*** Official KING KONG Review Thread (1 Viewer)

[SteveGon]

Just got back from a showing.

While I agree that the film had its (minor) flaws, it's still a heckuva piece of entertainment!

:star: :star: :star: :star: out of :star: :star: :star: :star:

 

[Jim Smith]

Peter Jacksons King Kong is a well done remake that does the original justice. In my view the 1976 version is a guide on how not to remake a classic. This is the first remake that fans of the original can finally enjoy. First of all the effects are perfect. It possibly has the best effects work ever put on screen. Kong looks so real I almost thought they used a real ape. Skull Island is beautiful designed and fun as hell. Kong versus the tyranosaurs is one of the best fight scenes in cinema. 70 years of inovation show immensily. The movie isn't perfect. The films length is completly unnessary. A good half hour could have been cut easy and the movie would have lost nothing. The boat ride getting to skull island is pretty boring and one of the most slow annoying build ups in cinema. The cuting away from Kong to stage plays were a terrible way to break up the flow. I also hated that the giant pteranadon was replaced by some lame giant bats. Overall though Id say the strengths far outweigh the flaws and Peter Jacksons King Kong is a fun exciting and emotional experiance to be enjoyed.

8.5/10

 

[Sam Favate]

I thought it was great. Thoroughly satisfying, and in many ways, even better than the original. Sure, it was long, but when I thought about what could have been cut, I came up with nothing. The long opening scenes in New York were all about character development, and without them, you lose a lot of the experience. I think when a director like Peter Jackson is making a three-hour adventure picture, he's saying "Do you want to come on this journey?" This is not a quick roller coaster ride.

I liked that the "relationship" between Ann and Kong was more fleshed out. I felt that she really cared what happened to him - something I didn't get from the original. She could see he was a peaceful creature, who was vicious only when he had to survive. He was intelligent too, which is something else the Denhams of the movie couldn't see. I think Jackson conveyed all of this very well.

 

[Jordan_E]

:star: :star: out of 5

Didn't get any sense of wonder from this movie at all. It was okay, but I couldn't raise any emotion for something that needed SO much editing. Sure, the natives were creepy as hell, but that pole vaulting thing was laughable! Now, I really wished I had waited for the DVD, since I give movies much more slack watching at home.

 

[Steve Y]

First of all, I have to say I'm a big fan of Peter Jackson and have most of his movies on DVD.

The opening to the movie, which set up the 1930s, was excellent. The whole introduction to Ann Darrow's character was great. But after the boat trip is arranged, there needed to be a jump cut to Skull Island, or at least right before. This "boat trip" section of the movie needed MAJOR excising. Whole subplots should have been cut, or at least the most necessary dialogue could have been plugged into the jungle scenes, if absolutely necessary.

Overall, King Kong was too long by an hour, maybe more. I thought the scene with the "natives" was by far the worst; it was straight out of the beginning of Braindead. But unlike Braindead, it wasn't played for laughs here.

Peter Jackson has this love affair with the overcranked effect (used in the Uruquai / river montage from the end of FOTR and in the "Pippin grabs the sphere" scene from ROTK, among others) and it still doesn't work. It looks cheap. Like, "this scene isn't intense enough, so let's overcrank it and pump up the intensity."

In contrast, I thought the "pole-vaulting" natives were great. One of many astounding visuals in this movie. It was the only sequence with the natives that wasn't overly campy / gory.

I always enjoy big special-effects sequences. All of them worked for me in this Kong except for the "stampede" sequence, which was just way too over the top even for me, though it looked pretty cool. It was also the only big sequence that didn't propel the story or characters forward.

I loved the bugs and the T-rex fight and everything after the story returns to New York. Naomi Watts was amazing. Her interactions with Kong were the heart of the movie, and thankfully, they worked completely. While I'm not going to jump on the "Serkis deserves an oscar" bandwagon, I was truly moved by the big ape's expressive qualities.

Ultimately I just didn't connect to (most of) the human characters in the movie, which is too bad considering how much time the movie took to set them up, only to waltz them out of the movie again. They would have been just fine to me as "character types" surrounding Naomi and Serkis.

