King Kong
- Thread starter Big.Wayne
- Start date
I thought it was a brilliant film. Probably the best film I've seen in the cinema since LOTR.
I loved the way Kong moves it's captured brilliantly. Also the way he emotes adds huge weight to the scenes between him and Anne. Some of the CG looked a bit iffy though, overall I would give it 9/10.
I loved the way Kong moves it's captured brilliantly. Also the way he emotes adds huge weight to the scenes between him and Anne. Some of the CG looked a bit iffy though, overall I would give it 9/10.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 8,495
- Location
- Essex
Balddog said:
In 1933 obviously
Hands down one of the best "blockbuster" movies ever made in my opinion :-
- ANY film that make 3 hrs fly by is a quality movie
- ANY film that's 3 hrs and you don't want it to end is unique
The first hour didn't drag, nor was it unnecessary or out of place, The film wasn't too long - If they'd pushed the first hour into 15-20 mins everyone would have said "No character development" - Jackson can't win
If the film had been 2 hours of Kong with little else everyone would have been like CGI CGI CGI blah blah blah,the main plus point of the film, namely the emotional/human side of Kong would have been missing, THIS is what stands THIS film above all other similar films, You cared about Kong, he wasn't just a Godzilla / Jurassic Park whatever...........
The pace of the films was perfect, the acting in particular the lead lady was fantastic, the casting/characters was great, not cliche annoying characters, the CGI for the most part was the best to date as it had to be believable, the fight scenes were worth ticket price alone
The 1930's NY was recreated amazingly, it was emotional in places too, How anyone can give this 5/10 is beyond me, I's say 8.5 or 9/10
So glad no other director got their hands on this, Cant imagine anyone doing anything as close to what Jackson has done
Those saying theyve seen it all b4 - why go see it then ? were you expecting shawshank 2 or something
Even with CGI aside, Kong is one very very good film
- ANY film that make 3 hrs fly by is a quality movie
- ANY film that's 3 hrs and you don't want it to end is unique
The first hour didn't drag, nor was it unnecessary or out of place, The film wasn't too long - If they'd pushed the first hour into 15-20 mins everyone would have said "No character development" - Jackson can't win
If the film had been 2 hours of Kong with little else everyone would have been like CGI CGI CGI blah blah blah,the main plus point of the film, namely the emotional/human side of Kong would have been missing, THIS is what stands THIS film above all other similar films, You cared about Kong, he wasn't just a Godzilla / Jurassic Park whatever...........
The pace of the films was perfect, the acting in particular the lead lady was fantastic, the casting/characters was great, not cliche annoying characters, the CGI for the most part was the best to date as it had to be believable, the fight scenes were worth ticket price alone
The 1930's NY was recreated amazingly, it was emotional in places too, How anyone can give this 5/10 is beyond me, I's say 8.5 or 9/10
So glad no other director got their hands on this, Cant imagine anyone doing anything as close to what Jackson has done
Those saying theyve seen it all b4 - why go see it then ? were you expecting shawshank 2 or something
Even with CGI aside, Kong is one very very good film
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 1,853
- Location
- Tonbridge, Kent
I don't know, I don't enjoy films that have too many, 'almosts'. What i mean is that a character escapes death every second. From about the second hour, most of the characters almost die about 1000 times. This gets a little tiring for me. I couldn't be bothered with all the lovey dubby scene's between the Gorilla and the main female role. Why is it when American's do romance/feeling they make it cheesy. The lead female kept on doing stupid stuff, that no one would ever do. I got the distinct impression she wanted to make love with Kong but didn't know how, probably the reason for all the long staring scenes.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 9,055
- Location
- In my penthouse, Park Ave
Watched it last night and enjoyed it 
Watched it last night and thought it was good. As others have said cast was good, the scenes of 1930's New York were excellent, reminded me of the game Mafia. 
Kong looked very good for most of the scenes, up close shots and facial expressions were amazing, but in some other scenes it looked like off a game. But everything else was good and thats just me nitpicking at what was otherwise a very enjoyable movie. 8/10
Kong looked very good for most of the scenes, up close shots and facial expressions were amazing, but in some other scenes it looked like off a game. But everything else was good and thats just me nitpicking at what was otherwise a very enjoyable movie. 8/10
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,342
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
ElvisFan said:
Its Penski - it can mean whatever you want.
Went to see it lastnight, wasn't really expecting much but it sounded like a good spur of the moment idea...
Loved it, like others have commented the first 30 odd mins could have been chopped down a bit but absolutely loved the rest.... well maybe not Jack Blacks Cheesey as Wotsits line....
