King Kong rocks the world

[saurabh]

King Kong, the film about an ape who terrorizes New York City, made its world premiere in New York City on Monday night.

'Kong' stars Naomi Watts (21 Grams), Oscar-winner Adrien Brody (The Pianist) and Jack Black (School of Rock) joined producer, writer, director Peter Jackson on the red carpet.

[audioqueso]

Did you see it?

[Azeke]

Wondering that myself?

Just FYI, it has received 100% @ rottentomates.com.

I viewed the previews via D*TV, and it certainly seems like an awesome flick to me, one that may even rival the original.

As the blind man said, "We will see, as he grabbed his hammer and saw".

Best regards,

Arman

[saurabh]

Did you see it?

Its coming here this Friday.........so lets see how inspired do I get to buy the tickets .......but the promos look good with the Dino's etc

[aphexist]

King Kong, the film about an ape who terrorizes New York City

Thanks for giving away the plot, dude. Really appreciate the spoiler. Geez.

[Shane Martin]

Opens Wednesday here in the states. I'll be there this weekend.

[aud19]

Thanks for giving away the plot, dude. Really appreciate the spoiler. Geez.

:rofl:

Seriously though, this looks good... real good :P

[David Meek]

Aphexist may be playing around - or not - but I added spoiler tags, just in case someone hadn't seen or heard much about Kong.

[NMyTree]

I saw it last night here in North Carolina.

It's A Wild Ride!!!

I simply loved it!!!

Fantastic job done by Jackson!

Don't over analyze and try to put anything into realistic parameters. Just enjoy the ride!

Wait till this comes out on DVD, our subwoofers are in for a major workout. Wrap a sweatband around the head of your subwoofer, now! :B :B

[Sithlord]

As much as I want to agree with NMyTree I believe this movie doesn't meet the hype. I afraid for me the biggest problem was the running time it just dragged far too long in places for such a simple story. The effects were up and down I still think LOTR is better in this department. Kong was done right but I was expecting him to be bigger and some scenes were just too blue screen most evident was the stampede just too rushed and the camera was waving all over the place made me feel sick. I get the idea of trying to make the audience feel like their in the movie but it was too much and very far fetched. Once Kong is in the big city (how did they get him into the ship??) things get better but again the ending was missing that special something. Not sure if my expectations were too high but after all the hype and reviews I guess I feel a little disappointed. As for the casting all great except for Jack Black bad choice IMO just didn't pull it off. One thing is for sure this movie will sound amazing on dvd alot of scenes to test the limits of your subwoofer.
:3: out of 5

[Shane Martin]

I just got back.

While I would not recommend this for younger kids, I can recommend this to anybody. King Kong proves that you don't need to insult our intelligence in order to make a blockbuster film about a giant creature. Usually the creature takes a backseat to the story while the SFX overpower your senses. This is simply NOT the case. Here Kong is an actual creature that you feel for on an emotional level. He truly doesn't take a backseat to anyone.

While the running time may hamper the overall take at the box office, movie goers are rewarded with a powerful, mesmerizing movie that involves every element you could ask for. The characters are not weak at all, the dialog is solid and the SFX are fantastic. You are in for a visual treat and this can only be appreciated on one of these 75 foot screens. A simple 9 foot screen doesn't do this film the justice it deserves. Normally we don't get to see all 100+ million dollars on screen but it's obvious here and knocks you out. The whole 30's feel to the movie was especially great because most other hack filmmakers(Emmerich anyone??) would have modernized it and that would have killed the movie as far as I'm concerned. Peter Jackson wanted none of that.

Other than an insect sequence and a subdued score, I felt this was as close to perfect as we can expect from a popcorn film.

Truly a masterpiece and one that doesn't insult the original. The filmmakers of the 30's would be proud.

9.5 out of 10.

One of the best films I've seen all year.

[Shane Martin]

I afraid for me the biggest problem was the running time it just dragged far too long in places for such a simple story.

I beg to differ. While it is long, the story is far from simple and not about some ape trashing the city. If you make a comment like that it's more obvious you haven't seen the film. It's way way way more deeper than that.

Other than the insect sequence and the subdued score I didn't feel there were ANY weakpoints.

