Come anticipate Peter Jackson's _King Kong

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

So. I've specifically held off viewing much to do with Jackson's followup to Them Films What I Really Liked As Did Many Others, even though the spinoff fan site from theonering.net:

http://www.kongisking.net/index.shtml

...is one of if not the best example yet of a major film production and an organized online fanbase engaging in mutually beneficial 'you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours' shenanigans out there. Basically after my absolutely obsessive tracking of Lord of the Rings online, I just needed a break. Still, it's well worth checking out the production diaries for the whole thing, which will be continuing through post-production. It's also goddamn weird seeing the thin non-glasses wearing Jackson.

But anyway, full-on production is done and presumably some sort of trailer will be surfacing in the next couple of months looking ahead to Christmas release, so come anticipate etc.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 23 April 2005 01:34 (twenty years ago)

i really don't know what to think of this one.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Saturday, 23 April 2005 01:38 (twenty years ago)

i just can't get excited about a king kong remake, i think!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Saturday, 23 April 2005 01:39 (twenty years ago)

i agree about thin peter jackson being weird.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Saturday, 23 April 2005 01:42 (twenty years ago)

In my case I don't have much of a connection to the original (or That Seventies Version...thank god). So I'll actually be coming to this somewhat fresh and will enjoy seeing it stand or fall on its own merits.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 23 April 2005 01:43 (twenty years ago)

Ned, I think you've already started this thread in your mind many times in the past few months. Please use your Internal Search Function!!

― efil4zelffor (deangulberry), Saturday, 23 April 2005 01:46 (twenty years ago)

I did! It told me nothing.

(I was actually going to wait for a trailer to finally surface but then thought, 'hell with it.')

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 23 April 2005 01:49 (twenty years ago)

PJ looks fantastic!

― David R. (popshots75`), Saturday, 23 April 2005 03:02 (twenty years ago)

i barely have any connection to the original at all--i'm just having a hard time getting excited about this for whatever reason. maybe it's my ingrained remake antipathy...

― s1ocki (slutsky), Saturday, 23 April 2005 03:04 (twenty years ago)

i don't get the "i love this so much i have to COPY IT CRASSLY FOR LOTS OF MONEY" stuff. if he loves it leave it the fuck alone.

― ryan (ryan), Saturday, 23 April 2005 04:42 (twenty years ago)

This will prob'ly only be classic if Peter returns to his gorefest roots and Kong eats lots of people's brains.

― Failin Huxley (noodle vague), Saturday, 23 April 2005 05:21 (twenty years ago)

Imagine how many he'd have to gobble up for it to be much a meal though, he'd have to have the equivalent of a cinema popcorn box full of brains.

― Øystein (Øystein), Saturday, 23 April 2005 06:10 (twenty years ago)

Mmmmmmmm, Brain Poppers.

― Failin Huxley (noodle vague), Saturday, 23 April 2005 06:13 (twenty years ago)

every version of this movie rules, you can't go wrong with kong

― j blount (papa la bas), Saturday, 23 April 2005 06:26 (twenty years ago)

who is playing the guy in the monkey suit?

― keith m (keithmcl), Saturday, 23 April 2005 13:59 (twenty years ago)

Tor Johnson

― David R. (popshots75`), Saturday, 23 April 2005 14:11 (twenty years ago)

blount otm

― jones (actual), Saturday, 23 April 2005 15:02 (twenty years ago)

how did he get so skinny? did he have gastric bypass surgery or something?

― shookout (shookout), Saturday, 23 April 2005 15:38 (twenty years ago)

He's been saying he just decided to go 'hell with it' and do a lot of exercise and eating right, but considering the drop off happened sometime between the Oscars last year and last August or so -- I think that's when I first saw the new look -- all I have to say is that he either spent all his time in between doing nothing but that regimen, he had some assistance via Friendly Medications, or surgery. But who knows? Also for all I know he's actually gotten thinner still between August and now, so maybe it's been more gradual than guessed.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 23 April 2005 16:51 (twenty years ago)

i bet he went on atkins with ebert!!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Saturday, 23 April 2005 16:57 (twenty years ago)

Hahah. Body exchanges or something.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 23 April 2005 17:04 (twenty years ago)

one month passes...

