Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Entertainment › Movies (Theatrical) › It's official -- Peter Jackson's next film: King Kong
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

It's official -- Peter Jackson's next film: King Kong - Page 11  

post #301 of 814
6/27/05 at 11:05pm
I'm just not sure about this one. All I think about while watching the trailer is Jurassic Park: Lost World and that's not a good thing.

Hopefully I'll be proved wrong in December.
post #302 of 814
6/27/05 at 11:42pm
Quote:
I'm sure he'll have more than one expression.




Yeah, I hope so. LOL,

I got the idea not only from that photo, but from reading this little article where they go into some of the decisions they made regarding the age and general look of Kong.

http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/...ing-kong_x.htm

By the way, they also note that they are indeed still working on the post production & effects, and have not yet even finalized the look of Kong himself. I can't imagine PJ putting his 'DONE' stamp on this until it looks at least as polished as the LOTR films.
post #303 of 814
6/28/05 at 5:13am
Couple of quick comments. Those that weren't anticipating the film, but now are...bandwagon jumpers

PJ and KONG...what was there NOT to get excited about?!?

I think Adam is correct. The CG looked bad on my one viewing as well, but I assume the refining hasn't occurred. KONG looks good though. I'm not worried about that. The film will look fine the day it's released.

I wasn't overwhelmed with the trailer, but I enjoyed it. Jack Black (who I also thought was a good choice from the beginning - he's done more than Shallow Hal and School of Rock in the last few years) had a lot of lines in the trailer It was irrelevant how I responded to the trailer anyway.

1) KING KONG
2) PJ
3) Naomi
4) Naomi
5) Giant Monkey
6) Dinosaurs
7) Giant Monkey fighting dinosaurs
8) Naomi
9) Naomi and Giant Monkey
10) KING KONG

Anyways, I recommend we all continue to write KING KONG as such. Regular Font is unsatisfactory.

Make it so,
Chuck
post #304 of 814
6/28/05 at 6:29am
The trailer looked like a lot of fun, but Adam I agree with you 210% the CGI looked BAD. And no matter which way you cut it - high definition makes bad effects look WORSE. It's mostly animation issues here.


I thought the same thing...and it made the trailer a real disappointment for me. I did not use the link to the USA Today article, but it may be the same story I read that the look of Kong is still a work in progress. ANd reading some of these posts here, there is still a lot of work to do in the CGI department. So, why release the trailer now if it isn't showing things the way they will be seen in the finished movie? It's still six months away! Hopefully future trailers will be a more accurate reflection of the final product.
post #305 of 814
6/28/05 at 7:04am
Peej may be turning out to be the next Spielberg. Who else is succesfully tackling universally appealing, larger than life projects like these with such a fresh new eye? Is anyone else out there creating this sort of "Movie Magic?"

He is already on the very short list of household name directors, and a financial and critical success of King Kong will ensure that remains there for a long time.

Anyone knows what's next for him?

--
H
post #306 of 814
6/28/05 at 7:13am
Quote:
Anyone knows what's next for him?

I think he's set up to do an adaptation of The Lovely Bones. Kind of going back toward Heavenly Creatures territory.
post #307 of 814
6/28/05 at 7:15am
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0380510/combined
post #308 of 814
6/28/05 at 7:33am
The Lovely Bones is a fantastic book, and an interesting fit for PJ.

Take care,
Chuck
post #309 of 814
6/28/05 at 7:47am
My girlfriend finished reading The Lovely Bones a few months ago, and fell in love with it. Upon learning that PJ was going to direct it after Kong, she told me that he would be absolutely perfect for the material, and was happy that the book was in such good hands.
post #310 of 814
6/28/05 at 8:00am
I thought the trailer looked very good. My only real disappointment is the fact that it features that rather dreadful "action" music heard in a choral arrangement in the Fantastic Four trailer.

Regarding the effects, yes, some of them looked cartoony on my TV screen. They looked better, however, in the high-res QT version.

I recall the same criticisms of the FX in the early LOTR trailers. If WETA's track record is any indication, I think it's safe to say that we'll have forgotten our gripes by the time Dec. 14 rolls around. Either WETA will tweak them some more, or they'll simply look better to our eyes projected on a large screen at the proper resolution, when all the painstakingly created detail on these CG models isn't washed out.

--Jefferson Morris
post #311 of 814
6/28/05 at 8:04am
Sorry to those that didn't like the trailer but I thought it was fantastic. I loved the period look and approaching the boat gave a nice creepy descent into hell idea. Skull Island looked otherworldly, with those impossible rock formations and thick jungles. The natives looked amazing as well. The part that sold me was when the dinosaur, intent on getting Naomi, is stopped in its tracks when it sees Kong and you get that feeling of 'gulp, this is going to turn out bad for me'. Kong's roar was a perfect capper and I'm quite happy to see him in the trailer.

