King Kong:reviews

[Marc Chevalier]

The definitive ?¢‚Ǩ?ìKing Kong?¢‚Ǩ? has not yet been made.


I just saw Peter Jackson?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s version. Fantastic cinematography, visual effects and sound effects. Lots of frenzied, acrobatic violence a la ?¢‚Ǩ?ìRevenge of the Sith.?¢‚Ǩ? A beautifully rendered Kong, who manages to be poignant yet not at all anthropomorphic. Generally insipid acting and lousy dialogue. The same flat ending as the 1933 version: ?¢‚Ǩ?ìT?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢was beauty killed the beast.?¢‚Ǩ? Yeah, sure.

Here?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s what would have been a better ending. As the filmmaker/impresario Carl Denham says this implausible ?¢‚Ǩ?ìbeauty?¢‚Ǩ? line, his scarred young assistant (and ?¢‚Ǩ?ìvoice of conscience?¢‚Ǩ?), Preston, appears behind him. Preston replies: ?¢‚Ǩ?ìT?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢was greed killed the beast?¢‚Ǩ?, and roughly shoves Denham onto the dead Kong. Denham bashes into Kong and falls on the ground. Stunned, he lifts himself up and gazes at his hands. They are covered in Kong?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s blood. The End.

 

[Zemke Fan]

Agree...

Here?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s what would have been a better ending. As the filmmaker/impresario Carl Denham says this implausible ?¢‚Ǩ?ìbeauty?¢‚Ǩ? line, his scarred young assistant (and ?¢‚Ǩ?ìvoice of conscience?¢‚Ǩ?), Preston, appears behind him. Preston replies: ?¢‚Ǩ?ìT?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢was greed killed the beast?¢‚Ǩ?, and roughly shoves Denham onto the dead Kong. Denham bashes into Kong and falls on the ground. Stunned, he lifts himself up and gazes at his hands. They are covered in Kong?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s blood. The End.

Remind me to let YOU read my next effort BEFORE I send it off to the script consultant. Could save myself $300!

 

[Marc Chevalier]

I've been thinking about this. Here's my final version of a better finale to the new KING KONG ...



CARL DENHAM (greedy, manipulative filmmaker/impresario): "It was beauty that killed the beast."

(Preston, Denham's long suffering assistant and voice of conscience, appears behind him.)

PRESON: "It was beasts that killed the beast."

(Preston roughly shoves Denham onto the dead Kong. Denham bashes into Kong and falls on the ground. Preston tosses a dollar bill to the ground next to Denham. A small corner of the dollar reddens with Kong's blood.)

PRESTON: "Here. Buy a ticket to the funeral."

(Preston turns and walks away. Denham, stunned, lifts himself up and gazes at his hands. They are covered in Kong?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s blood. He wipes his hands on Kong's fur and reaches for the dollar. Cue to music: Al Jolson's rendition of "We're in the Money." As the song continues to play, Denham rips off the bill's bloodstained corner and tosses it. He pockets the rest of the dollar and walks away -- disappearing into the crowd. The End.)

 

[Sefton]

I haven't seen the new version yet. Sounds like you did...and liked or disliked it? Interesting scene that you describe though....

 

[Marc Chevalier]

The new version ends as flatly as the old one did: with Denham's maudlin line, "T'was beauty killed the beast." What a load of hooey. It was criminal of the screenwriters to let that windbag have the final say.

 

[Absinthe_1900]

They changed the airplanes too.

It was Vought O2U "Corsairs" that killed the beast in '33. (Plus a couple of Consolidated trainers)

For this re-make they used replicas of Curtiss F-8C "Helldivers". (The full scale replica Helldivers did look nice from the photos I've seen)


End of wrong aircraft rant.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

I'll add to the commentary. Jack Black, the actor who plays Carl Denham in the new KONG, is made to look like a young Orson Welles. Interesting, in that Welles would have been a perfect Denham. Orson was selfish, demanding, megalomaniacal. He was also charming, highly intelligent, charismatic, and wholly immersed in his art.

 

[Twitch]

If we go back to the original we sure don't have any award-winning performances or any snappier script lines. There is nothing but the story that truly makes it unique.

Film makers are damned if they do and damned if they don't change things in any remake. Changing classic movies ends in remakes doesn't work. How would a 2006 Casablanca be reviewed if Rick had gotten on the plane with Ilsa?

 

[Twitch]

Why would anyone feel compelled to change the ending to the remake of any classic film?

 

[DanielJones]

Thanks for the spoiler gang.

Cheers!

Dan

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Daniel, buddy, who asked you to read this thread? Didn't its title warn you what it would be about? (My tongue-in-cheek answer to your tongue-in-cheek comment. :cheers1: )

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Why would anyone feel compelled to change the ending to the remake of any classic film?

Maybe because the ending of the classic film could have been better than it was.

By the way, how are you feeling? We've been sending our best hopes your way, Twitch.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

If we go back to the original we sure don't have any award-winning performances or any snappier script lines. There is nothing but the story that truly makes it unique.

But Twitch, there's always room for adding "award-winning performances" and "snappier script lines" to a remake. I mean, why not?

Film makers are damned if they do and damned if they don't change things in any remake. Changing classic movies ends in remakes doesn't work. How would a 2006 Casablanca be reviewed if Rick had gotten on the plane with Ilsa?

Hmmm ... George Romero's 1990 remake of his own 1968 "Night of the Living Dead" has a different ending from the original's. A better one, too, according to just about everyone who's reviewed it.

 

[Matt Deckard]

King Kong in review

Could spoil.
If you haven't seen the film... don't read.

Saw the film and thought the first moments were corny. The film progressively became better and better with a few points where the special effects were too overshadowing to be believable (too much blubbery dino-flesh). The end had a few more of those corny points, particularly circling some chartacter actors playing execs that were from the studio for which Jack Blacks character was supposed to be making a movie.

The costumes while in the Jungle I thought were dead on for the period.

The women's clothing and makeup in the city scenes I thought was very accurate for the early 30's. The men's clothing was a mess of what looked like custom made clothes with low cut armoholes and light weight fabrics. the men's hats were all modern. the crowns were low, there were too many tear drop shapes and their ribbons were all too narrow.

All together if I don't nit pick at the clothing I thought the movie was great.... If it didn't have the corny parts at the begening and end and stayed a little more serious at those points, I would put it at the level of Titanic.

On a scale of one to four I give the movie a four.

It had heart!

 

[Matt Deckard]

I like your ending... it's clever!

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Thanks, Matt!

And thanks, MK, for combining the two "Kong" threads into one.

 

[MK]

.

Agreed on most points. I have to say the make-up was too modern on Watts...especially the lipstick. Hair was terrible. Watts has flyaways like I have never seen in a golden era period film....even her show girl look! Don't even get me started on Brody's hair.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

MK, you're right. If a remake of a '30s film is going to be set in the same time and place and honor the original, it should maintain the same (and. in the '33 "Kong"'s case, outstanding) visual esthetic.

Personally, I would have preferred Uma Thurman in the role. She's apt to have the lean, hungry look of a struggling hoofer. Thurman has sad eyes or laughing eyes -- it all depends on the situation she's in. And she's tough to boot.

 

[Cousin Hepcat]

Thought it was a great movie all around.

tho the natives Were a bit too much Nightmare Fuel. sort of like you're watching an authentic style 30s film, then Bam, for a couple minutes you get dropped into the middle of the movie "The Ring"...

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Peter Jackson also directed the comedic zombie movie "Brain Dead" (also known as "Dead Alive"). 'Nuff said.