Trailer out in eight days.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 20 June 2005 00:54 (twenty years ago)

Love the old Peter Jackson (through Heavenly Creatures), can't make it through more than 20 minutes of any LOTR. Can't really get excited for this.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Monday, 20 June 2005 01:00 (twenty years ago)

The original King Kong is a perfect movie. It really probably shouldn't ever be remade, even by a guy I admire as much as PJ. In fact, the fact that I admire PJ as much as I do is the only reason I'm not declaring this remake effort a guaranteed ridiculous failure from go. Still, the chances that I'm not going to be disappointed because I'm a cynical, highly skeptical reactionary about this kind of remake are very slim.

And of course I'll probably see it on opening night, too. Like the dorky fanboy I also am.

― Austin Still (Austin, Still), Monday, 20 June 2005 01:43 (twenty years ago)

Trailer's up.

Hmmm. Functional enough, but I admit, seems kinda not-entirely-there. (Then again I was expecting more from the dinosaurs perhaps -- twelve years on from Jurassic Park should count for something SFX-wise.)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 01:38 (twenty years ago)

well the dinos from the first Jurassic Park are pretty hard to beat/improve upon.

― latebloomer: now with 20% less cetacean content (latebloomer), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 01:41 (twenty years ago)

Hey, so long as we don't see anyone staring at a typewriter and saying "It's a UNIX system!" then that's an improvement right there.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 01:42 (twenty years ago)

hahahahaha otm

thoughts on the trailer: looks nice, the visuals have a very 'painted', stylized feel. the cgi seems decent but iffy in a few places, like ned said.

overall looks promising, i'd say. i just hope it doesnt end up as 2005's Godzilla!

― latebloomer: now with 20% less cetacean content (latebloomer), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 01:47 (twenty years ago)

1930s New York looks pretty great, though!

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 01:52 (twenty years ago)

The crappy-CGI pullback from the ocean cavemouth (right after Watts screams) does not bode well.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 02:05 (twenty years ago)

i think the trailer looks great, actually! makes me MUCH more interested in the film.

kong is a bit weirdly small though isn't he? kinda mighty joe young (redux) sized?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 02:06 (twenty years ago)

Actually in terms of scale that's not far off from the original movie.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 02:07 (twenty years ago)

really? i guess i remember him bigger in relation to the empire state building!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 02:08 (twenty years ago)

We'll have to compare/contrast. ;-)

Frame by frame breakdown if you care. Apparently it's being updated bit by bit.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 02:10 (twenty years ago)

(Which, I realize, is why after a few pages it switches to Return of the King trailer descriptions. ;-))

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 02:12 (twenty years ago)

really? i guess i remember him bigger in relation to the empire state building!

-- s1ocki (slytus...), June 28th, 2005.

the kong in the original changed sizes from scene to scene!

― latebloomer: now with 20% less cetacean content (latebloomer), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 03:09 (twenty years ago)

Interesting that on the http://www.kongisking.net site, all the headlines have spoiler! and MAJOR SPOILER!!!

It's a remake. What is there to spoil?

― fields of salmon (fieldsofsalmon), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 03:53 (twenty years ago)

kong is an asexuallly reproducing hermaphrodite and gives birth to little sasquatches.

― latebloomer: now with 20% less cetacean content (latebloomer), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 04:28 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, for something that's supposed to be the definition of "really large", that's a pretty small ape.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 07:30 (twenty years ago)

every version of this movie rules, you can't go wrong with kong

how many other versions of king kong have there been? there's the original, the '70s version, i think two japanese takeoffs...any more?

