to kindergarten, that's where you belong.

Slappy
19-12-2005, 19:46
That's what I keep telling people but the schools won't let me back in.

ArtificerArmour
19-12-2005, 19:58
I saw the original for the first time today, and my God, its was brutal! Kong was rampaging, throwing people down ravines to their death, scrapping with the local populus like a true chav and randomly killing people as they slept!

I loved it. It has only aged in the acting styles. I'm busting to go see the remake.

Inquisitor Engel
19-12-2005, 22:18
I loved it. It has only aged in the acting styles. I'm busting to go see the remake.

It's not QUITE that violent (or it may well be, simply in a different way). But it's an awesome, awesome movie. Upon release of the extended DVD (though unlike LOTR, the thought of a longer version doesn't fully excite me) I'll see just how well it stands up to repeated viewings.

Then I shall see if it belong in my Top 10.

Lurker
20-12-2005, 00:23
I saw it last night, I really enjoyed it. I was quite surprised by how they portrayed Kong as an emotional creature opposed to just being a brutal killing machine.

Hey Engel I’m curious what movies are in your current top 10 that Kong would have to beat?

m1s1n
29-12-2005, 17:59
I really hated this film.
It was way too long for starters. I do not mind long films, but if the film is empty of real substance I do not want to waste my time with empty, unmotivated scenes. There is so much in this film that is in dire need of being cut. The empty exposition stuff at the begining . . . and well . . . most of the island. Why do we have to watch an entire minute of footage from Anne's perspective as Kong lobs her around? Why does the tribe create a ghost effect when they capture the "Good Guys"?
There are so many plot holes, inconsistencies, and unmotivated moments in this film that it is almost unwatchable. Willing suspension of disbelief will only take you so far. How can you have an island of uber-aggressive creatures? If everything is attacking and killing everything else how are you capable of having a sustainable ecology--especially on an island of limited size, resources, and capacity? And since when did bats attack gorillas--let alone something their own size?
What this film really needed was a director that wasn't the producer, and an editor that wasn't the director. That way the overly spectacular--for the sake of being spectacular (3 T-rexes? 3!?) would have been cut or never shot. And what happened to the tribe? Do they just disappear? That's a lot of people to just vanish. They were probably swept away by their mothership after the monkey shows up.

Sure, the film was amazing to watch at parts. King Kong was animated better than 90% of the CG out there. The relationship between Anne and the beast was well crafted as well. However, Jack and Anne's relationship is again--an unmotivated plot gimmick to move the story forward. We get that Jack loves Anne, but does Anne ever do anything to show that she loves Jack as well?

This film would have been so much better if it were an hour shorter and better organized. Instead of playing the homage route Peter Jackson should have tried to make a better movie.

tzeentchgiant
29-12-2005, 18:19
Saw it last night too, suffice to say I was deeply impressed by the visual aspects of the CGI masterpiece, but overall, my opinion about some of the plot points and holes remains consistent with m1s1n, the whole film could have been shorter, and a lot of it seemed to just be an indulgence for Mr. Jackson.

Did anybody else notice the massive gorilla skulls in Kong's layer? Doesn't that mean there were more of them/him?

I preferred the original, just so amazing for its time, like Sinbad, a real classic, this one I may purchase, but if with the extended scenes etc, I think it may well top 3 hours 30 minutes, which might make it unwatchable.

A couple of points though, amazingly violent for a 12a, overall nicely done violence too, quite spectacular. The bugs were completely superfluous, an indulgence, but very creepy, a lot of shuddering going on in the cinema. Kong’s death scene left me very disappointed; it lacked the heart-warming character of the original, seeing Kong fall as he does made it slightly humorous (to a degree), and detracted from the tear-stringing death it could have been. The opening was very tiresome, and I think PJ may have invested too much into certain characters, such as Jimmy, I came out of the cinema despising him, and the helper boy of Jack Black’s, whose name eludes me, he seemed to play be a more important character than he should have been for his development, I think his story could have been expanded a bit in-place of the baboon Jimmy.

Oh, m1s1n, the bats could be like “vampire bats” which are known to regularly suck the blood of cows, despite being mouse sized, so that wasn’t the most unreasonable part of the film.

I do have more to say, but I'll save that for another time, I would appreciate if someone could suggest a reason for the gorilla bones in Kong's layer, I would love to know more about that, thanks,

EDIT: Just read khonna's post, seems vaild enough (although I'd love to have the oportunity to imagine the whole Kong family tree)

TG

m1s1n
29-12-2005, 18:24
Yes, but vampire bats sneak up on sleeping animals and make a small bite on the animal, then drink the blood--they don't swarm, nor do they attack.