The only thing that gives me pause were the insect attacks. Done well...well, there aren't many mass insect attacks which don't feel campy (Eight Legged Freaks) or just badly done (Mummy Series). But, no reason to worry. Jackson has been doing nothing but impressing the hell out of me since Bad Taste.
post #312 of 814
6/28/05 at 8:41am
I'd like to ask a delicate question and hope it hasn't been covered before. We did not get good looks at the natives in the trailer and when I looked at the HD captures there is one of a young, native girl.

Frankly, she appears to me to be caucasion and not of color. I have wondered how the natives would be portrayed in this version, because its 70 years later and what was done in the original wouldn't fly today.

I'm wondering how the natives will be portrayed worshiping a big ape and offering human sacrifices without becoming racist?
post #313 of 814
6/28/05 at 8:43am
Looks good, better then I expected.
post #314 of 814
6/28/05 at 9:40am
The CGI is not movie ready and it has been proven time and time again that what is in a trailer is better taken as a draft version. I will wait for December before making any such pronouncements.

It is the content that counts and PJ is delivering once again.

Christmas and PJ - watch out Santa! Someone is going to take your job away!
post #315 of 814
6/28/05 at 10:15am
Johnny,
I wonder if they might be Maori or something closer to Pacific Islander. I'll have to give it a closer look.
post #316 of 814
6/28/05 at 10:37am
As was already mentioned, Jackson will helm "The Lovely Bones" after wrapping work on 'Kong'. Word around the campfire is that PJ wants to concentrate on smaller films for a while. The guy has been non-stop for the last five years working on the LOTR trilogy and 'Kong'. Doing four immense projects like that back to back have probably taken a lot out of the guy.

Jackson is still expected to eventually helm "The Hobbit", but it'll probably be a few years before PJ and co. decide to jump into another "mega-production" like LOTR or 'Kong'. Plus, PJ has that nasty little lawsuit against New Line to wrap up.

After 'Kong', expect his next two features to be more along the lines of "Heavenly Creatures".
post #317 of 814
6/28/05 at 11:28am
Doing four immense projects like that back to back have probably taken a lot out of the guy.

Yeah, just look at recent pictures. He's only about half the man he used to be.

So, why release the trailer now if it isn't showing things the way they will be seen in the finished movie? It's still six months away!

Because for the past six months, all the impatient fans have been shouting "Where's the trailer?!" "Shouldn't there be a trailer by now?!" "When's the trailer coming out?" "If they're smart, they'll have a trailer out this summer?!" "They can't be waiting until fall to release the first trailer can they?!" "Where the hell's the damn trailer!?

Of course, now that we have it, many of those same people seem to be nitpicking the unfinished CGI. Damned if you do, damned if you don't....
post #318 of 814
6/28/05 at 11:28am
After 'Kong', expect his next two features to be more along the lines of "Heavenly Creatures".


I'll believe it when I see it. It seems like after major projects like this, everyone from Jim Cameron to Bryan Singer talk about how they want to do "smaller" films but they rarely materialize. Spielberg seems to be one of the few who consistently balances small and event pictures on a regular basis.

Jackson also has the health of Weta to be concerned about and these big event pictures certainly help keep food on the plate for their employees.

I think the same about Lucas- for all of his talk of going to "small, experimental" films I think it will be closer to the post ROTJ period- ie he won't direct any films at all.
post #319 of 814
6/28/05 at 11:31am
Jackson also has the health of Weta to be concerned about and these big event pictures certainly help keep food on the plate for their employees.

Weta has plenty on their plate besides whatever is generated by PJ. I believe they're currently working on "Chronicles of Narnia" and I'd heard they're supposed to be working on the film adaptation of Steve Alten's "MEG," supposedly coming out July 4 weekend 2006.

LOTR has transformed them into one of the MAJOR effects houses. I doubt they'll be starving for a long time to come.
post #320 of 814
6/28/05 at 11:32am
Quote:
The CGI is not movie ready and it has been proven time and time again that what is in a trailer is better taken as a draft version. I will wait for December before making any such pronouncements.

A very good idea. Most people on the Internet should learn to do the same. The movie is not finished yet!
post #321 of 814
6/28/05 at 11:38am
I have no major issues with the CGI and expect it to be perfectly fine in December. But you can't put a trailer out with "draft" CGI and then attempt to deflect criticism. The trailer is an official release. It can be judged. I wouldn't judge the FILM on it, but we can certainly judge the trailer on it.

