Went to see this today and was VERY impressed. This is going to sound like absolute heresy, I know, but I wasn't fully convinced by the LOTR trilogy that Jackson was a great director. (Good yes, but not great.) I was by this.
Almost everything about this film was wonderful. The casting was perfect. The effects looked beautiful and were not ridiculously overdone. (Kong was a very believable and sympathetic character, much as the original stop-motion version was.) The story was faithful to the original without being a hoaky carbon copy. As a matter of fact, I think there were some elements that were an improvement over the original, such as the expanded characterizations, particularly in the case of Ann Darrow. Naomi Watts' rendition was, IMHO, superior to Fay Wray's in that it was more believable and fleshed out, less of a caricature. Her interactions with Kong also yeild a great deal of emotional resonance and even sexual tension.
The film is a bit long at ~3 hours, though, and probably could've used some tighter editing in a few places. I'm not talking about cutting whole sequences, but just trimming a little, like in the sauropod stampede and the bug melee and maybe even the Kong/Rex fight. Perhaps some of the chaos in the streets immediately after Kong's escape could have been condensed as well.
All in all, it's obvious that a lot of love and effort went into the piece on the parts of director, actors, and effects men, and the results are quite effective. A nice balance is struck between nostalgia, serious drama, horror, romance, and socio-political commentary. I give it 3.5 stars out of 4.
-MMoM Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Was there a giant monkey? I'll see anything with a giant monkey.....
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Nope. Just a giant ape.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Was he purple?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
No, you're thinking of "Peter Jackson's Bonzi Buddy : The Official Spyware of the Movie".
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
So, any particular reason for the apparent lack of interest in this film? Or have people just not gotten around to seeing it yet? Or is it merely the general lack of interest that all my movie reviews seem to generate?
In any case, I saw it again today and it stood up to the repeated viewing quite well. I do make the observation, however, that the guardian/ward subplot between Hayes and Jimmy was rather unnecessary and could have been another good place to "liberate" some running time. Although, it did allow for the introduction of the whole Heart of Darkness thing. Also, the ice-skating scene in NY would have been a logical cut as well. But I suppose that, when $200 million is spent on a film, one wants to get as much out of it as possible.
Naomi Watts is gorgeous, BTW.
-MMoM Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
What do you think of Jack Black? Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I think, for not really being a serious actor, he did a good job as Denham. I sort of have a problem seeing him as any character other than himself, but he seemed to carry this part off reasonably well.
He's not my type, though. Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Heheheh the second part is what I was referring to! Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I'm definitely going to see it, and will comment then. Probably see it this weekend. Just haven't had time (nor the desire to sit in a jam-packed theater) yet.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
I just don't see the point. Girl meets Giant ape, Giant ape fancies girl, Giant ape falls off building. Just with flashier special effects for the MTV generation. There's nothing profound about the story. "It was beauty killed the beast." No, it wasn't, it was the biplanes flying around his head, firing machine-guns, causing him to lose his balance that killed him. And just because Naomi Watts has finally fucked her way to the top of the Hollywood totem pole doesn't mean I have to pay money to celebrate that.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Okay, who's not been feeding Lee? He's gotten all grumpy.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Being a giant, grumpy ape that easily loses his balance and becomes enamored with hot blones in flowing white gowns myself, I can empathize with the storyline. There are also people who would gladly shoot me, from a biplane or otherwise.
Posted by tricky (Member # 1402) on :
Click-Klack Ohh yeah, I'm a goin' Aban Run' a huntin' Gonna git me a Big rug! Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lee: I just don't see the point. Girl meets Giant ape, Giant ape fancies girl, Giant ape falls off building. Just with flashier special effects for the MTV generation. There's nothing profound about the story. "It was beauty killed the beast." No, it wasn't, it was the biplanes flying around his head, firing machine-guns, causing him to lose his balance that killed him. And just because Naomi Watts has finally fucked her way to the top of the Hollywood totem pole doesn't mean I have to pay money to celebrate that.
The tale is much more iconic than that. It's about the relationship of humans and the natural world, prejudice and exploitation, conceptions of masculinity, and other such deep-seated themes. It's a classic, your cynicism aside. And I think Jackson's take on the story put some interesting new spins on some of these elements that made it all the more relevent to today's audiences.
