King Kong Reviews

madrab

just baack from seeing it now, amazing movie, pigman you really should go see it then tell us what you think of cgi kong, looked very real to me

Snake Plisken

Have to agree with Pigman, Hulk CGI was poor, everytime I looked at him all I could think of was how similar he looked to Shrek!!!!!

Kong haven't seen it but have seen the scene where Kong is fighting the Dino's with Ann in his hand, all I could think of was how bad the CGI looked! And I shouldn't be pulled out of the story to think those comments if its done right! To me Speilberg got it right with WOTW, I just thought that the effects looked realistic and were well done.

Don't get me wrong I have great respect for Mr Jackson and thought The fellowship were all excellent including the effects and Heavenly Creatures is one of my all time favorites (Check it out if you haven't seen it), but I will reserve judgement until I see Kong.

Cheers

Snake

RoyalMarine

going to the cinema tonight. cant wait to see it on the big screen..

was in the uk last 2 weeks ago, and saw it at a boot sale for 4 quid!
but i didnt buy it as its pirate obviously, and wanna see it in the cinema to appreciate it to its max....

CANT BLODDY WAIT!

sunzz

Just seen this 2night, all I can say is the film throughout was out of this world.

Pigman I respect your decision and by all means you’re entitled to it however, the cgi from where I was sitting looked fan-****in-tastic. I mean Kong looked as real as they came. Best cgi I’ve seen in a film and I came in expecting nothing less. GOLLUM anyone.

Pros:

Non stop action when they hit skull island

the fight scene with Kong and the t-rex goes on for an age and is quite literally in my opinion worth the admission fee.

The way Jackson brings out the beauty in the beast and really makes you care for him, the end scene and the emotion that went with it for me was very compelling, think I may even have shed a tear:D Thumping the heart… etc etc

Cons: As stated earlier I thought maybe the film could have been scaled down to maybe 2:30 minutes
It does run slowly up until skull island but when they hit the island its all guns blazing

All in all it’s my movie of the year so far.

9/10

ObeyGiant

Saw Kong the other day and thought the CGI was incredible. Never mind Gollum - most of that performance was in his voice. With the sound down low, I'd be hard pressed to see any kind of emotion from the animation. But Kong is the first time a CGI character has elicited any kind of emotional reaction from me. It genuinely looked like a 25-foot gorilla acting happy/sad/confused/angry/whatever.

The stills for this film aren't doing it justice at all. You need to see it moving (and preferably, on the big screen) to get the full impact.

madrab

my only dislike of the movie was

jimmy, what was the point of him? we found him 4 years ago as a stowaway...bla bla bla jimmy cries....grrr he was a bit of an annoyance

other than that fuppin brilliant movie

JackKelly

Saw i the other day and while it was good, it wasn't as great as i thought it would be.

Firstly it was way too long. It seemed to drag at places. Especially the start. As far as the CGI, on the whole they were great but

the stampede scene was a bit dodgy IMO

. Also, there was too much soft focusing on the characters. There was so much of it on the girl at some parts, that it looked like she was computer animated. I suppose that is the look they are trying to get across but i think they overdid it. As was said, what the hell was the story with Jimmy and the big guy. Most pointless side-story ever. Ended up just annoying me. Also, what happened to all the inhabitants after the first scene on the island? They seemed to just leg it. And no-one seemed shocked to see a evil looking satanic freak girl standing infront of them pointing at the start.

In fairness, the action scenes were amazing and all of the fights were great. But apart from that, i didn't think it was up to much. It seemed the fight and action scenes were well thought out but the rest was thrown together to accomadate them. Better than "flightplan" though, which i was unlucky enough to see the other day

OY

Is it possible to be moved deeply by a movie and disappointed with it at the same time? I would have thought not until this movie.

Let me start by saying that Kong was amazing. There is no words that can describe seeing him, he was just breathtaking.

His death scene was just so moving, but so also was his capture, him in chains and pretty much most of his scenes. Even the small things like the Giant Ape skeletons at his home just made your heart break for him. (I am spoilering this line in case someone is living on mars and does not know that Kong dies)

Honestly though, i have quite a few gripes:

1. The acting was below par IMO. Black struggled to deliver what were dodgy lines to begin with... e.g:

"I have come into possession of a map..." that whole cigar smoking scene was awkward.

2. At least an 40 minutes of the movie could have been cut.

Stampede, insects/slugs, jimmy, etc.

There was a lot of scenes that i could not help but think... "What is the point to this?" Most of the scenes were overly dramatic and drawn out.
3.

The guy swinging from a rope to save them from the insects! What was that!!