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 08:10 (twenty years ago)

wow, the first japanese monster movie! http://imdb.com/title/tt0157898/

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 08:14 (twenty years ago)

there was the '86 sequel to the 70's remake, Kong Lives:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091344/

― latebloomer: now with 20% less cetacean content (latebloomer), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 08:44 (twenty years ago)

I think there was also a sequel to the original called "Son of Kong", or something like that.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 08:59 (twenty years ago)

yeah, that's true.

― latebloomer: now with 20% less cetacean content (latebloomer), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 09:23 (twenty years ago)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0024593/

― latebloomer: now with 20% less cetacean content (latebloomer), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 09:24 (twenty years ago)

Jack Black was like MADE to play the director dude. This should be pretty bad ass.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 12:07 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, this is definitely 'his' trailer as compared to Brody and Watts, who don't seem to do much but strike poses and scream and run around.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 13:13 (twenty years ago)

i think watts looks pretty awesome in it!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 14:42 (twenty years ago)

i mean if she just strikes poses and screams and runs around in this movie i'll be happy

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 14:43 (twenty years ago)

The merriness of a S1ocki!

I have to say rewatching the trailer later, it worked a bit more -- and knowing how Jackson works, he'll have everyone down there fine tuning the effects up until two weeks before the premiere.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 14:48 (twenty years ago)

i'm kind of shocked that i'm more into the trailer than you are!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 14:56 (twenty years ago)

:-) It will all balance out!

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 15:03 (twenty years ago)

Two rather impressive CGI preview pics @ Ain't It Cool News:

Mr. Kong

T Rex

― StanM (StanM), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 21:31 (twenty years ago)

the trailer looked very nice on the big screen (it was on before war of the worlds).

― latebloomer: now with 20% less cetacean content (latebloomer), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 22:27 (twenty years ago)

The best thing that could come of this remake is a restored print/revival run of the original and a DVD release.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 22:29 (twenty years ago)

or... a good remake!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 30 June 2005 02:38 (twenty years ago)

nah, I'm hoping for a revival and good DVD, I haven't actually seen the original since I was nine or ten. A good remake would be a bonus, but I don't expect it to be earth-shattering.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Thursday, 30 June 2005 02:53 (twenty years ago)

OMG NAOMI WATTS

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Thursday, 30 June 2005 03:56 (twenty years ago)

dude, the original king kong is fun and charming, but c'mon...

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Thursday, 30 June 2005 03:59 (twenty years ago)

naomi watts >>>> fay wray

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Thursday, 30 June 2005 03:59 (twenty years ago)

"dude, the original king kong is fun and charming, but c'mon..."

You forgot 'and the most influential monster movie of all time because it's basically flawless in every important way'

Seriously, I wonder if you've seen it recently. It's fuckin' great.

― Austin Still (Austin, Still), Thursday, 30 June 2005 05:19 (twenty years ago)

it's no chang

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Thursday, 30 June 2005 05:34 (twenty years ago)

??? Searching imdb for 'chang' yields a 1927 movie about elephants stampding in thailand. Is that what you mean?

― Austin Still (Austin, Still), Thursday, 30 June 2005 05:38 (twenty years ago)

search:

Merian C. Cooper
Ernest B. Schoedsack

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Thursday, 30 June 2005 05:44 (twenty years ago)

"yes" would have also worked.

Still, I should've seen their names at the top of the page. Sounds interesting, thanks for pointing.

― Austin Still (Austin, Still), Thursday, 30 June 2005 05:51 (twenty years ago)

actually it's not really any better than king kong, i was being snobbish. but it is pretty cool.

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Thursday, 30 June 2005 06:14 (twenty years ago)

peter jackson: writer, producer and director of the first and only movie ever to feature dinosaurs being gunned down with tommy guns. he might as well retire now, hes never gonna top that

― fe zaffe (fezaffe), Thursday, 30 June 2005 15:00 (twenty years ago)

Adrien Brody. Just saying that.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 30 June 2005 16:03 (twenty years ago)

My coworkers were agreed on Brody being a weak link. "Hi, I will stand here and stare."

