|
|
 |
|
12-18-2005, 10:02 PM
|
#301 of 786 
|
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 1999
Local Time: 05:45 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 1,333
|
Did anyone see the sign (probably already mentioned) for the in the hold of the Venture? I believe it's the
|
|
|
|
12-19-2005, 12:13 AM
|
#302 of 786
|
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Local Time: 05:45 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 2,276
|
Thought the film was great! The Central Park scene was brilliant, IMO. I was also glad to see that after all the Box Office scare that went on for the weekend, the film seems to be already showing its legs with its Saturday rise and small Sunday drop.
One question... with the 3 versions; the '33, '76 and now '05, was this the smallest version of Kong? He was about 25 feet I believe. Was that the same height in the '33 version? I can vaguely recall him being MUCH bigger in the '76 version.
|
|
|
|
12-19-2005, 12:20 AM
|
#303 of 786
|
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Local Time: 01:45 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 216
|
Quote:
|
and ultimately distracting tangents such as the pointless Jimmy/Hayes relationship (if the third acts focus was on how Jimmy reacted after this expedition once they got back to New York now that he no longer has a mentor, then yes, thoses sequences would have been valid and neccessary- barring that, they are pointless)and i was even more annoyed in retrospect that that screentime was squandered by not better setting up a stronger relationship between Ann and Jack.
|
Couldn't agree more. But, like many others have said, I still really like this movie. Some of it was needless, but its still a thrilling movie. BTW, I also missed that Kong-tongue-ripping moment.
|
|
|
|
|
12-19-2005, 12:32 AM
|
#304 of 786
|
|
Roger Jason Adams
Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Local Time: 12:45 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 614
|
Quote:
|
On the Howard Shore thing, was all of it creative differences or was it more along the lines of "I have to score this by WHEN?!?" Just curious.
|
It was the latter. Since Shore orchestrates and composes BY HIMSELF, he couldn't have the score done on time. Shame too...I would have really loved to hear it, instead of the sonic wallpaper. Another John Barry King Kong score would have been the icing on the cake.
|
|
|
|
|
12-19-2005, 12:53 AM
|
#305 of 786
|
|
Member
Location: Bethalto, IL. North of St. Louis
Join Date: Feb 2000
Local Time: 12:45 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 6,353
|
Just got back from seeing it, I agree that it was a bit pretentious in the first half and a lot of the "busy work" action sequences could have been pulled back a little IMO but I am still satisfied with the film...a great film in fact.
I don't have a problem with Jackson's preferred use of "skip-frame" slo-mo, I never have.
JNH's score was OK but nothing special (although the love theme on the ship, when Ann is trying to cry for the camera and sees Jack, stood out as classic JNH and was quite nice IMO)....John Barry's score for the 76 version is still the best as far as I am concerned.
Only thirty or so people in the theater when I saw it tonight. 
|
|
|
|
|
12-19-2005, 01:42 AM
|
#306 of 786
|
|
Member
Location: Lexington, KY
Join Date: May 2001
Local Time: 12:45 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 8,424
|
One of my favorite scenes is the Central park one.
|
|
|
|
|
12-19-2005, 07:37 AM
|
#307 of 786
|
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Local Time: 05:45 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 2,287
|
Quote:
|
One question... with the 3 versions; the '33, '76 and now '05, was this the smallest version of Kong? He was about 25 feet I believe. Was that the same height in the '33 version? I can vaguely recall him being MUCH bigger in the '76 version.
|
His height is variable in the original version. He's about 25 feet on Skull Island, and then gets a bit taller when the action moves to New York. They talk about it a little on the dvd. |
|
|
|
|
12-19-2005, 08:25 AM
|
#308 of 786
|
|
Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Local Time: 12:45 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 190
|
Well with just over 50 million for the weekend gross, that brings King Kong up to 66 million since opening. I don't think there is any way it will not make it's money back, but it's a shame it is not doing better.
Farewell and adieu to you fair Spanish ladies.
Farewell and adieu to you ladies of Spain.
For we\'ve received orders to sail back to Boston.
And so nevermore shall we be seeing you again.
|
|
|
|
|
12-19-2005, 08:40 AM
|
#309 of 786
|
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Local Time: 12:45 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 7,684
|
Well, the EW states the 300 effects shots cut from the film are completed, so no worries about seeing them at some point. I still want the film to do well, but I'm less worried now. It's opening take, plus the holidays and WOM, ensure it will be in the black before DVD. And probably a huge seller as well. That's enough for me.
I believe the young Walsh-Jackson boy is handing out the papers in the beginning  I did not see him, but a friend of mine did...she has better eyes than me.
Something we have't talked a lot about, but deserves the attention, is the period NYC effects work. I think it's fabulous, as good as anything we've seen this year. I was initially a bit concerned about this aspect of the film, but it ended up being a real highlight. |
|
|
|
|
12-19-2005, 09:23 AM
|
#310 of 786
|
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Local Time: 01:45 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 582
|
I enjoyed the movie, despite its many flaws, but I just have to say that the final line of dialogue is one of the worst bits of screenwriting I have seen all year. Black's awful delivery didn't help matters at all. What should have been a moment of supreme tragedy instead became a moment of unintentional comedy, and the theater was filled with snickers and laughter as a result. If that moment had been cut, the ending would have been much more staisfying.
|
|
|
|
|
12-19-2005, 09:58 AM
|
#311 of 786
|
|
Tim Glover
Member
Join Date: Jan 1999
Local Time: 11:45 AM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 7,791
|
| |