I was already annoyed at this point with some of the scenes though and i think that this one sticks in my head and represents all of the other cringes.
4.

Blacks character was not killed! Now i know in the originals he was not either and that is fine but there is no justice in this movie. Not only did he manage to get almost an entire crew killed, lied to people continuously, manipulated situations so that other characters got wrapped up in his drama, was the cause for Kong's ultimate destruction, not only did he get away with all this but at the end he gets to deliver the sucker punch "It was beauty that killed the beast!" I was mad! I know that Kong falling on him was not an option but suicide or at least some remorse may have helped.

The more i type the more i can go on so i am going to stop. Sorry for all the spoilers but i do not want to ruin anything. I am done ranting though...

Back to what i said, i was very moved by this movie but also very frustrated and that is not something i experience too often. The conflicting feelings just make me confused as to wether or not I should recommend it. the best reason i can think of is... decide for yourself.

spooky donkey

I enjoyed the movie but wouldent go see it again. Infact when I get the DVD im going to skip the first hour, i dont ever want to sit through that agian. If yer going to the cinema and are like 30 mins late dont worry you wont miss anything. Also the Dino fight was so good that in a way it ruined the rest of the film for me. As soon as it ended I knew nothing else in the movie would blow me away like that did. Its the kinda big secene that is needed to end a movie but It wouldent have made sense doing it in this film.

Also here is a question and it can appaly to any version of the movie. How the hell did they get him onto the ship.

pearsquasher

God this film sucked ass.

Theres one major thing missing from most blockbusters these days... besdies the mimor things that are missing from this movie like.. dialogue, characters, pace, music etc.. that's that intangible bit of movie magic we got from films like:

Raider of the Lost Ark
Jurassic Park
Alien/Aliens.
Back to the Future
Star Wars
Close Encopunters
Seven Samurai
Godzilla (1954)
Annie Hall
Brighton Rock
.... etc

It all goes out the window when you get big production + big effects + no-expense spared. This seems to suck the life out of peices of cinema that used to be crafted lovingnl with passion and a heap of good old fashioned heart. This is why Coen brothers and Woody ALen films and John Carpenter flicks are sooooo good. You KNOW they involved a vision that went beyond having "the best people/money available".

Kong had one good thing going for it... and that was the characterisation of the ape. Everything else was filler and i balk at the thoughts of people feeliong emotional at this turd. Go see the original Japanese "Godzilla" and see what emotion is when you realise what that "monster" movie is really about. :eek:

ObeyGiant

pearsquasher wrote:

Jurassic Park
...
It all goes out the window when you get big production + big effects + no-expense spared.

Erm
Surely Jurassic Park is the definition of "big production + big effects + no expense spared". Sure they even say it in the movie - spared no expense.

CyberGhost

Saw this 2 days ago, BRILLIANT! I loved it!

Kong is incredibly well made, looks very real, and his expressions were clear too, I didn't think the movie was stretched tbh, I like it, didn't feel bored at all, but I think that's because I wasn't in a hurry to see a Kong vs T Rex fights, I was just enjoying the whole movie, the fights though were very good!!! CGI is stunning in King Kong, King Kong vs 3 T Rexes was super! but 1 on 1 fight was kinda short, but I guess you can understand why.

spooky donkey wrote:

How the hell did they get him onto the ship.

lol yea, that was odd for me aswell but this movie is so good, I just ignored that fact.

pearsquasher

.. yeh, but "Jurasic Park" had good characters that had some sort of place in the story unlike everyone in "King Kong" except the girl and the ape.. which i concede were great but when you got 60 - 80% filler, a film is going to blow hard and in my opinion this film is as limp and vacuous a film as you're going to get. Think about the going-nowhere characterisations of all the supporting cast. The beginnig was appauling too and the last line? Please!

And what really irks me is peoples argument:

"but its's for kids" or "what about the effects?"... Didn't stop all those fantastic adventure films we see every year on TV at xmas having some sort of magic in them... from "Wizard of Oz" to "Lord of the Rings".

I'm just sick of cut-n-paste big budget trash when if they got a few talented story writers they could really make something special WITH effects too.

Rant done! :cool:

ObeyGiant

pearsquasher wrote:

.. yeh, but "Jurasic Park" had good characters that had some sort of place in the story

Ahem... Tim? Lex? Are you trying to tell me that Genarro actually had a place in the film apart from the sheer comedy value of seeing a man cowering on a toilet getting eaten by a T-Rex?

pearsquasher wrote:

The beginnig was appauling too and the last line? Please!

