I totally believed in the special effects. They were a bit better than Gollum and some of the LOTR stuff and I'd say on par with the immersiveness of Jurassic Park.
You spent God-knows-how-much on a three hour movie, was disappointed, and came back for seconds? WTF? Personally, I haven't been to see it yet. I'm trying to convince the wife, but that's futile - if it's not a Bridget Jones-style film, she's not interested. Sigh.
Can't believe people liked this movie so much. First let me say I have no problem in allowing for a different set of rules of reality. For example, I can think its perfectly acceptable that Superman can fly, because he is superman. However, if an ordinary person long jumped 40ft in a movie, to me that is unrealistic. Having said that, here is what killed the movie for me: The dinosaur stampede. Not only do the humans run at the same speed as these dinosaurs and the raptors, but the majority of them do not get crushed in it. The run was also a full sprint for over a minute. In this scene we also have Brody shouldering a raptor which resembles Robinho in the fall. Some guy kicking a raptor and sending it flying. The interactions between Tommy and the black guy. I liked the black guy, but disliked the Tommy character. The way Kong moved. Kong running on all 4 limbs with the blonde girl in his right hand, yet she is not hurt when his hand hits the floor multiple times. The whole T-Rex vs Kong fight. Skipping how they got Kong onto the boat and to the US, only because they (writers) couldnt think of a way to do it. How NYC seems to become a ghost town when Kong finds the blonde. Also when he 1st sees her and they do that little bit with her walking towards us, the people in the background are walking calmly. After all that negative, I have to say that the graphics were outstanding and the ending drew me in. 6/10.
Agreed. This scene was very unrealistic. Also have to agree here. They way she was being swung around, she would have snapped her neck or back. Gotta disagree here. This was the best scene in the movie.
Forgot two bad scenes. The natives pole vaulting on the wet sea rock to the ship. Tommy wildly shooting the bugs with the Tompson machine gun. Another positive, didn't feel that long.
Not only was he shooting the bugs, but he was shooting directly at the guy who flailing around like mad, an didnt get hit by a bullet..
King Kong managed to hold its own, winning the Christmas weekend movie box office sweepstakes. King Kong: $31.4 million Chronicles of Narnia: $30.1 million Fun with Dick and Jane: $23.5 million It's said Kong would have done better, but its excessive length worked against it with people pressed for time during the holiday season. It's expected to improve. The overall domestic take so far: Nardia: $163.5 million (17 days in release) Kong: $118.7 million (12 days in release)
Watched it last night. I was ok, but it didn't need to be 3 hours. And it was emotionally rip-rawring at the end. Would I watch it again? Not if I had to pay the admission fee.
Finally saw this last night. Enjoyed it reasonably enough. Thought it was very smart in the way that it referenced the original (one of the scenes they were filming on the boat had dialogue taken directly from the original, having the actor guy come out on stage as the hero). But, the movie has a huge race problem. I'd go so far as to say that it is, in some of its central premises, a racist film. I don't throw that charge around a lot, so here are the two major things I have a problem with. 1. The lack of articulation among the "natives." Now, I wouldn't want hippy, feel good welcoming natives who live in peace and understand nature, but would it be too much to ask for some articulation above gutteral grunts with eyes rolling back into their heads. Some communication with each other, perhaps. These natives were even less articulate than the orcs in the LotR. You might argue that the movie is filmed through the eyes of the folks on the boat and that's how they see them, or that it's a continuation of the forced Heart of Darkness metaphor, but either one doesn't satisfy me. 2. (And this is where I think the film is racist.) Why does Kong fall in love with Ann Darrow and not with any of the other women who have been offered him? Are we to believe that she is the first to try to entertain him, to try to engage with him? The conclusion the film offers is that he falls in love with her because she is beautiful ("beauty tamed the beast"). Not coincidentally, Ann Darrow is the first White woman to be offered to Kong. Thus the film makes an explicit connection of beauty and whiteness, and of lack of beauty and blackness. Even if we abandon the beauty explanation, we're left with the film's assumption that Ann is the first woman intellectually capable of developing empathy and connection with Kong, again leading to the stark White/Black dichotomy.
Peter Jackson is a good director, but he does need to learn to use his own ideas. He copied the Lord of the Rings 70's Film-Animation to create the trilogy, and copied the 70's version of King Kong in the latest adaptation. The ending should have been more creative imo, or Kong should never have left the island altogether. Oh, what do I know, I'm just a semi-pro footballer.
It also failed to address the key unanswered question of the original... How the fvck do they get Kong on the boat?