King Kong:reviews

[Solid Citizen]

All Kong'd Out, Peter Jackson's "Heavens Gate"

We sat with just 50 other people in a 200 seat theatre to see my first & last viewing of Mr. jackson's so called revival of the 1933 classic. Jackson cast Jack (Can't Act) Black as the director himself. then spent the next three hours snipping @ mankinds cruelty to nature & the stereotyping of African Amercians from the original Kong. Almost every scene was excessive in length icluding the over done missing spider pit scene in this overall miscast movie.

For me the most exciting scenes were the Venture heading into the fog & being stranded on the rocks off Skull Island. Andy Serksis as Lumpy the Cook was very,very good.

In the final scene with the people standing around Kong's body from the back of the male extras heads all the fedoras appeared to come from the same supply source, same hats different colors.

Peter :cry:

PS Know many can't wait for the 6 hour directors cut with more of that thespian Jack Black in action.

PSS The .45 Tommy Guns had more rounds than Kirby's BAR on TV's classic
1960's "Combat"

 

[MrBern]

Could you imagine how disappointed we'd all be if this were a real piece of drek like the Godzilla remake???

 

[up196]

A new angle on the new KING KONG * * * SPOILER ALERT * * *

I saw the new King Kong, then watched the original 1933 movie on DVD and then went back and saw the new King Kong again. After seeing the new version a second time, I detected a subtle pretext, based on two scenes in the new movie, that in the new King Kong, I was watching the "actual" events on which the 1933 movie was based. Allow me to elaborate:

In one scene, in the taxi, Denham is trying to find a replacement leading lady and the dialog is:

Denham: Fay! Fay! What about Fay? She would be perfect!
Preston: She's already filming something for RKO.
Denham: Cooper! I should have known.

In another scene, when Kong is presented on stage in New York, the "native's" costumes and choreography are the same as shown on Skull Island in the 1933 film.

That's when it hit me. This movie is set in 1932, judging by the license plates on the cars, and, in fact, Fay (Wray) was filming something for RKO in 1932, The Most Dangerous Game, directed by Merian Cooper, and also starring Robert Armstrong (1933's Carl Denham). Cooper went into production on King Kong and filmed the two movies simultaneously, using the sets that were available from The Most Dangerous Game and the wall/gate from Intolerance: Love's Struggle Through the Ages (1916).

And so I came away with the impression that safari filmmaker Denham actually captured Kong, but that following the tragedy in New York, he was "scooped" on making the movie of the story by rival filmmaker Cooper at RKO, who used the sets and actors from The Most Dangerous Game along with some native costumes he got a deal on from the Alhambra Theater in New York.

Anyone else notice this, or am I just too willing to suspend disbelief?

 

[IndianaGuybrush]

It's a cool thought, and I did notice both the costumes and the 'Fay' line, but I just assumed them to be shout outs to the original.

I saw Kong today and thought it was really quite good. While I did see King Kong when I was very young, I was never one of the die-hard King Kong fans. Sure, I know it's a great movie, and I can still watchi it today and enjoy it, but I wasn't as outraged as some people were when they heard it was being remade. I thought Jackson provided an entertaining and worthy remake, which will undoubtably not live up to the reputation of the original, but which I was more than happy to spend my 7 dollars on (matinee).

My one major criticism of the film is how heavy handed it was. I remember in the original, not sympathising at all with Kong until the very end when he's being attacked by the planes. For me that was the beauty of it. You're rooting against this monster the whole time, then you find yourself hoping that he somehow pulls through in the end. This movie humanizes Kong to a very large degree, and ends up hitting you over the head with the message. Maybe that's what modern audiences need, but it was the weakest part of the film for me.

All that being said, I reccommend the movie to anyone, it's an excellent way to pass an afternoon.

 

[Hemingway Jones]

I still haven't seen it, but looking at the money it made, or should I say, didn't make, and reading the press coverage; I was wondering if any of you had an opinion as to why this film turned out to be such a financial failure?
$82MM for a film of this type at this point in time is not a lot of money. In contrast, "Chronicles of Narnia" is passed $127MM.
I find this very surprising. I would have bet that "Kong" was going to be huge.