Thanks for giving away the plot, dude. Really appreciate the spoiler. Geez

Luckily it gives away NOTHING. This is a love story with an ape who has feelings. Most other hack directors would have screwed that up and modernized it.

Kudos to PJ, he smacked a Home Run.

[Azeke]

I concur Shane, I certainly enjoyed this film, SPX, emotion, you actually felt with the characters. This is how to produce a remake. I was in the movie a little over three hours, but it certainly didn't feel like it. Sure there are some minor flaws, but you won't dwell on them, if you consider the overall impact of this film. I can't wait for the DVD. Go see it and just enjoy the ride.

4 1/2 out of 5 stars.

Peace and blessings,

Azeke

[Sithlord]

If you make a comment like that it's more obvious you haven't seen the film.

Shane WTF. You think I would make a post about a film without seeing it?? People on this forum do have a brain and a clue so think twice before posting such a ridiculous statement like that :roll: . And yeah the story is a simple one and if you dont see that then well nuff said. I'm a big Peter Jackson fan but this film simply isn't his best work and as you said yourself it's a almost perfect POPCORN FLICK but thats not saying very much is it?. Most of the ships crew we dont meet but they die and well I didn't shed a tear did you? The love story was weak and rushed and just happened even with the 70mins to do it in before we even get to the island. Jack Black was badly cast in this movie every line he was given I was waiting for him to say a funny punch line. A serious actor he is not. The special effects were not the best that we have seen thus far in movies. Case in point dinosaur stampede scene just looked too fake the actors didn't even look like they were in the same shot. A pointless scene anyway Jurrasic park dinos looked much better. The only thing they got right was Kong himself everything else was just time filling. And whats with the end? I lost count how many flybys those planes made and Kong didn't even seem to be taking any bullets except the early 1 in the chest. The problem for me was there was no blood shown on Kongs body from the multiple bullet wounds he took which of course lead to his demise he just stop fighting. The 1976 version was better for that scene imo. It may seem I'm being very picky but when you wait for a movie as long as we have for this then you cant help but expect alot.

Anyway I'm happy you enjoyed it but for me it fell short in many areas. We obviously have different views on what is a deep movie. But hey who am I and what do I know. In the future I will just wait with bated breath for your next indepth movie review or maybe I will post many more movie reviews without actually seeing them. Yeah that makes perfect sense.

Have a nice day.

[Shane Martin]

Shane WTF. You think I would make a post about a film without seeing it?? People on this forum do have a brain and a clue so think twice before posting such a ridiculous statement like that

Relax Sith, I was commenting on the original statement from Saurabh.

and as you said yourself it's a almost perfect POPCORN FLICK but thats not saying very much is it?

Meaning it's not going to win awards but it's not going to insult us either. By Popcorn flick I didn't mean stupid or mindless film. Popcorn films SHOULD be this intelligent while still having some "out of this world moments". It's a movie about a big frickin ape for sakes.

Most of the ships crew we dont meet but they die and well I didn't shed a tear did you?

Not about the crew. when kong died I did, this tells me that I had a large emotional attachment. In fact I cried several times because the movie has a very warm touchy story

The love story was weak

The love story was weak and rushed? The whole movie is the love story. 3 hrs is rushed??? Did you see how each character(the ape and the girl) cared for one another and actually didn't want either to be harmed??

The Depth had to do with the emotional attachment we felt as fans toward both the ape and the Naomi Watts. It's clear these were the 2 main characters while Jack Black and the rest were add ons. The characters themselves had depth, the monkey had depth and feelings. He was almost a human being which is more than the other monster films. Just look at Godzilla for instance.
[spoiler]The ape actually thought about his consequences and felt love for someone and he got it back. Tell me that someother hack director would not have went to this much trouble to iron out the 2 main leads and form the bond they did?? They wouldn't have.

So sith reread this post and realize I was not picking on you. Obviously I should have quoted 2 different people but realize that I do not believe the story was that simple. It wasn't an ape trashing the city either which is what people expected. We got much much much more than that.