The last line is a verbatim repeat of the last line of the original movie. It's one of the staples of what makes a Kong movie - travel to the island, find the big ape, blonde girl gets sacrificed, climbs a big building, falls down, "The airplanes got him..."

Sure, you might not like it, but it wouldn't be a Kong movie without it.

And I'm going to use this as the basis of an argument to your suggestion that Peter Jackson's King Kong isn't "crafted lovingnl with passion and a heap of good old fashioned heart." Jackson's remake, unlike other big-budget blockbuster remakes we've seen this year (top of the head: Dukes of Hazzard, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory) was made with a genuine love of the source material. Indeed, we're all getting a little sick of hearing people talk about how King Kong was the movie that made Peter Jackson want to make movies.

To say that it's been made without any passion is demonstratably wrong, as you can see from any of the production diaries Jackson made during the making of King Kong. Jackson put a lot of passion, blood, sweat, tears, 70lbs of fat - and indeed, heart - into this movie, and he's wearing it in every frame of the movie.

Your complaint about this movie being 60-80% filler is just baffling to me. Not because I disagree with your figure. This is what you felt, and I can't argue with that. But because of your praise for Woody Allen earlier. Like many others, I personally feel like the plot of a Woody Allen movie "happens" within 5 minutes of the movie and the rest is given over to setting a mood. Exactly what I thought Jackson did with a lot of King Kong.

(ps - surely Woody Allen movies and Peter Jackson movies are like Chalk and Cheese? If we were discussing Bergman, sure I could understand bringing up Woody Allen, but jeez..)

Mezcita

This film was a huge disappointment. Avoid.

3/10

pearsquasher

Fair enough... comparing Jackson to Allen is a bit of a stretch alright but i wasn't exactly comparing them either.. just listing a film-maker who is known for passion:p

And it does seem like Jackson worked hard on the movie.... but it failed miserably to have any sort of impact on me outside of the characterisation of the ape itself... which was pretty damn good.. but sort of has to be given todays standards. It doesn;t seem like the stroy or characters in todays movies have those same standards however.

Also, just because Jackson keeps elements of the origional, like some lines and the basic story.. doesn't make it any less of a turd. If you're going to do that, and perfectly acceptable to if you're doing a remake, then have a bit of finese about it intsead cobbling together a bunch of set-pieces glued by meaningless scenes featuring characters no-body gives a toss about.

madrab

pearsquasher wrote:

It all goes out the window when you get big production + big effects + no-expense spared. This seems to suck the life out of peices of cinema that used to be crafted lovingnl with passion and a heap of good old fashioned heart. This is why Coen brothers and Woody ALen films and John Carpenter flicks are sooooo good. You KNOW they involved a vision that went beyond having "the best people/money available".

john carpenter??? ok his early stuff was great but he hasnt made a good movie in decades

pearsquasher wrote:

"but its's for kids" or "what about the effects?"... Didn't stop all those fantastic adventure films we see every year on TV at xmas having some sort of magic in them... from "Wizard of Oz" to "Lord of the Rings".

yeah lotr has no sfx :rolleyes:

LegacyUser

Loved this movie. I never saw the original and never knew it was so emotional! I felt like crying at the end!!!!

dam it!i cant see this film till january!its so annoying!

Canis Lupus

Seen it last night. Feeling was mostly meh. Got a few laughs out of me and only once got me choked when Kong stood for the last time but that feeling left after two seconds.

It was a way to pass time but will have forgotten about this movie by Saturday

franman

Mezcita wrote:

This film was a huge disappointment. Avoid.

3/10

Agreed!! Hated the first hour and didnt much care for the last hour either. If they had made it shorter would have been alot better IMO.

Bartronilic

Verry good movie! It could have been a commercialised modern version that would have been crap (eg more like Sharks Tale than Finding Nemo) but Peter Jackson made a masterpiece!

Jesper

Great Film
Bit long

sprinkles

franman wrote:

Agreed!! Hated the first hour and didnt much care for the last hour either. If they had made it shorter would have been alot better IMO.

You said to me that you found the last hour boring....what, the bit with the monkey in NY city tearing the place up.......yeah, yawn inducing

I found the action sequences excellent, cgi was brilliant in parts but some bits, the brontosauruses in particular looked unfinished. The love triangle was done well (Kong, jack and Ann) but obviously wasn't the reason I bought the ticket. All I wanted to see was a giant monkey kick some dinosaur as$ and beat his chest. Does not disappoint.


The way it was shot really paid homage to the original, the "offering" scene where ann was offered to Kong was very reminiscent of the atmosphere of the original. Jackson did an excellent job.