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 30 June 2005 16:04 (twenty years ago)

Your coworkers suck, that's all he needs to do.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 30 June 2005 16:05 (twenty years ago)

I think there's something wrong with Adrien Brody. He always looks like he's about to sneeze.

― n/a (Nick A.), Thursday, 30 June 2005 16:06 (twenty years ago)

Or cry.

― Rock Hardy (Rock Hardy), Thursday, 30 June 2005 16:10 (twenty years ago)

see one pianist!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 30 June 2005 16:42 (twenty years ago)

my question is: does he get to wrassle with the big ape?

― latebloomer: now with 20% less cetacean content (latebloomer), Thursday, 30 June 2005 16:43 (twenty years ago)

Oh, I can't wait for this monkey movie. It looks (err..) bananas.

― Jay Vee (Manon_70), Thursday, 30 June 2005 16:51 (twenty years ago)

YOULL GO APE

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 30 June 2005 16:55 (twenty years ago)

Stop making fun of the Brody.

― jocelyn (Jocelyn), Thursday, 30 June 2005 16:56 (twenty years ago)

peter jackson: writer, producer and director of the first and only movie ever to feature dinosaurs being gunned down with tommy guns. he might as well retire now, hes never gonna top that

Jackson's exempt from the "never gonna top that" theory - otherwise he would have had to stop after Meet The Feebles and we wouldn't have gotten Dead Alive.

― Brian Miller (Brian Miller), Thursday, 30 June 2005 17:09 (twenty years ago)

My wife went from "'King Kong'? Why the fuck would he do that???" to "OMG MUST SEE THIS MOVIE YESTERDAY" after watching the NBC trailer.

― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 30 June 2005 17:10 (twenty years ago)

OMG DUDE DISCOVERED SOUTH BEACH

http://www.newgrounds.com/bbs/user_images/pics/1/5584000/ngbbs42bed31d2d357.jpg

― Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Sunday, 3 July 2005 17:19 (twenty years ago)

Sorry I only just saw this (as well as first glimpse of the film) and I'm not sure which I'm more excited about.

― Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Sunday, 3 July 2005 17:20 (twenty years ago)

You are full of love, sir.

Ally: you will be pleased to learn that you have a powerful friend in your Adrien Brody regard in the person of my mom, who agrees with you re: his hotness and his need to do nothing else but just be there. Your mutual sentiments were passed on to my doubting coworker Tom, who grimaced but accepted it.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Sunday, 3 July 2005 17:43 (twenty years ago)

one month passes...

For those much more interested in the original film. But Mr. Jackson is helping with it, it seems.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 8 August 2005 00:10 (twenty years ago)

Personally I'm excited about the new one. As LOTR proved, Jackson has the knack of making projects that seem very over-ambitious and ill-advised turn out wonderfully.

― chap who would dare to thwart the revolution (chap), Monday, 8 August 2005 00:24 (twenty years ago)

now that is exciting news. The movie still looks bad, though.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Monday, 8 August 2005 01:15 (twenty years ago)

two months pass...

In the 'huh' category:

UNIVERSAL CITY, Calif., Oct. 14 /PRNewswire/ -- Universal Pictures confirmed today that James Newton Howard will compose the original score for the dramatic adventure "King Kong," which is directed by triple Academy Award(R) winner Peter Jackson. Mr. Howard replaces Howard Shore, who is leaving the project.

Peter Jackson made the following statement: "I have greatly enjoyed my collaborations with Howard Shore, whose musical themes made immeasurable contributions to 'The Lord of the Rings' trilogy. During the last few weeks, Howard and I came to realize that we had differing creative aspirations for the score of 'King Kong.' Rather than waste time arguing with a friend and trying to unify our points of view, we decided amicably to let another composer score the film. I'm looking forward to working with James Newton Howard, a composer whose work I've long admired, and I thank Howard Shore, whose talent is surpassed only by his graciousness."