An ambitious homage to the original movie, the new King Kong ultimately collapses under its own weight. I'll agree with the critics who write that it's a very good 100-minute adventure/love story stuck in the body of an unwieldy 800-lb. epic.

:star: :star: out of :star: :star: :star: :star: :star:

 

[Brett_M]

King Kong played much the same way Return of the King did the first time I saw it: I was numb after watching it. I didn't want to tell anyone what I thought. I had to let it play in my head for a while. I was so amazed by the effects and so glad that I was finally seeing it, I wasn't affected by the story on an emotional level (although I was in tears at the end).

When I saw ROTK a second time, I let it wash over me and was blown away emotionally. I think KK will play that way upon a second viewing.

The performances were great. The CGI was incredible. I enjoyed the score very much. For every quibble mentioned in this thread, I have 2 or 3 sequences which blew me away. I think that Jackson and Co. basically released an extended cut of the film theatrically. There are character moments in the film that don't add to it right now. If the film was 150 minutes theatrically and then released on DVD at 187 minutes, I think we'd love the additions. There is so much to KK that we can't process it all.

My advice to those who have not seen it: Stop reading the armchair quaterbacking in this thread and see the film on the biggest screen you can.

I liked King Kong a lot and I'm pretty sure I'll love it after I see it again.

Right now, it's a solid 4.5/5.

 

[Dome Vongvises]

Score: B+/A-

It felt long. Otherwise, awesome movie.

 

[Brian_J]

A Stunning Film...

I am amazed by some of the comments of those about editing this film down and particularly as it relates to the opening hour. My only thoughts are that we as a society have become so numbed to typical Michael Bay filmaking and so impatient in the new technology driven millenium that we cannot even wait for character development and emotional build up. I truly dont get it (maybe its ADD). I for one thought that the initial build up was exceptional. I was coming out of my seat in anticipation for skull island. This is how it is supposed to be. It is not supposed to fall in your lap, you are supposed to long for it.

And when it arrives oh boy hold onto your seat. This is a true rollercoaster ride. I for one have been so dissapointed by every CGI laden film I have seen, whether it be the Star Wars garbage or the ridiculouse adventure film du jour that I am stunned after watching this movie. I have a real appreciation for Mr. Jackson. This movie has heart and soul plain and simple and no other CGI laden film that I can think of comes close to making me actually care about the people in the movie.

There is true emotional involvement with the ape, due in large part to how ferocious he is played at the start and the fact that Naomi does a wonderful job in this film as you watch her go from fright to love. By the time he is to be captured you are hating that you know what is on the way. This is just one of the tear jerkers. Followed only by the wonderful ice scene in New York and of course the climax of the film.

We all knew it was bad but you really come to understand just how poor that 70's remake of Kong was when you watch this film. This film redeems that mistake much in the way Batman Begins redeemed those other attrocious affronts to cinema.

Brian

10 out of 10

 

[Rich Romero]

I really liked it. LOVED Kong and most scenes involving him. Naomi Watts was incredible. Unfortunately, the movie was just too long and could have easily chopped off a half hour worth of material. Right now I'll give it:

:star: :star: :star: :star: out of :star: :star: :star: :star: :star:

 

[Carlo_M]

Just got back from the movie: 9/10

I had zero problems with the length of the movie or the pacing. I think the extra time with the characters at the beginning paid off throughout the movie. I thought the quiet moments between characters (and yes this includes the big guy and the girl) all were very well done.

It's funny, when we see movies that are fast paced, we say "Wait for the Extended Edition for the extra characterization that the studio forced them to chop"--well in King Kong you don't have to say that, because they are all there onscreen. And now, ironically, we get people saying "it should have been trimmed down." Oh well, you can't please everyone.

The only reason I didn't give it a 10 rating is that while 90% of the CGI was well done (especially Kong and the dinosaurs), I really don't like it when humans are CGI'd. We know how humans run and fall, and CGI (to date) has not been able to recreate that faithfully. Something still rings untrue to the eye.

And of course, some of the physics were a bit over the top. I don't mind suspending disbelief, but if Ann Darrow had really been whipped around like she was by Kong at various stages of her captivity, she would not only have had severe whiplash, but probably dislocated vertebrates and other severe damage.

