King Kong!!!

[daveshel]

Too long, too many dinosaurs; typical overblown Hollywood pap.

 

[Linux23]

the movie was way too unrealistic.

 

[SaltBoy]

Originally posted by: Linux23
the movie was way too unrealistic.

Yup, you don't see too many 25 foot gorillas out there...

Lumpy the cook's death = WORST WAY TO DIE EVAR

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: Linux23
the movie was way too unrealistic.

I hope that was supposed to be a joke

 

[Linux23]

Originally posted by: Eeezee

Originally posted by: Linux23
the movie was way too unrealistic.

I hope that was supposed to be a joke

nope.

 

[Linux23]

Originally posted by: SaltBoy

Originally posted by: Linux23
the movie was way too unrealistic.

Yup, you don't see too many 25 foot gorillas out there...

Lumpy the cook's death = WORST WAY TO DIE EVAR

i liked when gollum (the actor that played gollum) died. nice.

 

[pookguy88]

Originally posted by: chrisg22


yep it was "beauty that killed the beast"

i hate how everyone gets this quote wrong, its "beauty killed the beast" not "beauty that killed the beast"

 

[otispunkmeyer]

it wasnt half bad

could of done just forgetting the first 30-40mins that just didnt need to be there. the movie was too long for my likes, i could feel the DVT setting in, and it get awfully uncomfortable on the chairs at our cinema, not very big, and no leg room!

still i enjoyed it enough to make it worth £4

i kinda didnt want Kong to die in the end.......but i swear...if the director did one more close up of that girls face i was gonna just leave. she wasnt even that nice looking, or that good of an actor for that matter, i wanna see kong beating up T-Rex's not some blondes wooden expression.

jack black had some horribly delivered lines....that one at the end reminded me of yr9 drama lesson, it was that corny

best bit had to be kong snapping the t-rex jaws, and biting out a tongue lol! and the dino pile up that was a little OTT since im sure they would of all been trampled before then, but it was good.

the bugs were pretty good too.

 

[Eddieo]

Was not as good as the first one (1933).

Like someone said, Ann Darrow not very hot, she also did not scream as good as Fay Wray.

Carl Denim was a joke in the new film. I thought his acting was bad. First movie blew him away.

Like most say, the new movie is way too long.

Not as many giant monster battles against Kong in the new one and added jurassic park small beasts too.

Kong looks just like a old gorilla at the zoo and moved just like him. His size should have made him move a little different.

I could go on and on but stopping for now.

 

[SaltBoy]

Originally posted by: Linux23

Originally posted by: SaltBoy

Originally posted by: Linux23
the movie was way too unrealistic.

Yup, you don't see too many 25 foot gorillas out there...

Lumpy the cook's death = WORST WAY TO DIE EVAR

i liked when gollum (the actor that played gollum) died. nice.

That would be Lumpy the cook.

 

[bucwylde23]

Originally posted by: pookguy88

Originally posted by: chrisg22


yep it was "beauty that killed the beast"

i hate how everyone gets this quote wrong, its "beauty killed the beast" not "beauty that killed the beast"

so.....what.....

 

[pookguy88]

so.....what.....

why bother putting quotation marks if that wasn't how it was said in the movie?

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: Linux23

Originally posted by: Eeezee

Originally posted by: Linux23
the movie was way too unrealistic.

I hope that was supposed to be a joke

nope.

Ooooookay then...

Because 20 foot tall primates are so realitstic... I'm surprised you didn't say that Jurassic Park was too unrealistic

 

[TheAdvocate]

Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
it wasnt half bad

could of done just forgetting the first 30-40mins that just didnt need to be there

the backstory was conceptually necessary but not quite engaging enough to make it worthwhile. I hate to say it, but it should have been at least as good as the backstory to Titanic... it was a great chance to make Denim the (comicly) challenged relief of the film, but Jack Black didnt pull it off. I kept wanting to see Doc (Christopher Plummer??) from BTTF in that role.

the movie was too long for my likes

I could have done without 90% of the dinosaur stuff, especially the Jurassic Park escape scene. Leave it on teh cutting room floor and that's 10 minutes right there. That was also some of the weakest CG in the movie, especially the cliff scene.

still i enjoyed it enough to make it worth £4

It's worth the price of admission, or rental, but definitely not both, nor do I want to buy the DVD when it comes out.

but i swear...if the director did one more close up of that girls face i was gonna just leave. she wasnt even that nice looking.

I realize that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so in that case, please get yours checked. Naomi=beautiful.

BTW- you'd rather see bad cgi dinos than hawt womerns[sic]??

jack black had some horribly delivered lines....

yes, but...

that one at the end reminded me of yr9 drama lesson, it was that corny

THAT WAS THE CLOSING LINE OF THE ORIGINAL MOVIE. All caps because I cannot believe how many times I've heard people complainw ho were oblivious. Balck could have delivered it better, but the line wasn't that bad.

best bit had to be kong snapping the t-rex jaws

... also in the original. I liked that part but the frozen pond scene was the most magical in the movie. It was included in a moment of sudden inspiration and it worked exceptionally well. It reminded me of the most memorable scenes from movies like E.T.

the bugs were pretty good too.

