|
|
 |
|
12-14-2005, 10:29 AM
|
#31 of 786 
|
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Local Time: 12:45 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 7,684
|
I felt some of it was filler. I'll admit that. None of it was bad. Maybe it was because it was 1 AM, I don't know.
In the end, it's completely irrelevant. What I found to be minor filler some might think essential.
|
|
|
|
12-14-2005, 10:32 AM
|
#32 of 786
|
|
Crawdaddy
Administrator
Location: Michigan
Join Date: Dec 1998
Local Time: 12:45 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 18,319
|
This thread is now designated the Official Discussion Thread for "King Kong" please, post all comments, links to outside reviews, film and box office discussion items to this thread.
All HTF member film reviews of "King Kong" should be posted to the Official Review Thread.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Crawdaddy
G.W. McLintock: Camille, you're on your own.
|
|
|
|
|
12-14-2005, 10:38 AM
|
#33 of 786
|
|
Member
Join Date: May 2002
Local Time: 12:45 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 3,859
|
Chuck:
With the LOTR:EE, the additional material was great because:
1) the plot and characters were already so compelling that you wanted more; and
2) they were based on popular (and lengthy) books that have lots of great material.
So, I didn't feel like any of the stuff was filler.
KONG seems a bit different, however, because it is based on the 1933 film which was 100 minutes long (watched it last night, by the way, and it is easily one of my all time top 20 favorites). There isn't a lot of extra material to work with, especially for people that have never seen the 1933 film.
|
|
|
|
12-14-2005, 10:40 AM
|
#34 of 786
|
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Local Time: 05:45 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 2,127
|
Quote:
I felt some of it was filler. I'll admit that. None of it was bad. Maybe it was because it was 1 AM, I don't know.
|
Doesn't sound too bad if you gave it a 9.5 
Very well written review. Do you have the urge to see it again any time soon? I know PJs films can be exhausting on many levels (in a good way), but all of the LOTRs had the most effect on me the second viewing for some reason. It's just so much to take in at once. |
|
|
|
|
12-14-2005, 10:42 AM
|
#35 of 786
|
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Local Time: 12:45 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 7,684
|
Hey first post!!!! Hahahahaha. Not really...all thanks to a Crawdaddy snip.
I cut the review off but there was so much more to say. The music wasn't terribly distinctive until the last hour, and then it was excellent.
The action scene I mentioned is the KONG/V-Rex fight, and it's one for the books.
PJ really needs to make an R-rated horror film. He keeps slipping in horror elements, and he's not afraid of body counts  The Natives attack sequence was rather harrowing and nightmarish, and I'd be interested to see something similar without the PG-13 safety net. And I'm not even a horror guy. |
|
|
|
|
12-14-2005, 10:46 AM
|
#36 of 786
|
|
Member
Join Date: May 2002
Local Time: 12:45 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 3,859
|
Quote:
|
PJ really needs to make an R-rated horror film. He keeps slipping in horror elements, and he's not afraid of body counts
|
I was shocked at the violence in the original version, given that it was 1933.
|
|
|
|
|
12-14-2005, 10:47 AM
|
#37 of 786
|
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Local Time: 12:45 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 7,684
|
Kami,
I really want to see it again: it's a rich feast of a film, I had to take a wicked leak in the last hour, and because I might have been hard on the first hour. I'd like to be sure. But it's an emotionally exhausting film (it was last night), so I can wait until the weekend. I do vow to see it twice more because it's such a big screen treat.
Chris,
Not everything that happens in the middle hour is plot-centric...it's PJ having fun on Skull Island. Some of the beginning material is good stuff, but not critical path. I'd definitely watch a longer version of this film, but I don't think anything major is missing (unless it deals with Jamie Bell a little more). The LOTR films needed the EEs in some cases. KK doesn't need more material.
|
|
|
|
|
12-14-2005, 12:03 PM
|
#38 of 786
|
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Local Time: 05:45 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 2,287
|
Quote:
|
I was shocked at the violence in the original version, given that it was 1933.
|
1933 is pre-Production Code era, IIRC, so some of the movies made back then could be pretty vicious (and overtly sexual, too).
Quote:
|
The Natives attack sequence was rather harrowing and nightmarish, and I'd be interested to see something similar without the PG-13 safety net. And I'm not even a horror guy.
|
Lot of the horror-centric critics' reviews I've read have compared the natives in this version to the natives encountered in Italian cannibal films. Never thought I'd see something like that in a big Hollywood production  |
|
|
|
|
12-14-2005, 12:27 PM
|
#39 of 786
|
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Local Time: 01:45 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 67
|
It has been so difficult to avoid reading or watching reviews about King Kong. But I can always count on HTF to give initial impressions without spoiling anything. I can't wait to see this on the big screen and sure enough will see it more than once.
|
|
|
|
|
12-14-2005, 01:34 PM
|
#40 of 786
|
|
Member
Join Date: Nov 2000
Local Time: 12:45 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 1,151
|
Great review, Chuck. I won't be seeing this until Sunday (!), but good to know folks whose film opinions I respect are giving it enthusiastic recommendations.
\"You know, God has some really weird kids, and I find it hard to be in their company most of the time.\"
--Paul \"Bono\" Hewson
|
|
|
|
|
12-14-2005, 01:47 PM
|
#41 of 786
|
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Local Time: 12:45 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 7,684
|
Anecdotal evidence alert!
Don't expect a huge midnight take. My usual theater (AMC 22) showed the midnight KONG on one screen, and it wasn't but about half full. Never been to a midnight show that wasn't packed or on multiple screens. I still think the film is going to be pretty huge, with a nice long WoM supported run in theaters. But it won't open to $100M.
Unless my screening was the exception, and I doubt it was.
|
|
|
|
|
12-14-2005, 01:50 PM
|
|