I actually liked the bones in the lair because they gave some type of motivation for Kong's lonliness. Somehow . . . for no stated reason . . . he is the last of his kind. It makes more sense than Kong just being there.

RampagingRavener
29-12-2005, 18:26
The bones were also something I wondered about...Kong seems to have rather a short temper in the film, mabey the rest of his group (don't know the name for a herd/pack/whatever of Gorillas) did something to anger him, so Kong killed all of them? And thats why he didn't kill Ann, because he was lonely?

Mabey food was short and some of them starved. Or mabey food was short, so Kong killed and ate the others?

tzeentchgiant
29-12-2005, 18:26
Yes, I liked it too, those sorts of bits in films are the parts I remember, adds character and depth, good things to use your own mind to think up the events that made them happen.

Blah, that's a grammatical nightmare

RR: khonna said that PJ stated in an interview that the rexes had killed off all his relations, although I wouldn't put it past kong to have a go at a couple of them.

TG

m1s1n
29-12-2005, 18:33
How could the Rexes have gotten up into that area? They don't seem to be agile enough. Then again--this helps to prove my point. How can you have a stable ecology of overly aggressive animals? Eventually everything will go crazy because of the lack of balance until balance is restored (at which point the overly aggressive animals would have gone extinct or evolved into less aggressive).

tzeentchgiant
29-12-2005, 20:49
Who's to say Kong didn't beat off the rexes after his relatives died, then drag them back up the hill?

Another point I wondered about it, in the original, didn't kong live in a giant skull shaped mountain, or am I getting confused, anyway that's not the point.

Another thing I noticed is, they all cross the island in a day, how could something that small contain that many huge monsters! Well, witout arguing over the realism, I thought it was quite an enjoyable film.

It was an effects-fest, I'll leave it at that.

TG

BlazeXI
29-12-2005, 23:27
Just seen the film today.
I was not bad, but not excellent either.
Did you notice it the scene when Kong frees himself and runs rampage through NYC, Ann comes to him and clames him down. they go iceskating in Central Park. He must be some 2 tons in weight at least, yet the ice does not break under him. So I'm judging it must have been at least -10 Celsius.
And Ann is wearing a summer dress. Her skin does not react to cold (apart from nipples:evilgrin: ). So there is an inconsistency for me.
The scene of the ship crashing against the rocks, the 3 Rexes fight and Kong fending of the plane where the highlights of the movie.
My favourite character: the sailor with one eye constantly closed with tatoo on his neck;)

m1s1n
30-12-2005, 00:26
My favourite character: the sailor with one eye constantly closed with tatoo on his neck;)

Yeah, that's Andy Serkis. He motion captured King Kong and Gollum. I think his performance was really good as well. Aside from interesting comic relief it was interesting to see him in that role--which feels so different from the CG characters he usually models.

Melchor
30-12-2005, 00:32
Yeah, that's Andy Serkis.

I didn't recognise him until I read the credits on IMDB. :) He's one of my fave characters.

I really enjoyed it by the way, though it could have done with some scenes cut short. It's also good to see JB in a different roll than usual. :cool:

BlazeXI
30-12-2005, 07:27
Yeah, that's Andy Serkis. He motion captured King Kong and Gollum. I think his performance was really good as well. Aside from interesting comic relief it was interesting to see him in that role--which feels so different from the CG characters he usually models.

I knew the face was familiar, but did not have a clue where I have seen it. I did watch making of Gollum long time ago.

As to Jack Black the only film I've seen with him is Water World (from the list in IMDB.com) but can't recall him. So I have no drawback of labeling him as a comic actor. To me he was pretty convincing as a guy who would sell his own mother to achieve his goal.

Aurelien
30-12-2005, 08:29
Saw it a few days ago, and enjoyed it very much. For the most part.

I thought when they were being attacked by all the bugs and were dying like flies was a bit over the top (beyond even the 3 v-rex fight). They got recused by others twice in the film, I tihnk once was fine, but the second time was too much.

I guess a lot of the film was like that, overdone, but hey, I had a good time, and I'd see it again, so thats a good rating in my books.