Shore's been on the other end of this when he was drafted in last-minute for Gangs of New York; still I have to admit I'm fairly surprised by this.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 15 October 2005 11:44 (twenty years ago)

that's very weird!! good thing they found another composer named howard at the last minute! though i would've preferred if it was his first name...

― s1ocki (slutsky), Saturday, 15 October 2005 14:26 (twenty years ago)

Howard Hughes.

If you go to the kongisking.net site, the production diary from 'Week 13 and counting' -- it's about four down or so -- is in part on the music. I haven't seen it all yet, but it would be interesting to view in light of this decision.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 15 October 2005 14:51 (twenty years ago)

can i say that regardless... i'm still REALLY excited about this movie. it tickles me.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Saturday, 15 October 2005 14:59 (twenty years ago)

incidentally, ok shameless self-promotion, but you might find this interesting:

"They took you from the mundane world of the Depression into the most outrageous, fantastic situation that’s ever been put on the screen! You have to see it on the big screen—I pity the young people today who see it on television first. It’s not the same picture. You’ve gotta see it on the big screen!”

― s1ocki (slutsky), Saturday, 15 October 2005 15:00 (twenty years ago)

(which is why i wish they'd re-release the original in theatres before jackson's opens!! how great an x-promotion would that be? i know there's a fancy new dvd coming out...)

― s1ocki (slutsky), Saturday, 15 October 2005 15:01 (twenty years ago)

i'm still REALLY excited about this movie. it tickles me.

Yeah, I'm starting to get pretty up for it as well. Could be great fun!

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 15 October 2005 16:01 (twenty years ago)

Good for Howard Shore. Now he can continue to work on films foradults instead of this CGI'd, Oscar-winning kiddie slop.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 17 October 2005 13:56 (twenty years ago)

seriously! it's time to go back to the creative impulse that drove the brilliant scores for "the truth about cats and dogs," "guilty as sin," and "white man's burden"!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 17 October 2005 14:06 (twenty years ago)

Hahahaha.

(I will say that the score which first got me into Shore was Ed Wood, still one of my favorite movie soundtracks ever.)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 17 October 2005 14:08 (twenty years ago)

or his Cronenberg films, dingbat.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 17 October 2005 14:10 (twenty years ago)

the ed wood soundtrack is terrific!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 17 October 2005 14:11 (twenty years ago)

Dr., your assuming Slocki's DOESN'T know about those scores is amusing to me.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 17 October 2005 14:11 (twenty years ago)

Where ya get that assumption, I dunno. It's his cherry-picking 'unimportant' titles I was mildly irked at. (The Truth About Cats & Dogs had one or two plausible characters and several intentional laughs, unlike The Return of the King.)

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 17 October 2005 14:26 (twenty years ago)

Which had a lot of plausible characters and many intentional laughs -- hooray!

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 17 October 2005 14:27 (twenty years ago)

OK Ned the last half hour of Return of the King was not intentionally funny.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Monday, 17 October 2005 14:32 (twenty years ago)

Good for Howard Shore. Now he can continue to work on films for adults instead of this CGI'd, Oscar-winning kiddie slop.
-- Dr Morbius (wjwe...), October 17th, 2005.

wow, you must be in the loop to have come to this judgement -- i don't think a single critic has actually seen this film yet, kudos!

― N_RQ, Monday, 17 October 2005 14:38 (twenty years ago)

apparently it's also somehow pre-won some oscars!!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:08 (twenty years ago)

dr morbius exists to make me agree with amateurist about film

― _, Monday, 17 October 2005 15:10 (twenty years ago)

OK Ned the last half hour of Return of the King was not intentionally funny.

I wonder if extended shots of dewy-eyed hobbits are the ultimate anti-noize creations.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:10 (twenty years ago)

its like on ancient ilm when me and patrin would both end up shaking our heads at some anticon prog-rap nerd

― _, Monday, 17 October 2005 15:11 (twenty years ago)

Surely Noize Dudes love LOTR. They're all big nerds like the rest of us acting all tough on the internet, right?

