King Kong

Shadow Leonardo · 12-10-2005, 11:14 PM

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.

**Barkworm** · 12-11-2005, 01:08 AM

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...

Doppleganger · 12-11-2005, 10:35 AM

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

Shadow Leonardo · 12-11-2005, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barkworm

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...

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

Cerpin Taxt · 12-11-2005, 11:20 AM

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

~~Turtledude2k3~~ · 12-13-2005, 05:03 PM

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..

*ZariusTwo* · 12-13-2005, 07:07 PM

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

**Barkworm** · 12-14-2005, 05:24 PM

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...

~~Turtledude2k3~~ · 12-15-2005, 12:22 AM

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

**Barkworm** · 12-15-2005, 01:13 AM

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

*Spitfire* · 12-15-2005, 01:24 AM

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.

**Barkworm** · 12-15-2005, 01:41 AM

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

~~Turtledude2k3~~ · 12-16-2005, 04:44 PM

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

*DrSpengler* · 12-16-2005, 07:45 PM

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.

**Barkworm** · 12-17-2005, 01:49 AM

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)?

*Anarky* · 12-17-2005, 02:08 AM

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...

**Barkworm** · 12-17-2005, 07:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anarky

Kong: He looks bad, he looks fake.

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

*DrSpengler* · 12-17-2005, 10:29 AM

Spoiler:

*ZariusTwo* · 12-17-2005, 12:31 PM

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.

**Barkworm** · 12-18-2005, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrSpengler

[...]in the 76 version he was a gigantic pervert whom I didn't like one bit[...]

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

12-10-2005, 11:14 PM	#1
Shadow Leonardo Foot Soldier Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Realizing that being a freshman stinks Posts: 145	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. __________________ Dooku:"You have anger,you have hate, but you don't use them."

12-11-2005, 01:08 AM	#2
Barkworm Draconian leftist ruler Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Germany Posts: 6,758	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... __________________ Make ****, not kill!

12-11-2005, 10:35 AM	#3
Doppleganger Stone Warrior Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 687	Ooh yeah I'll definitely be seeing it. Looks promising. __________________

12-14-2005, 05:24 PM	#8
Barkworm Draconian leftist ruler Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Germany Posts: 6,758	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... __________________ Make ***, not kill! Last edited by Barkworm; 12-15-2005 at 01:45 AM.*

12-15-2005, 01:13 AM	#10
Barkworm Draconian leftist ruler Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Germany Posts: 6,758	The spiders are pretty pointless but yes, they are big and look cool. Not as cool as the giant leeches though, those were CREEPY. __________________ Make ****, not kill!

12-11-2005, 11:20 AM	#5
Cerpin Taxt Hench Mutant Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 278	I was lucky to see a press showing of it recently. I, personally, didn't think it was all too special.

12-13-2005, 05:03 PM	#6
~~Turtledude2k3~~ Banned Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Canada, BC Posts: 783	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..

12-13-2005, 07:07 PM	#7
ZariusTwo Overlord Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Britain, DINO THUNDER...POWER UP! Posts: 22,494	Looks samey to me, after watching Narnia, I have higher expectations for this...

12-15-2005, 12:22 AM	#9
~~Turtledude2k3~~ Banned Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Canada, BC Posts: 783	I heard the new one has spiders in it? Is the spiders scary and big? Are they in groups?

12-15-2005, 01:24 AM	#11
Spitfire Writer • Director Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 12,035	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. __________________ Check out my online portfolio http://www.christopherpelletier.com/

12-15-2005, 01:41 AM	#12
Barkworm Draconian leftist ruler Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Germany Posts: 6,758	He should have cut more out though. So many scenes were just completely pointless. __________________ Make ****, not kill!

12-16-2005, 04:44 PM	#13
~~Turtledude2k3~~ Banned Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Canada, BC Posts: 783	If he cut out alot of the scenes, the movie could be maybe 30 minutes less?

12-16-2005, 07:45 PM	#14
DrSpengler Foot Elite Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 4,842	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.

12-17-2005, 01:49 AM	#15
Barkworm Draconian leftist ruler Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Germany Posts: 6,758	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)? __________________ Make ****, not kill!

12-17-2005, 02:08 AM	#16
Anarky Outlaw Hero Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Tannhauser Gate Posts: 4,867	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... __________________ Because it's... I dunno... brutal.

12-17-2005, 10:29 AM	#18
DrSpengler Foot Elite Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 4,842	Spoiler: Saw it yesterday and thoroughly enjoyed it. The bronto stampede looked a little fake, but that's my only complaint in regards to the special effects. The fight between Kong and the 3 T-Rexs was amazing. Also liked the bit with the giant insects in the valley; those leeches were nasty. I liked Kong's portrayal in this movie better than any of the previous versions. In the original flick he was just sorta "there", in the 76 version he was a gigantic pervert whom I didn't like one bit, but in this one you really feel for him. He doesn't want anything to do with Ann sexually (like the last movie laid on way too thick), he was just lonely and looking for some companionship. All the monkey bones in his cave seemed to imply that he was the last of his kind. The bit in Central Park, where they were having fun on the ice, was great. And the GCI effects did what no suit or even stop-motion could do; and that's what really gave Kong his personality and made me feel he was a real character and not just some special effect. The bit where Ann is dancing for him and he's laughing and sighing and rolling his eyes and clapping; he REALLY looked like a big monkey. The CGI in some places (particularly the bronto stampede) looked a little sketchy, but I assume that's because they focused most of their time, effort and money on Kong-himself. And it really pays off, as Kong looks fantastic. And yeah. It's a bit too long.

12-17-2005, 12:31 PM	#19
ZariusTwo Overlord Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Britain, DINO THUNDER...POWER UP! Posts: 22,494	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.