TheHood
30-12-2005, 10:04
I watched it the other day and have to admit, I walked out unsure of how I actually felt about it. Even now, 3 days later I can't actually tell you whether I really liked it or really disliked it. I came out with a 'meh' reaction I think. :p

I was really pumped to see this before I went in, I love the original and I love Peter Jackson's other work so I was hopeful that I would enjoy this one...

But I found it rather boring. There was far too much needless elements presented that lengthened the film for me. I felt the 3 hours + I was in the cinema, something which has never happened before.

Individual parts were cool - the Kong v 3 Rex fight, the Empire State building... but this was largely offset by long, boring parts that frankly bored the pants off me.

So, I guess I feel that this is a largely average film for me. I understand that it was a dream project for PJ but it didn't rate with me I'm afraid. :( 5/10

Wraith
30-12-2005, 10:12
I saw it on Boxing day and though it was excellent.

Many people complain about the length but I thought it was perfect -- I wouldn't have shortened it.

I'll be honest I was far more interested in the skull island parts than anything else -- the dinosaurs, the natives, the bugs, bats, and of course Kong.

When Kong was brought back to NY I was just waiting for him to die really...

Favourite character? Andy Serkis as the ship's cook.


Has anyone else got this book (http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1416502580/qid=1135678984/sr=8-1/ref=pd_ka_1/202-1934772-9792614) by chance? I think I might get it...

Baggers
30-12-2005, 12:21
Well I saw Kong last night, and I was unimpressed. I saw the orginal for the first time about three weeks ago and enjoyed that more then this remake.

Now don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the film, I love the action secuences, Jack Black and his Cornia acting (pun intended) but somehow it was just not as good as the oginal. Maybe becasue its not groundbreaking like the orginal or maybe I am more picky about a great film.

There was an awful lot of green and blue screen scenes that looked rushed and had been knocked out in about ten minutes or so.

Overall a dissapointing six out of ten.

I think this sums up the Year 2005 in terms of film, there has been a lot of potential for some really great films with great stories but really these films rarely live up to thier potential.

Strictly Commercial
01-01-2006, 17:17
There was an awful lot of green and blue screen scenes that looked rushed and had been knocked out in about ten minutes or so.


Agreed. I wanted to like this film, because the story was told pretty well, but the FX stuck out like a sore thumb in so many places. I thought Jurassic Park looked better, as far as dinosaurs went, but the bugs and the New York scenes were pretty tight.

Also, the part where they just "floated" to Skull Island after changing course was sort of "deus ex machina" for me, a bit difficult to believe with 360 degrees of the compass they end up there (it may not have been as untenable a plot device as it seemed in the theatre, but the moment I first saw it, it did).

plasmadaemon
01-01-2006, 20:10
Saw the film two days ago, not much to comment about it as you guys already teared it appart, but I must say I liked the way Jackson made the film very long: normally in films you don't get enought information from individual scenes and it ends way to quicly (Narnia, Madagascar etc..), but this film goes at a nice smooth pace which you can keep up with, mixed in with action throughout.

On terms of CGI, overall they weren't up to a good standard in pretty much 1/3 of the film, not the actuall graphics but the merging and blending, in them 1/3 parts of the film, the graphics were crudelly sliced together- like in the scene with Kong and Anne up the mountain- the setting sky was shaking against the *real* rocks that were on the shooting set. They were badly merged together.

Overall this is a great film, lovely views, CGI and acting, but PJ should have had more time to work on the CGI merging. :)

Icewalker
02-01-2006, 04:06
Agreed. Could have been better. Some of the scenes were overly long, but all in all it was a good movie. I can't believe that Kong was Andy Serkis; doesn't he ever get out of those suits? :D
Anyway, it was cool; the natives were really freaky and the sailor who got eaten by those leach thingies was incredibly creepy; I didn't like that scene with the bugs and all. Fun movie; one I don't think I'd be able to sit through again though. I kept thinking whenever I saw the Engelhorn dude "That's Faramir right?"

plasmadaemon
02-01-2006, 09:35
...and the sailor who got eaten by those leach thingies was incredibly creepy...


Seconded :D

I'd love to know how it feels like having 3 of your limbs and a head slowly devoured by a slug :eyebrows:

Baggers
02-01-2006, 14:58
Captain Engelhorn was played by Thomas Kretschmann. The only other film he is that I know about is# Resident Evil: Apocalypse. But he was pretty decent.

Apple Dave
02-01-2006, 15:03
Overall it was an ok film, good fights and stuff, nice CGI bits it just seemed to lack something but i cant quite put my finger on it.