― chap who would dare to violate the least amount of laws of physics (chap), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:13 (twenty years ago)

(Shore's 3 Oscars for LOTR; don't pretend to be a dipsh ... oh)

Let's see, I have just made a jillion dollars pandering to nerds by transforming plodding medievalist fantasy into "exciting," videogame-style, incoherent action movies with bombastic NFL Films music. Heavens to Betsy, what shall my remake of King Kong be like? Bets?

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:13 (twenty years ago)

who are you gibbering about, peter jackson or howard shore?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:16 (twenty years ago)

Dr., you sound bitter you weren't given any of the money. Are you Stuart Townsend?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:18 (twenty years ago)

he's upset that something he thought was "plodding" was turned into something "'exciting'"... i think?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:20 (twenty years ago)

plodding sans quotes >>> allegedly exciting

somnolent >>> headachey

Brody's haircut in trailer so very not 1933.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:23 (twenty years ago)

you are very annoying

― _, Monday, 17 October 2005 15:24 (twenty years ago)

so something you didn't like was adapted into something else you didn't like... i'm not really sure why you care

(xp)

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:25 (twenty years ago)

and i actually agree re: lotr!!

― _, Monday, 17 October 2005 15:25 (twenty years ago)

but you talk like a combination of geir and gene shalit

― _, Monday, 17 October 2005 15:25 (twenty years ago)

Brody's haircut in trailer so very not 1933.

The good Dr.'s ancestor, at the Globe Theatre, 1603, during intermission:

"THAT FUCKER SHAKESPEARE DIDN'T REALIZE BOHEMIA HAS NO SEACOAST! STINKING VARLET!"

Geir Shalit, now that's a vision. Photoshoppers to work plz.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:26 (twenty years ago)

also alex in nyc, and an unfunny jay sherman

― _, Monday, 17 October 2005 15:26 (twenty years ago)

i heard the film contains further inaccuracies regarding the actual number of giant apes to scale the empire state building in 1933

― _, Monday, 17 October 2005 15:27 (twenty years ago)

HONOR THE CURLY-HAIRED MELODY.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:27 (twenty years ago)

i heard the film contains further inaccuracies regarding the actual number of giant apes to scale the empire state building in 1933

The number of Skull Islands in this world has been drastically misrepresented.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:27 (twenty years ago)

Gene Shalit, I would remind you, likes just about everything with a big budget. Like you guys.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:29 (twenty years ago)

Hey Slocki, I didn't realize you liked that big budget film Revenge of the Sith! I apologize for taking your opinions the wrong way.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:30 (twenty years ago)

this is beginning to feel like morbius's last stand

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:32 (twenty years ago)

morbius i wasnt comparing you to him because of similar philosophies, it was because theyre both irritating dipshits who are always wrong about movies

― _, Monday, 17 October 2005 15:33 (twenty years ago)

Inability to see relevance of anachronistic hair in film where footage of 1930s New York was digitally incorporated and costumes and art direction are very likely authentic to period = DA ILX CRIZIX AT WOIK

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:36 (twenty years ago)

Also NFL Films has waaaaaaay better music than LOTR

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:37 (twenty years ago)

if lotr had been scored to 'jock jams' i wouldve actually liked it

― _, Monday, 17 October 2005 15:37 (twenty years ago)

that reminds me of back in h.s. when me and my cousin watched the matrix on mute while listening to atari teenage riot

― _, Monday, 17 October 2005 15:39 (twenty years ago)

ARE YOU READY FOR THIS?

― n/a (Nick A.), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:39 (twenty years ago)

What scene woulda got Rock 'n' Roll Part II?

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:39 (twenty years ago)

I know I always demand perfect period authenticity in my movies about giant apes.

― Are You Nomar? (miloaukerman), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:40 (twenty years ago)

In this version Kong must eke out a living in the dust bowl due to the bank losing all his savings and calling in his mortgage.