[Sithlord]

Relax Sith, I was commenting on the original statement from Saurabh

Umm no you quoted me actually and where did Saurabh say this?? I said it mate so I think you need to reread the posts on this thread and quote properly.

I was not picking on you

How else is someone surposed to interpret what you said then? Even if it wasn't meant for me (which it was) it was not appropriate.

Ok to end this in a positive way the 2 scenes which I thought were emotional were :
1. Kong in chains

2. Park on ice scene

Jackson nailed those perfectly. As for the love story I'm referring to the 2 human characters on the boat not Kong and the girl, as that was done well.

[Azeke]

Easy gentlemen, easy 8), tis the season you know .

Peace and blessings,

Azeke

[Shane Martin]

As for the love story I'm referring to the 2 human characters on the boat not Kong and the girl, as that was done well.

The love story really wasn't this. It was about Kong and the girl. Afterall beauty killed the beast. The love story with the writer was cut short for a reason because it wasn't the point of the film. In fact the girl completely blew him off after she met Kong. In fact Brody's character after they got back to New York was really not needed if I do say so myself

where did Saurabh say this??

First post in the thread.

(which is was)

It was not so let's move on. The only objection to your post I had was that it was a simple story(it was not). Yes I quote you and tried to comment on the first post and I was wrong. I apologize for that.

The other emotional parts that caught me off guard:
When Kong fell to his death
When Kong Defended the girl, it was obvious he felt something for her
How kong defended the girl and sheltered her during the battle sequences at the end

The whole movie is based on Kong's love for the girl and vice versa. If you pass that up and ignore it then the whole movie crumbles to pieces because yes I too would think there were a bunch of story lines that were incoherent.

Perhaps we are disagreeing because we can't agree what the movie was about. I can see why you would be dissapointed if you saw it the way I think you saw it. One thing I have to question and feel free to not answer it is: What time of day did you see this? If I were to see this late at night I would have likely gotten bored with it until the action got going. It's not a late night experience kinda film. I would call it deliberate(not slow). The payoff was well worth it. I sniffled like a 3 yr old.

[David Meek]

Let's play nice, gentlemen.

[Sithlord]

Shane your digging a hole for yourself so please if you can't admit you overreacted with (in bold) and I qoute

I beg to differ. While it is long, the story is far from simple and not about some ape trashing the city. If you make a comment like that it's more obvious you haven't seen the film

then I give up. It was very clear that you responded to what I said so just admit it and apoligise. How could you possibly mix the 2 posts up? Saurabh just said the film opened bla bla bla and thats it. Read his 1st post again and you will understand... hopefully.

As for movies being better depending on what time you see it is absurd. It's either good or it isn't. I saw Kong at 1.10pm if that matters so if you go see it late as you said you will find it boring? I did comment on the pace of this movie but you liked it? I for one are not understanding where your going with this but anyway however you want to justify this movie is your business. You either like the movie or you dont. You either like the pace or you dont. Having the sun up or down doesn't change that fact. :roll:

David I'm sorry that this has gone where it has but I find it hard to back down when someone clearly believed I posted a review without seeing the movie and pasted a comment like they did, it is in my opinion inappropriate. Then trys and makes out they quoted the wrong person I mean come on. As far I'm concerned this debate is over and I'm happy that Shane found this movie enjoyable. I hope others who read this thread dont get put off seeing it. Please go see it as it does have some truelly amazing visuals and some great acting by ther main female character. Just IMO not up there with past offerings this year. :T

[Shane Martin]

Sith,
I did apologize. Just read this comment again:

Yes I quote you and tried to comment on the first post and I was wrong. I apologize for that

Did you just skim past that part? As far as the first comment, read the spoiler tag on the first post and the retort following it.

I saw Kong at 1.10pm if that matters so if you go see it late as you said you will find it boring? I did comment on the pace of this movie but you liked it? I for one are not understanding where your going with this

Being not a late night kind of person if I saw this late(which tend to do with my friends because he works until 10pm) we have found that longer more deliberate movies we don't enjoy as much because our fatigue is taking over. It's a distraction.

Like you I saw it during the day but I saw it for that reason alone. The running time of a movie plays a role in when I tend to see films because I know fatigue affects how I view them if they are long. There's been many times my opinion has changed on films because I saw them when I wasn't tired. That was my point.