Loved it, like others have commented the first 30 odd mins could have been chopped down a bit but absolutely loved the rest.... well maybe not Jack Blacks Cheesey as Wotsits line....
A large but pretty average film in my opinon. Naomi Watts kept my attention but not for the scripting! Black was ok, but it could have been played with a little more venom - the guy is ment to have a ruthless streak to make it work but this wasn't acted or was in the scripted dialogue to capture the despiration.
The relationship between Watts and Kong was good, although I think she should have been prevented from seeing Kong by Black's character - hence making the reunion much better.
Unlike LOTR the characters seemed unfocused and shallow.
They should have named on of the characters "Derek" with the immortal line "Dereks don't run!" - subtle and would have make a good in-joke.
Hence average because, like an average film, I walked out the cinema not really feeling anything - perhaps because it's a 12A he felt too limited.
The relationship between Watts and Kong was good, although I think she should have been prevented from seeing Kong by Black's character - hence making the reunion much better.
Unlike LOTR the characters seemed unfocused and shallow.
They should have named on of the characters "Derek" with the immortal line "Dereks don't run!" - subtle and would have make a good in-joke.
Hence average because, like an average film, I walked out the cinema not really feeling anything - perhaps because it's a 12A he felt too limited.
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 1,853
- Location
- Tonbridge, Kent
Wilf said:I was thinking the same thing....
Hmmm,
"Stare at Kong lovingly"
I think its mostly down to the Director to decide how long this lasts and the emotions he wants to see.
Perhaps Spoilers; BeWaRe!
For me this movie was simply average, had its good moments but ultimately 3 hours was too long - I missed the last 20 because I fell asleep...
There were about 20 'chase' scenes, which although all done well, just left you feeling that certain characters were invincible and nothing particularly revolutionary was going to happen to the plot.
Also, I know it was a fantasy movie and all but the stampede scene was absolutely ridiculous. I was almost laughing in disbelief!
1. They managed to keep pace with the dinosaurs for about 10 minutes.
2. Only 4 of about 30 of them died. Thats ridiculous, just so unrealistic, even in a fantastical movie.
3. Why they didn't just jump up the side of the valley and hang on for dear life still evades me.
Overall, though CGI and production in general was clearly excellent (I liked the dinosaur fight) I thought the plot didn't have enough depth to warrant a 3 hour movie, though the numerous action scenes tried to increase the pace I felt the repitition of these scenes meant that overall I was left waiting to leave at the end.
4/10 for me.
Reading all the other posts though it seems that it was mostly well received.
For me this movie was simply average, had its good moments but ultimately 3 hours was too long - I missed the last 20 because I fell asleep...
There were about 20 'chase' scenes, which although all done well, just left you feeling that certain characters were invincible and nothing particularly revolutionary was going to happen to the plot.
Also, I know it was a fantasy movie and all but the stampede scene was absolutely ridiculous. I was almost laughing in disbelief!
1. They managed to keep pace with the dinosaurs for about 10 minutes.
2. Only 4 of about 30 of them died. Thats ridiculous, just so unrealistic, even in a fantastical movie.
3. Why they didn't just jump up the side of the valley and hang on for dear life still evades me.
Overall, though CGI and production in general was clearly excellent (I liked the dinosaur fight) I thought the plot didn't have enough depth to warrant a 3 hour movie, though the numerous action scenes tried to increase the pace I felt the repitition of these scenes meant that overall I was left waiting to leave at the end.
4/10 for me.
Reading all the other posts though it seems that it was mostly well received.
ElvisFan said:
its fantasy man! where else can you see that sort of otherworldly entertainment?
at source king kong is about a massive monkey who falls in love with a woman, if you can buy that then why worry about some quick movement. i can bever understand people who complain about fantastical elements in movies.
at the end of the day, everyone knows what king kong is about, surrender reality at the door and enjoy an escape to another world, imo wonderfully executed by peter jackson.
excellent entertainment.
Malenko said:
lol, im assuming that you mean the final line in the film. theres a reason its there, the original Kong finished with the same line as you may know, I thought it was a nice touch and a fitting testament to the original.
interesting fact:Jackson wanted that line to be delivered by the original heroine Fay Wray but she passed away
ross-o said:lol, im assuming that you mean the final line in the film. theres a reason its there, the original Kong finished with the same line as you may know, I thought it was a nice touch and a fitting testament to the original.
interesting fact:Jackson wanted that line to be delivered by the original heroine Fay Wray but she passed away
yeh, a real shame, she was 97, jackson wanted to have her do the voiceover but she passed away quickly just before production began