Other than those two minor quibbles, I thought this was an excellent film!

 

[BarryS]

Since there seems to be some dispute over it, I wanted to chime in again and say that I LOVED the opening New York City scenes. They introduce Ann Darrow and Carl Denham perfectly. I love the period detail that Jackson put into these scenes. I wasn't as fond of the scenes on the boat, but I certainly don't mind them. Though I did love the scene where Denham films Ann Darrow and Bruce Baxter and they quote dialog from the '33 King Kong in a little in-joke.

I love the whole film. I agree with what Harry Knowles wrote in his review. I didn't think King Kong was too long, I thought it was too short. I could have sat through another hour easily (though I probably would have pissed myself).

 

[Joseph Bolus]

I finally had an opportunity to view King Kong Sunday afternoon.

I went into this movie with fairly large expectations (based on the reviews) and I came out of the theater thinking that it was even better than I thought it would be!

As one of the reviewers stated: "This isn't just a remake of the 1933 movie; it *is* that movie; just "fleshed-out" and with modern production values." Indeed, I think you could edit the movie down to the original's 100 minute running time and include every scene that was in the original! But you wouldn't really want to do that after being exposed to this edition. Peter Jackson has made more than a living, breathing, remake of Kong. I think he has actually retired the trophy for the best movie ever made in this genre'. You want action/adventure/fantasy/mythos? You've got it in spades! You want monsters? You've got monsters out the gazoo! And the monsters go way beyond "just dinosaurs". Do you like to see your monsters go on a rampage? "Hold on to your butts!"

All this, and the ending was just ... rapturous ... even as it was tragic.

All I can say was: I was entertained!!!! (And left breathless!!)

:star: :star: :star: :star: :star: out of :star: :star: :star: :star: :star:

 

[Joe D]

The Good:

The final New York scenes were fantastic, the effects were great and they were a lot of fun.

The V-Rex fight scenes were a lot of fun.

The sound.

The Bad:

The quality of the effects was either great, good, or bad depending on which shot.

The score.

The Ugly:

The Bronto chase sequence, bad effects, WAY over the top, and way too long.

The overall length of the picture. 2 Hours would have been perfect.

All the time spent on items that go nowhere, such as the boy thief story, that could have been completely cut out.

The bug fight.

The movie had its moments, unfortunately it was sandwiched into an hour of fluff that hurt the movie.

2.5 stars out of four for me.

 

[Daman]

Saw it over the weekend and did not enjoy it as much as i thought i would. The movie shines at what's the core, i felt for the beast and his emotions were superbly done.For the first time i actually felt his loss and love. But the scenes on the Skull island like the bug alley or the dinosour chase/t rex fights were way overdone. They totally took me out of the movie. That whole part could have been totally done away with. 3 stars out of five for me.

 

[Simon Massey]

Not an awful film but I was expecting so much better after the Rings trilogy.

To say it is too long is an understatement. I am surprised really because Jackson held my attention throughout the Rings films for 3 hours at a time and I never even noticed. Here it really began to drag in the first hour. When your film is called King Kong and it takes nearly 70 minutes for the title character to turn up, you'd better be sure that those 70 minutes are worth it for the build-up. Quite frankly, nearly all of those 70 minutes added very little to the film for me, especially the scenes on the boat with Jimmy. Ok, I appreciated the effort to get to know the characters a little better, but the only ones worth following are Jack and Ann since they are really the only ones who have a storyline that is carried through to the end of the film.

However, once Kong does show up, the film improves dramatically. I found all of the scenes with Kong to be by far the best part of the film, and the last hour was great. The dino-stampede was OTT in the wrong sense of the word yet the Kong vs T-Rex's was OTT in the right sense if that makes sense.

The finale in New York was brilliant really well done. It's such a shame really because there is a great film here about 2 hours long. It's just that the extra padding is not compelling enough to warrant a 3 hour film.