This one wasn't particularly more effects-heavy than the original, either, it's just CGI instead of stop-motion. Both were done using the state-of-the-art techniques of the time.
But, you know, you're right about not having to pay to go see it. Nobody's forcing you to.
-MMoM Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
I saw the original was I was about 9 years old, back in the good old days before Star Wars. I became obsessed with King Kong, dinosaurs, and gorillas. Add in 2001: A Space Oddyssey, Planet of the Apes, and Star Trek, and became a SF fan for life.
I really liked the Peter Jackson's version. I've probably been waiting to see it for 40 years. (I also saw the 1976 version the first day it was released, but that ended badly. ) It wasn't perfect, though. It was too long. The first scene with Kong was a bit lackluster (when he grabs Ann from the altar). Too many dinosaurs (3 rexes and all those sauropods) sorted of diluted the impact, and that spider pit scene wasn't needed. I also missed Kong chewing on people, pterodactyls, elasmosaurs, and the scene of rafts getting capsized (apparently filmed but cut), and Ann's scream practice (in the trailer but cut). The problems of Jackson's film are excesses of an obsessed fan who probably had this pumped up version in his head for 40 years, so I can't fault him for his love of the Kong, but he should've shown a bit of restraint. But overall, worth seeing on the big screen.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
It was a good movie yet there were too many dramatic pauses and close-ups of the characters (like the scene where Kong is finally captured on the shores of the island). Also the scene in the insect pit (despite the action and killing) did get boring. As well the scene with Kong and Watts in the frozen lake seemed inappropriate after all the destruction he caused. Other than that it truly was a very epic movie that could only be appreciated more if you've seen the original black and white one. (I hear the 70s one sucks.)
P.S. Jack Black was a real bastard in that movie!
Posted by Not Invented Here (Member # 1606) on :
I loved this film to bits when I saw it just before Christmas. Absolutely brilliant. It is a touch too long though, as people have pointed out above. Again, as already pointed out, it's mainly the length of individual scenes that needs shortening, particularly the bug fight.
I disagree about the Ice Skating scene, I thought that bit was absolutely beautiful. It reinforced the fact that Kong didn't actually want to be all destructive, he just did it when he had to. I'd love to know exactly how the film was shot, how much of it was CGI, etc. Oh well, the DVD will be along soon.
A sign of how much I liked it is the fact that both my friend and I enjoyed it despite having to sit next to 2 grotty little kids who wouldn't stop eating or talking throughout the whole movie. Before you ask why I didn't try to shut them up, their parents were sitting just behind them. And were talking even more. This is why I must start going to the cinema in the middle of the night again.
Kong Vs Rex scene. Wow.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I had the same problem at both my viewings of Chronicles of Narnia. Some idiot lady sat behind me both nights and neither of them seemed to realize that they were not in their living rooms.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Actually, the DVD is out already. Just not the movie part.
I saw it as well, and I loved it. It was exactly the type of movie to see on the big screen, and it was just the adventure movie I needed to see. Jack Black was just right as the slimy film producer, despite what some have said about his performance (though I almost cracked up when he said the last line). I also think Kyle Chandler (of "Early Edition" fame) did a great job as the arrogant movie star, and I also enjoyed the performance of the ship's captain.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
I finally went to see this, and it was great, but was it as great as this?
quote:Originally posted by TSN: No, you're thinking of "Peter Jackson's Bonzi Buddy : The Official Spyware of the Movie".
*golf clap*
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Just saw the movie yesterday (nicked the dvd off my brother) and after reading through this thread I was quite surprised to note several negative references to the insect pit. Maybe it's just me but that scene is quite possibly the most horrific thing I've seen in a film in a long time (bare in mind I haven't seen Saw 1 or 2 yet). It wasn't even particularly graphic, but the bit with Andy Serkiss (who played a very entertaining character other than the ape) getting slowly consumed by giant maggots...that just disturbs the hell out of me, mostly I suppose that issues of scale aside, that's frighteningly realistic...like a Richard Attenborough documentary gone horrifically wrong.
Oh yeah and the rest was great if a little too long.
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
"like a Richard Attenborough documentary gone horrifically wrong."
He he! Something like:
'And heah, we see some of the most impressive footage of man eating worms ever captured.'
So much better than Steve Irwin. He'd probably poke it with a stick and get eaten.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)