 

[Doctor Strange]

I wouldn't write the big guy off yet. The film will be enormously profitable in the long run, possibly even before the DVD sales begin (and certainly afterwards, without question). It's doing very well in the overseas market.

It is not perceived as a kids film the way Narnia and the Harry Potter films are (the only films to recently do $100-mill in their first weeks), but let's see how it does in the next 10 days, during the school holidays. Contrary to the popular belief, it's not always "all about the first two weekends"...

 

[Solid Citizen]

Kong Profits!

Doctor & Hemingway, while Kong didn't set opening day records its grosses are starting to climb & Jackson's people reportedly appear confident over the Holiday/Post Holiday period the film together with international grosses & yes, as you stated eventual DVD sales will push them into the black (And I don't mean Jack Black (Sic)). Look it was Jackson himself who put 20+ million $ of his own Lord of the Rings profits into Kong since the studio wouldn't 100% fund themselves the 3 hour length picture he wanted to release.

When we left the theatre yesterday their were people commenting who liked it & others who didn't. I'm in the didn't like group, will not be buying the DVD or see a repeated viewing of the film. I'm sticking with the original 1933 classic! Peter :cry:

PS Hemingway I would enjoy reading your take on Kong after you see it?

 

[Hemingway Jones]

PS Hemingway I would enjoy reading your take on Kong after you see it?

I definitely need to see this and as soon as I do, I will post some comments here. Thanks!

 

[scotrace]

Advise?

My daughters are 9 & 13 and are begging to see Kong with Daddy. I'm game, but their mother says, "OK, but you're sitting up all night with the nightmares."
I can't find any guy friends with free time to see this and I REALLY want to catch it in theatres.
They are probably not as worldly as most kids their age. We wanted our kids to have an Eisenhower-years, Leave-It-To-Beaver sort of upbringing, and they have. But they have seen all three of the Lord of the Rings films 100 times.

Of those who have seen it, what do you think? Too intense for kids or not?

 

[IndianaGuybrush]

There are some very intense parts, that made even me squirm. Without spoiling too much, I'll use two words : "Bug Canyon" If your girls are not the "seasoned" movie veteran type, I would not let them see it until you see it first, so you can screen the parts you don't want them to watch.

 

[Doctor Strange]

If they're comfortable with the LOTR films, take 'em, by all means! The level of stylized violence is comparable, if more contemporary, with submachine guns instead of swords and arrows. Sure, there's some gross stuff, but it's all in good fun. If they like LOTR, definitely. Nightmares are unlikely!

My kids are a bit older - 12 and 15 - and we had seen the LOTR films in theaters the day after each one opened (meaning that my daughter was only 8 when she first saw Fellowship)... and many times on DVD since. They loved Kong. In fact, I think my daughter loved it even more than my son: she went in with no love for the original film, very skeptical, really only seeing it because of Peter Jackson (and me!)... and she was very moved.

That's the thing I would caution you about: the emotional aspect of the end of the film is (for many) quite hard hitting, Return-of-the-King-level powerful stuff. My daughter cried freely through the end of the film and was quite shaken for a while afterwards... but she loves that. (She had cried through most of ROTK. Heck, I can make her cry anytime NOW just by saying, "Rosie Cotton dancing... She had ribbions in her hair. If I were ever to marry anyone, it would have been her.")

 

[Twitch]

Hey up196- I noticed the subtle stuff too. As I said I watch the original an hour before seeing the 2005 and that way you notice the close parallels in exact script lines and storyline.

In 1971 I donated my time to a very small classic theater. The owner got ahold of the uncut version and invited all the principles to come to a viewing. Wray declined. Cooper attended. Special effect chief Willis O'brien had died but his widow was there. Marcel Delgado who made the models and worked on other effect attented.

I was able to hold the 18" Kong metal skeleton used for filming by then devoid of its furry skin. Concisely the people involved were using cutting edge techniques for 1932 special effects. And Cooper had wanted to develop the story and characters more to "something over 2 hours." David Selznick being the final word and the real money behind the venture didn't agree and what we see is it.

Copper's son had recently returned from Vietnam and brought his Dad a nice blue pipe which Cooper smoked that night but disappeared later no doubt picked up by a fan.