3/5

 

[Jason Roer]

Am I the only one (other than my wife) who actually enjoyed the 1st hour better than anything else in the film? I mean, I loved the whole film, but thought the build up to Skull Island was sensational. My mouth hit the floor when I saw the recreation of 1930's NYC! I thought the additional info about Ann was fantastic - loved the vaudville show she was working on! Having lost a mentor myself, I was happy to see the relationship developed between Jimmy and Hayes (though I'll agree the scene itself seemed to be slapped on - wish there had been a been flow in and out of the scene - but I didn't have any problem with the scene itself and thought it played off nicely when Hayes ultimately met his end in front of Jimmy's eyes).

Excellent film. Would love more - especially a sequence where they show Kong being hoisted onto the Venture and the journey home. Tension as it looks as though Kong might wake before they arrive in NY! Torment as the remaining crew let the events of Skull Island set in!

As far as scenes that could have been cut - I agree the Brontosaurus chase and the Bugs could have easily been lost and a few other minutes here and there. The thing is - this is the first time I actually enjoyed all the excess. I usually can't stand it when something is there just to be there. But I loved those scenes. Yes - those scene are going to hurt the box office. If those scenes and a few minutes extra were trimmed, the film would be 30-45 minutes shorter and you know what - I bet many people that aren't going to would give it a second viewing in the theater. Myself being one of them.

Will definately own this on DVD - and if time permits (doubtful), I'll catch it again in January.

Cheers,

Jason

 

[Edwin Pereyra]

A gentler and milder Kong? I’m sorry, but I just didn’t buy it.

Peter Jackson was supposed to remake Merian Cooper’s 1933 classic. But instead of King Kong, what we get is a hybrid between the original and Mighty Joe Young. Kong is supposed to be ferocious, menacing and unrelenting not only to the creatures it fights on Skull Island but also to the visitors who found their way into the island.

Up until the scene where the film and boat crew meet the natives on Skull Island, there is an aura of seriousness, mystery and peril. But as soon as Kong meets the story’s heroine, Ann Darrow, it takes a 180-degree turn into the world of Walt Disney films. From here on out what we get is too much sugar that what is missing are sugar plum fairies dancing to make it whole. The scene where Kong slips and slides on a frozen lake reminds me of a Coca-Cola commercial with its polar bears. Noticeably, the violence and thereby, the intensity is turned down for most of the film’s second half.

There is no doubt that Peter Jackson’s King Kong excels in visual effects but his decision to humanize Kong to the point of making him too charming and compassionate than menacing is a detriment to its story and in the end, to its acceptability and believability. The film also does not warrant its 187-minute running time. Certain scenes have been rewritten and characters added from the original that did not add any more depth to it.

I went into this film expecting to see Kong. But instead, what I got was Mighty Joe Young pretending to be King Kong.

Peter Jackson’s remake rates :star: :star: ½ (out of four).

~Edwin

 

[Steve Christou]

"And lo, the beast looked upon the face of beauty. And it stayed its hand from killing. And from that day, it was as one dead."

[blows nose] Look I've got a cold alright, a sniffle, that's all, that film had no effect on me whatsoever [wipes eyes] I'm fine I'm fine just give me a minute here.

Okay we're back from the cinema, we saw arguably the greatest monster movie of all time. KING KONG. After a slow build up, which I quite enjoyed, we reach Skull Island and face to face with... the creepiest ugliest natives in movie history, like something out of Cannibal Holocaust, these zombiefied natives don't waste much time kidnapping the gorgeous Ann Darrow and offering her to their ape god. From there on the film never loses momentum as we're thrust from one incredible action set-piece after another, it does get exhausting after a while.

One of my favorite scenes and the films turning point is when Ann entertains Kong on his mountain top retreat, she dances about, juggles, trips over, does cartwheels and Kong seems mightily amused by this unusual display, this is when Kong falls for Ann, and more importantly decides not to eat her. And this is also when we the audience realise we're going to be in floods of tears by the films finale. Peter Jackson knows how to press all the right buttons, he's the master of the long lingering tearful stare as he amply demonstrated in the Rings trilogy. I admit I got misty-eyed at the climax atop the then tallest building in the world, not sure what Sandra's reaction was, she had a glazed look, probably wondering if the film was ever going to end.

