King Kong
 

This film looks pretty intresting from what I've seen in the trailers, it looks like it's nearly staying true to the original 1933 version (settings, and the dinosaurs) and won't be butchered like the 70's version. Also it's done by the same people who did Lord of the Rings, so I'll probaly see it on opening day. If I can that is.

I'll definitely see it but I'm not quite sure what I should expect. A three hour monster movie might be a bit too much...

Ooh yeah I'll definitely be seeing it. Looks promising. :)

3 hours? Oh, well maybe I'll still see it but I really can't sit through long movies though LotR I could handle . :ohwell:

I was lucky to see a press showing of it recently. I, personally, didn't think it was all too special.

I hope it really does well like Lord of the rings.. What I mean is Peter jackson did such an excellent job translating the book to the movie well and I really hope this new movie does the same..

Looks samey to me, after watching Narnia, I have higher expectations for this...

Ok, I just came back from the theatre and I think this movie re-defines the term "mixed bag". Let's start with the bitching:

• the first hour is a goddamn crime
• Jack Black's acting is as wooden as the desk I'm sitting at
• As much as I like Adrien Brody, his role was pretty superfluous
• just like most of the support cast
• Brontosaur stampede sucked, the Brontosaurs looked crappy
• A lot of cheesy dialogue
• Thomas Kretschmann's accent is Germany's shame (seriously, no one I know talks like that!)
• some of the CG looked just horribly fake
• Extremely annoying slow-motion (S-K-U... SHUT UP!!!)
• Cookie-cutter soundtrack
• THIS MOVIE IS WAY TOO LONG!!! (and this is coming from someone who loves long movies)

Then there's is one HUGE pro about this movie: Kong. The big monkey is just awesome in every way, especially when he whops Tyrannosaur butt. You actually feel with him and the end almost made me cry.
This could have been a great movie. If it had been like an hour shorter. This way it's just meh...

I heard the new one has spiders in it? Is the spiders scary and big? Are they in groups?

The spiders are pretty pointless but yes, they are big and look cool. Not as cool as the giant leeches though, those were CREEPY.

I think Lord Of The Rings let Jackson do alot more in terms of movie length so he didn't think to cut out as much when he was editing it.

He should have cut more out though. So many scenes were just completely pointless.

If he cut out alot of the scenes, the movie could be maybe 30 minutes less?

I give the movie an additional 10 cool points for having a cage on the ship labeled "Sumatran Rat Monkey".

Peter Jackson's not too good to forget about Dead/Alive. 8)

How did you like the movie apart from that (I'd like to get some discussion going but it seems like no one wants to watch it)?

I don't think I'm goin gto see this. Sure, the previews look good, and the setting sounds like it could be good, but there's two major factors that make me not want to go and see it:

• Kong: He looks bad, he looks fake. Just another CGI-monstrosity on the big screen. Sure, it is amazing what people can do when using CGI, but that doesn't mean that you have to use it. Okay, I admit it, I'd have no idea how to pull this one of differently, but it's just not my cup of tea I guess.
• Peter Jackson: I generally don't like his movies, they're too long and too full of useless crap. I mean, everybody loved LotR, and everybody loves this, so I figure that he kept his style, and I honestly don't feel like a three hour movie with about half an hour of something happening.

So that's my beef with Peter "ZOMG! Teh Jeeniuz" Jackson...

This is only true for the long shots, the close ups are absolutely amazing. Definitely some of the best CG I've ever seen.

Who f'ing tries to make a film the length of LOR? Pete, work with what the crowd want, LOR "worked" because it weas based on an endless novel series, Kong was NEVER as long, and the public KNOW that, hence why your films' making only 800 bucks.

Right now I'm watching "King Kong Lives". What a load of bullsh*t! :lol:

Just got back from it and it was pretty good I liked it though there are a couple of cheesy scenes I still liked it, but I've always liked Kongs movies such as his original 33 version, the Son of Kong sequel, heck I even liked when they pitted Kong against Godzilla, that's all I have to say about the big ape.

I enjoyed this movie though it was a little long, and it took forever for Kong himself to show up, it seemed. But, the cg was awesome, with of course a few mistakes. Its funny that everyone nowadays expects perfect realism in movies like this. Back when the original King Kong was released, people were in total awe at the special effects. Now we look at that and laugh because of what we expect from today's films. I think some of the cg scenes in this film were the best I've ever seen such as the T-rex fight. Some like the bronot stampede weren't as good but I'm still impressed at how they managed to composite everything into it. It's tough to composite high motion scenes with cg because of motion blur. I think some of the stampede keys had hard edges which might have contributed to it looking kind of fake.
Kong himself was awesome, though some far away shots the animation looked kind of jerky. Nice how they composited ann into his hand in lots of the shots, but it's unbelievable that he didn't drop her during the T-rex fight. Anyway, I loved this movie but probably won't find myself rewatching it much because of its sheer length.

I saw the movie yesterday and I must say I LOVED it! Sure some of the CG you could tell was pretty fake like the brontos. But I think they did a terrific job on who they were supposed to. The King.

Excellent portrayal of the big ape. He was not just some computer animation. He had life, he had emotion. I loved the way he made such a big tantrum when Anne didn't want to perform for him (not that type of "perform"!). :P

The character development was great! I for one really felt for the crew especially the black guy. Sure the dialogue could have been cliche but for me it worked. He was a nice big brother/father figure to the boy. Plus he had an intelligence and wisdom that was beyond his years...

I have to disagree with the complaints about the three hour stretch. What Jackson did with King Kong was expand his world not unlike *sigh* (I know, I know) "Gargoyles" :roll: :lol:. He used that three hour limit and expanded Kong's world from Depression Era America to Skull Island. I was a bit wary of Jackson's portrayal of black and white/good and evil concerning the natives (gee weren't they ugly?). Plus well Anne was a "damsel in distress" can't argue with that, plus who's she to say what is beautiful. But you know what? I undestand it. Why?

The film was made in the 1930's a time when times were simpler. People didn't concern themselves which such things as being "PC" and Jackson captured rather well. There were a lot more things going in that movie than just the big ape. I kind of thought it was kind of interesting how they left in the sexist remarks from those guys in the beginning and how everybody on the boat treated Anne with a special kind of respect because she was a "lady".

It was hard to see the big guy go. But wow! What a way to go. He went out fighting. He died for the woman he loved. Awww! :) Would be so sweet if...HE WEREN'T A GIANT APE! :lol: Sorry pal, no way you would a worn her heart you ain't no Goliath.

Overall. 10/10 :)