Kevin, Cameron DID do smaller films that interested him...they just weren't films. The Bismarck special on the Discovery Channel and Ghosts of the Abyss.

Jackson paid a pretty penny for The Lovely Bones...he'll make the film.

Take care,
Chuck
post #322 of 814
6/28/05 at 12:03pm
Weta has plenty on their plate besides whatever is generated by PJ. I believe they're currently working on "Chronicles of Narnia" and I'd heard they're supposed to be working on the film adaptation of Steve Alten's "MEG," supposedly coming out July 4 weekend 2006.


I believe someone clarified in the Narnia thread that while some of WETA is working on Narnia, WETA Digital is not. And it seems like most of the other proposed WETA projects like the Evangelion live action movie never seem to get past the concept stage. Maybe MEG will happen this time but that movie has been in various stages of development since the novel debuted almost a decade ago.

Their LOTR work has cemented their respect, but I think its hard to get contracts when you are located so far away from the rest of the Hollywood power base.
post #323 of 814
6/28/05 at 12:06pm
Kevin, Cameron DID do smaller films that interested him...they just weren't films. The Bismarck special on the Discovery Channel and Ghosts of the Abyss.


Heh, yeah I thought about that after I posted but I seem to recall talk of smaller, traditional feature films.

Jackson paid a pretty penny for The Lovely Bones...he'll make the film.


I have no doubt there *will* be a Lovely Bones film. But I wouldn't be surprised if Jackson ends up working on it only as a producer. We'll see.
post #324 of 814
6/28/05 at 12:34pm
"Meg" is going to happen (likely in 2007), but more than one FX House will be handling the work on that one.

While the LOTR trilogy did put WETA among the top FX Houses in the biz, the top three (in terms of getting major contracts and overall workload) remain ILM, Sony Imageworks, and Digital Domain.

As Kevin pointed out, WETA Digital's biggest problem is their location. 'Kong' could net the company their first non-LOTR Oscar (if 'Sith' or WOTW don't get ILM their 15th FX Oscar that is), which would help the company compete for non-Peter Jackson helmed flicks.
post #325 of 814
6/28/05 at 1:09pm
The only caveat I have is the implication that the final product is being concurrently evaluated. A trailer is a work-in-progress and evaluation of it has finite relevance.

Knowing how organically PJ works, I have to wonder how many of those shots are even going to make it into the movie or were devised just for the trailer.

One can judge trailers for many aspects, but beyond rating how well it does in creating buzz, to me there is little value in doing so.
post #326 of 814
6/28/05 at 3:00pm
I was iffy about the film, but after seeing the trailer I am going to put it on my "must see in the theater" list.
post #327 of 814
6/28/05 at 4:22pm
Quote:
Of course, now that we have it, many of those same people seem to be nitpicking the unfinished CGI. Damned if you do, damned if you don't....
Considering that this is everyone's first impression of the movie, you'd think they'd make sure that the effects in the trailer are atleast as good as anything in the final product. One should always put their best foot forward, after all. It simply makes no sense for them to release a trailer with F/X shots anything short of final product quality.
post #328 of 814
6/28/05 at 4:28pm
It simply makes no sense for them to release a trailer with F/X shots anything short of final product quality.

It does when your target audience is 99.999999999% comprised of non-cinephiles with regular eyes instead of what are apparently the HD ocular implants of many folks here.

To those who don't really wallow in the minutae of film and special effects work, I'm sure it was more than sufficiently rendered.
post #329 of 814
6/28/05 at 4:52pm
Anyways, I recommend we all continue to write KING KONG as such. Regular Font is unsatisfactory.


In 1980, a close friend of mine was manager of a restored 1928 movie palace. This was the era just before the VCR when a classic movie house could earn it's keep with a program of art house/independent cinema combined with hollywood classics. My friend was looking through the closet that contained the marquee letters when he suddenly exclaimed, "...my GOD, look at the size of THESE!". He then showed me the BIGGEST marquee letters I've ever seen in my life. He then stated that he knew exactly what movie he'd use them for. Sure enough, months later I'm walking to the theatre to see one of my all time favorite classics when I look up and gaze upon those giant letters spelling KING KONG. He never used those letters for anything else. Yeah, regular font is VERY unsatisfactory.
post #330 of 814
6/28/05 at 5:37pm
It does when your target audience is 99.999999999% comprised of non-cinephiles with regular eyes instead of what are apparently the HD ocular implants of many folks here.


Yeah, in the discussion of the trailer on a few other non-movie focused messageboards I visit I've seen nary a complaint about unfinished CGI.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Movies (Theatrical)
This thread is locked  
Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Entertainment › Movies (Theatrical) › It's official -- Peter Jackson's next film: King Kong