The highlight as far as Sandra was concerned wasn't Kong's protracted battle with the three T-Rex's, which btw has to be one of the greatest action set pieces of all time, easily ranking alongside the Mines of Moria, the Battles of Helm's Deep and Pellenor Fields from the Lord of the Rings trilogy, but the sequence in the 'snake pit' (a homage to the original Kongs legendary lost film), which if you're easily squeamish will have you turning away or covering your eyes, as prehistoric cockroaches the size of cats and other giant creepy crawlies attack our heroes. Sandra was looking thru her fingers during this bit. Not really necessary plotwise but the audience seemed to love it.

The film was great, I loved it, Jackson did a great job, a King Kong for a new generation. Faults? 187 minutes was a tad too long, it could have been trimmed here and there, especially when some subplots don't seem to go anywhere. I enjoyed the brontosaurus stampede, a lot of people here thought it was the films low point, I thought the effects were excellent, yes some of the matting was iffy and there's no way these people would have survived running beneath the feet of these massive lumbering dinosaurs but it's a fantasy, Indiana Jones on Skull Island, just enjoy the ride!

Kong himself is the greatest example of what computer generated imagery can create to date! Beyond state of the art. This is a living breathing animal, the hero and heart of the film, and along with the mesmerising Naomi Watts the best actor in the film, a totally convincing creation. Winning next years Best Visual Effects Oscar will seem almost an insult to Kong.

:star: :star: :star: :star: :star: out of :star: :star: :star: :star: :star:

 

[Sam Davatchi]

Saw the movie today. Excellent, breathtaking movie. Regarding the running time. Not even once I looked at my watch but I do understand the complaints about it. Here is the surprise, no the movie could not have been trimmed!

People who complain about the length don’t know it but if it feels long and sometimes rushed, it’s because it’s too short! If Jackson adds to the movie, it will be shorter and easier to watch. This is the same situation as Fellowship of the Ring. I think that like that movie, the Extended Edition would flow better and feel shorter.

And also to people who say it’s a failure at the box-office. I mean please, so what? It doesn’t matter. The important thing is the movie itself and it’s a marvelous achievement, the rest is not important.

 

[Chris Atkins]

KING KONG

:star: :star: :star: 1/2 / :star: :star: :star: :star: :star:

I largely agree with Edwin's review. I saw the 1933 version only two weeks ago, but I found it an instant classic that immediately went on my top-20 list. I found Peter Jackson's version a pleasing visual feast but mostly cold emotionally.

The central relationship in the film is, of course, between Ann and Kong. I mostly did not buy into that relationship. In the original, the relationship is mostly one sided: Kong is fascinated with Ann who is, throughout the entire film, terrified of the beast.

In this version, though, Ann has feelings for the mighty beast, and I just did not empathize with those feelings. I felt as if the audience was asked to have sympathy for Kong because of Ann's feelings, and I was not willing to go along with that. This is partly due to some of the cheesiness of the romance scenes--especially Ann's vaudeville/juggling acts and a tendency on the part of PJ to overhumanize Kong.

The Jack/Ann relationship, however, was mostly well done, and the scene near the end when Jack is watching his own play = brilliant. Totally justified the plot change from the original in this instance.

I really, really missed one of my favorite scenes from the original: Kong's attack on the native village
. In fact, the natives just mysteriously disappear after our first encounter with them--which is marred by PJ's overuse of slow motion.

The visuals are mostly great. I was not wowed by Kong the way I was wowed by Gollum--probably because I bonded more with Gollum's character than Kong. There is no question that Kong is one of the better effects recently brought to the screen--though I did not think his closeup shots were appreciably more compelling than Gollum or Yoda's.

I thought the script was pretty weak. I do not think the film justified its run time vis-s-vis the original film. I can go with a three hour Kong version if the additional material is compelling. I don't think the extra material helped the film, and in some cases I think it held the film back.

Naomi Watts was mostly excellent except when called on to deal with some of the sugary sweet material with Kong. Serkis was of course great as the big fella. I did not buy into Jack Black as Denham, though, and I think it was a mistake for PJ to cast him.

One surprise was the score: very enjoyable and surprising given the problems PJ had in this area.

All in all a decent flick but marred by one major problem (Ann/Kong) and a host of minor problems. PJ transcended the source material in LOTR; he largely failed to transcend the original King Kong with this film.