Running Bing

Bartronilic wrote:

Peter Jackson made a masterpiece!

I disagree very strongly that King Kong was a masterpiece. For me it was very mediocre. I just dont get excited about three giant computer images kicking the crap out of each other although I can see how people would enjoy this and it was impressive in parts but I just felt the T-rex fight dragged on and got very boring much like the boat trip and the search of the island and the aeroplane fight at the end. I also thought a lot of the cgi work was lazy like when the boat pulls out of the dock at the start It showed it was cgi and it just shouldnt have. Same when Naomi Watts was juggling, could she not have just taking a few hours to learn to juggle adn if Kong was white the part on the ice could have been a Coke add. I thought CGI was used to much better effect in LOTR. The bottom line is I think PJ just tried to hard to make this an epic masterpiece when he should have concentrated on other things like a tigher plot structure, a better script(very shoddy in parts), better casting, better character development and maybe, dare I say, leave a bit more to the viewers imagination(something which doesnt seem to play a role anymore in the moviegoing experience).



And as for PJ being better than Stephen Spielsberg I think this all depends on how highly you rate lotr, and a look at imdb indicates just how highly some do rate it. But for me pj has yet to direct anything nearly as engaging as Jaws, raiders of the lost Ark or schindlers list. And I dont see any evidence that he will in the films hes directed so far.

Running Bing

sprinkles wrote:

All I wanted to see was a giant monkey kick some dinosaur as$ and beat his chest. Does not disappoint.

I couldnt agree more with this point, King Kong definately delivered on this front. But does that really merit the praise this film is getting?

Nick_oliveri

Seen a post earlier referring to the penis shaped things that

suck on that gollum lads head and limbs while he is still screaming

Seen a similar parasite / fish on an issue of bizzarre magazine years ago called the lamprey fish.

The first attachment is the fish itself, the second, more disturbing pic, is of its mouth.

I really didnt like this film. Cheesy as fook.

No, dont do it Jimmy! I wish Jimmy died a horrible, parasite related death. Little bastard.

RasTa

Just back from seeing it so i will give a few thoughts.
I wouldn’t say avoid seeing this film, but don’t expect anywhere near a 5 out of 5. The CGI is laughable for a motion picture and belongs more in a computer game. It’s about 1hr too long and the dialogue is even worse then the cgi.
I might be sounding harsh and i did enjoy some parts but in no way would I give it anything near a 5/5 10/10 or even 7 out of 10

Capt'n Midnight

NoelRock wrote:

Good: Most things. It's funny. It's exciting. It's visually startling at times. It's...dare I say it... a little scary at times? It ticks all the 'good blockbuster' boxes.

Bad: Some attempts at humour flopped, with only execs at the back laughing. It is too long, given the nature of the story (nothing wrong with long movies, as long as you're fitting something into them... this could've easily had 30 minutes lopped off). Some of the casting is very questionable - though I loved Kyle Chandler (also know as the guy from Early Edition).

8/10. As far as blockbusters go, this ticks all the boxes. Not a classic, but ...

I still like the original, this one beats the '76 version where Kong hitches a lift on a supertanker and is made feel small.

BTW: lets hope they show the Japanese version soon on TV - saw it many moons ago - missed the start, and rubber suits are not to most peoples taste.
http://www.godzillatemple.com/movie3.htm

It's a good film and if you've never seen any of the earlier ones then it's a must see.

What I didn't like was that Kong doesn't obey the laws of physics. He moves too fast and jumps too high. Even the original didn't do that. For me it ruined the impression of scale. I'd rather him move a little slower meself.

Another (smaller) ape film worth a gander if it's on is Mighty Joe Young (1949 one).

Venom

Mezcita wrote:

This film was a huge disappointment. Avoid.

3/10

Agreed. This movie just drags in from start to finish and personally I couldn't wait for the monkey to that the exit stage left via the top of the Empire State building. I even stopped the film about halfway through to go watch TV is was that dull.

The characters were dull and played by C list celeb at best with probably wasn't a good move to begin with, to many of them seemed to have had time wasted on them for no reason only to be killed off almost as soon as they were introduced and the whole girl/ape element felt like it was perfectly understandable rather than explained in any way.


The action sequences were dull and felt like they were added for the sake of it rather than to further the storyline and to make matters worse they added nothing new that hasn't been seen before and done better so don't go expecting any wow factor here folks. Kong while looking good from certain shots looked stupid when moving in allot of the shot and all the talk about how get the fur/hair effects were are not only pointless but about 5 years to late since it was done better in the Final Fantasy movie.

Overall this movie is one and a half hours to long and feels like every damm drawn out minute of it.