The bug scene got absolutely ridiculous (Indiana Jones & the Temple of Doom), but the death of Lumpy was amazingly repulsive. I'm not sure if I can still have nightmares, but if so, that's what it'll be.

 

[bucwylde23]

Originally posted by: pookguy88

so.....what.....

why bother putting quotation marks if that wasn't how it was said in the movie?

because who really cares? seriously...

 

[Corporate Thug]

too long

 

[pookguy88]

Originally posted by: chrisg22


because who really cares? seriously... i'm a dork

look, i misquoted, whoops

 

[YJK76]

urgh....am i the only one who didn't like this movie at all? =/
in fact i hated it. excuse me if i'm too critical, but come ooooooon.... it wasn't even worth what you would call "entertaining."
i just want 3 hrs and 7 minutes of my life back. sigh...
the only parts that are worth mentioning was how they made the tribal people look really freaky.

this movie was pointlessly long and too unrealistic. they didn't even try to make things look real or make sense despite all of today's CGI advancements. i.e. when king kong was getting shot multiple times, where was all the blood? the last scene shows a cleaned chest but you KNOW he was shot in the chest multiple times. or the scene where they are being chased by dinosaurs, the fact that a lot of them survived that chase made me go "yea, right!" naomi watts' face is dirty one moment and perfectly powdered the next. and the list goes on and on.
maybe they focused too much on the CGI aspects of the movie and just ignored everything else, including the acting (jack black's acting...always exaggerated and uncomic most of the time).

i haven't seen the first king kong movie but i have a feeling that a movie made 72 years ago would be a better watch than this one even with all its CGI effects.

 

[tk149]

I loved it.

Yes, there were many technical problems, but overall, I ended up enjoying this flick a heck of a lot more than I thought I would.

When I heard Peter Jackson had taken the reins, I really didn't expect much, despite the fantastic job he did with LoTR. After all, King Kong's story is old, (now) cliched, and has been done to death in numerous incarnations, spinoffs, and exploitations. King Kong's story just didn't have the depth of the LoTR world. I figured even Peter Jackson could only do so much to rehash an overused plotline.

I was dead wrong.

CGI New York and Skull Island - Very good. Not perfect, but definitely believable. And creepy.

Naomi Watts - physically, she's attractive, but just that - attractive. Not a raving beauty, not a drop-dead gorgeous babe, but just (in this movie at least) an attractive, wholesome-looking girl. She was perfect for the character of Ann Darrow. She played her part perfectly, and it was easy to see why Kong fell for her (pun intended). I don't remember much about the original Kong, but I believe Watts's character had a LOT more depth than Fay Wray's. There was something absolutely beautiful about the relationship between Darrow and Kong.

Kong - CGI Kong was quite impressive, as expected. I did expect to see a bit more blood on his fur though. It's kind of like the animators forgot that he was supposed to be injured (bitten, shot) during the movie. I couldn't help wondering why he didn't smell bad (he doesn't bathe, does he?).

Jack Black - I haven't really seen much of Black's work, but he was okay for this movie. And, as pointed out previously, the last line of this remake, WAS the last line of the original. Cheesy? Maybe, but absolutely necessary as a tie-in to the original.


PJ paid great homage to the original Kong, just as he did with LoTR. Can't wait for The Hobbit!

 

[DVad3r]

You should add another option to the poll:

Yes, aside from the tribal people and black guy/white minion dude getting cut out completely from the movie.

 

[LongCoolMother]

i thought it was horrible. i guess its pretty good if you're into the adventure/action type of movie. the indiana jones type most specifically. but i like movies with intricate plot lines and such. i saw aeon flux the next day. wasn't good either. but i saw memoirs of a geisha last night. now that was good. i dont know why it got such horrible reviews.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

I'd call it decent, but nothing special. I would give it 2 1/2 stars.

 

[TecHNooB]

I think Peter Jackson has a thing with making movies more complete. The movies he's directed so far were epic-scale movies. You guys remember how long the ending was for LOTR:ROTK was? I thought I was watching the end 6 different times. It just dragged on from hobbit to hobbit. Even though it was a boring sitting through each sequence, I understood why Jackson did what he did. You can't really cut movies like LOTR or King Kong short. It wouldn't do either justice.

Aside from that, King Kong did have a lot of screwy physics. In Jurassic Park, they had to use a Jeep to outrun a T-Rex. In King Kong, they simply outran the stampede of Brontasaurus'(?).

 

[mrSHEiK124]

Originally posted by: TecHNooB
I think Peter Jackson has a thing with making movies more complete. The movies he's directed so far were epic-scale movies. You guys remember how long the ending was for LOTR:ROTK was? I thought I was watching the end 6 different times. It just dragged on from hobbit to hobbit. Even though it was a boring sitting through each sequence, I understood why Jackson did what he did. You can't really cut movies like LOTR or King Kong short. It wouldn't do either justice.

Aside from that, King Kong did have a lot of screwy physics. In Jurassic Park, they had to use a Jeep to outrun a T-Rex. In King Kong, they simply outran the stampede of Brontasaurus'(?).

Not to mention Adrian Brody (already forgot his character's name, god twas a snooze fest) outran a 20 foot gorilla in a yellow Model T

 

[prontospyder]

best movie I've seen this year.