[George Bellefontaine]

According to an AP press release, Kong took in $50 million on opening weekend, about 10 million short of expectations. That's still no slouch, so somebody must like this flick.

BTW, there's nothing wrong with a little disagreement here. Hell, if we all agreed life would be pretty boring. The thing is to agree to disagree and keep our cool. Shane always calls 'em as he sees 'em. He and I have disagreed many times in the past and I love it.

[NMyTree]

Just for the record, this was never a simple story.

King Kong (the original ) had a few layers of themes and messages.

As much as this story is a love story and how beauty tamed the beast, and about explorers setting out to find and capture wildlife, or undiscovered species, bringing them to the "concrete jungle" (New York City), showing a contrast of environments and how quickly the safety of the "concrete jungle " can be compromised; there's also some other themes.

Edgar Wallace and Merion C Cooper also had the theme of primate emotions.

The debate of whether primates and other animals have a depth of emotion was an often debated and highly-contested issue for many decades.

King Kong illustrates the possibilities of a (non-human) animal having the capabilities for human-like emotions. Which in itself opens a pandora's box to a number of other issues, such as capturing wildlife and exploiting them for human monetary profit. Which is also prevelent in this story.

We also see a theme of judging a book by it's cover. Kong the formidable King of the jungle, is viewed as a savage beast who controls his environment with intimidation and brute force. But the introduction a love interest begins to show a depth of emotion and caring from this savage beast.

Suddenly, one has to ask oneself if Kong is the savage beast due to conditioning and the fight to survive, in his wild and higly competitive jungle...filled with other predators. Or is he simply that savage beast, period?

Obviously, Kong later displays bit more depth of emotion and intelligence than when we first meet him in the movie. So that tends to indicate he is the savage beast for the purpose of survival, but seems sad and alone.

We now know many animals have a capability for depth of emotion.

Primates, Elephants, Dolphins, Whales, Dogs, Cats, Iguanas and several other animals have proved to have very complicated human-like emotions, through their behavior. It's not a stretch to speculate that all animals are likely to have emotions.

So do we keep exploiting these animals, who have human-like emotions?

A question Kong seems to ask.

So you see, it is not a simple story.

[Shane Martin]

George,
I admit I made a mistake in how I quoted it. I can see how Sith might have taken some offense to that and again I apologize.

While Kong only made $50 million, I suspect that it will grow because of word of mouth and the fact that the malls will not be as busy. Alot of movie theaters are by malls and people try to avoid the malls due to the traffic this time of year. If it starts to flop, then i'll eat some crow. I'm thinking based on positive reviews and word of mouth that Kong will make its money back. It's a movie to definitely see at the theater. Rememeber that when Titanic hit the box office it didn't make much and people thought it would flop only to continually make money at the box office and be the largest grossing film ever. IIRC Titanic only made $20M at the box office the first week.

[David G]

Very well said Tony

[NMyTree]

Thank you, David.

[Danbry39]

Well, I saw it and have a hard time posting anything without doing spoilers, although it is a part of film lore and my expectations are that most everybody has a pretty good sense of what it's about.

Now, short impressions of the film (dang, I'll have to use some spoilers)

1. Adrien Brody didn't work for me. Somehow this was weak casting as I just didn't feel the chemistry between him and Naomi. She, on the other hand, did a great job.

2. The scariest thing in the movie for me personally were the tribesmen/women right after they land on the island.

3. The special effects were sensational. I really enjoyed the stampede, but was kind of not drawn into the insect attack scene.

4. I was very touched/moved by several scenes involving Kong and Naomi. It seemed as if he went from viewing her as originally intended by the natives, to a toy, to an object of love and she viewed him in a similar migration from threat to love. I felt it when he protected her and she tried to protect him in N.Y.

Someone said it wasn't Jackson's best work. Well, how many films can top the LotR's trilogy. It ain't that good, imo, but it is much better than most.

We have to remember that this competes with its classic forebearer from the 30's and with Jackson's other work. It's tough to outdo expectations like those.

[mjb]

imo, its a very impressive film, and fwiw I thoroughly recommend it