While I don't deny anyone their preferences in entertainment stuff like Jackson's Ring lore movies are way too lame for me. I quit watching one on HBO. That God I hadn't paid for it!

 

[Doh!]

There are some very intense parts, that made even me squirm. Without spoiling too much, I'll use two words : "Bug Canyon" If your girls are not the "seasoned" movie veteran type, I would not let them see it until you see it first, so you can screen the parts you don't want them to watch.

Agreed! At the very least, leave the 9-year old at home (it's rated PG-13, after all). The bug scene is pretty intense although not as gory as it could've been. Also, the natives on Skull Island ain't exactly the friendly type. Finally, towards the end when Kong is shot multiple times (sorry; did I give away the ending?) your girls might have an adverse, emotional reaction because at that point in the movie, Kong himself is seen as a sympathetic character so it's a lot like watching Bambi's mother die -- only more so.

On the other hand, I saw "Jaws" when I was only 11 and loved every minute of it!

 

[havershaw]

I saw this a week or so ago, and while I generally don't like remakes and I especially don't like any cgi stuff, I thought it was pretty great. I agree in general with Matt Deckard's assessment. The hats weren't right, a lot of the suits weren't right...and most of all, when Brody is in the hall of the ship without his shirt on, his pants are below his belly button. Pants of such low height seem pretty unlikely in 1932, if you ask me. The jungle clothes were pretty good, though JB's belted-back suit had way too big of a rear vent, if you ask me. And the fabric looked pretty cheap. Matt Deckard, why aren't you in movie costume design? There should be more folks with your eye to detail in that field. If we can spot the inconsistencies, why can't the folks who clearly get paid the big bucks?
Oh, and I agree with MK about the makeup. I also would have liked to hear more 30s colloquialisms in the dialogue. If you watch any of the Coen Brothers' period films (especially Miller's Crossing), they put in tons of that sort of thing, and I was hoping to hear more of that sort of thing.
Anyway, I thought overall it was pretty good. I'll probably go see it again because apparently my hearing wasn't damaged badly enough the first time.
Oh, one correction I have to make on something someone said earlier in the thread: George Romero most certainly did not remake NOTLD. Tom Savini directed it and from what I understand, Romero was not very involved. I've never seen it, so I can't really comment on how it stacks up against the original.
And also, if I recally correctly, that line about "When shark-a die, nobody cry. When Kong-a dies, everybody cry," was something DeLaurentis actually said to Tom Snyder on "Tomorrow" while promoting the film. I've always thought that quote is so awesome because he actually said it!

 

[DanielJones]

Finally got to see it today. Thoroughly enjoyed it. I went into it knowing Jack Black couldn't act, and thus, I was not disappointed in that. A digital Kong had more range of emotion than Black did. Silly huh? But my favorite character was Lumpy the Cook. Second was Hayes the first mate and the Captain. Cool characters. Now, the sign for the theatre that they were in looked a lot like the one for the Madison Square Garden marquee in Cinderella Man except it was on the other side of the street. Does anyone know if that theatre was across from MSG? Also did anyone notice the rat monkey reference on the ship from one of Jacksons earlier films? Too cool.
For those that haven't seen it, I would say check it out. Well done and well fleshed out.

Cheers!

Dan

 

[MrBern]

sith vs kong

So who was the better digital actor this year, Kong or Yoda?

 

[havershaw]

Kong had a blonde on his arm, which always gives an advantage...

 

[Doctor Strange]

Daniel - According to my dad, who grew up in Manhattan in the 20s/30s and was very much a movie and theater buff, there was *never* an Alhambra Theater on the east side of Times Square. (He said there was a theater with that name in NYC, but it was either far uptown or in the outer boroughs.) So, I'd say that's an example of the film's creative license in terms of recreating 1933 New York.

 

[MK]

.

I just finished watching the collectors metal box set. The documentry footage is amazing. I love the reproduction 1933 theatre program. Well worth the price of admission.

Now I have to watch Jackson's production diaries DVD set.

 

[The Wolf]

A hair question

I haven't seen the new Kong yet but I have a question for those who have.
Does Adrien Brody sport the same "period" haircut that Ryan Gosling had in "The Notebook"?

The Wolf