― chap who would dare to violate the least amount of laws of physics (chap), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:44 (twenty years ago)

Does he meet a socialist preacher?

― Are You Nomar? (miloaukerman), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:45 (twenty years ago)

Ah, The Apes of Wrath

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:45 (twenty years ago)

haha

― _, Monday, 17 October 2005 15:45 (twenty years ago)

I'm not entirely sure what is so offense about Adrian Brody's hair to begin with, maybe we should address that point before we go on to giant-ape-kidnapping-moronic-blonde-climbing-towers-and-dodging-bullets authenticity issues.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Monday, 17 October 2005 15:58 (twenty years ago)

I went to a junket in LA for a teleconference with PJ.

They showed about a half hour of footage, charmingly very much in-progress.

What looks best? 30s NYC. Really great stuff. And an excellent brontosaurus stampede.

PJ was tuckered out, but showed us the model Kong he made when he was 12 our of his Mum's coat.

― Ian in Brooklyn, Monday, 17 October 2005 23:24 (twenty years ago)

"Nobody cry when the old Kong die. *Everybody* cry when my Kong die."

― Rickey Wright (Rrrickey), Tuesday, 18 October 2005 07:29 (twenty years ago)

Tom Snyder: Mr. De Laurentiis, why make another "King Kong"? The first version, which I never saw.. [ laughs ] ..was apparently a wonderful piece of cinema.

Dino De Laurentiis: Don't talk to me about the old Kong. I'm gonna tell you something about the old Kong. They'd call him in to start shooting at six in the morning.. he'd come in drunk. He'd say, we shoot at eight o'clock tonight. What you gonna say to a star that big.. like Sinatra. Sinatra wants to shoot at eight, you shoot at eight... just like the old Kong. Night people.. the old Kong, he was a drunk.. party ape. I tell you something.. not many people know this, but the old Kong was going out with Jean Harlow at the time. No wonder he couldn't get up in the morning. Party ape. He used to make long-distance phone calls all over the world and charge it to the movie.

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Tuesday, 18 October 2005 07:56 (twenty years ago)

That sketch went on to include a racist line about the recently deceased actor Brock Peters.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 18 October 2005 12:40 (twenty years ago)

Okay, a lot of info:

The two-disc DVD reissue of the original, with the Jackson-produced documentary etc.

A bit on DVD producer/production diaries dude Michael Pellerin and all the various extra goodies he's involved with.

A general report on the film -- over-budget (what a surprise!) and three hours long (?! -- this genuinely surprises me; I would have figured he'd want to aim at a shorter film this time around after LOTR) but apparently Universal's happy as clams regardless.

Access Hollywood will be showing the new trailer first next Thursday November 3.

And the official one-sheet is out.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 28 October 2005 23:56 (twenty years ago)

3 hours!

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Saturday, 29 October 2005 00:14 (twenty years ago)

and the original was only 90 minutes!

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Saturday, 29 October 2005 00:15 (twenty years ago)

THEATRICAL RERELEASE OF ORIGINAL PLEAAAAAAASE

― s1ocki (slutsky), Saturday, 29 October 2005 00:17 (twenty years ago)

I hope they give the option of both the 90 minute familiar version and the 104 minute restored version.

― Austin Still (Austin, Still), Saturday, 29 October 2005 00:59 (twenty years ago)

this is the worst film ever

― captin crunchheart (dr g), Saturday, 29 October 2005 04:17 (twenty years ago)

THE NEW CIMINO

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 29 October 2005 15:13 (twenty years ago)

Dr. Morbius OTM throughout the thread.

― jed_ (jed), Saturday, 29 October 2005 16:10 (twenty years ago)

Jed, that would require some serious rewriting of the fundamental rules of the universe.

― The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Saturday, 29 October 2005 16:23 (twenty years ago)

He was kind of right that the main NFL theme song does sound a lot like the heroic song in LOTR though, I realized that the other day. The NFL song still better though.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Saturday, 29 October 2005 19:56 (twenty years ago)

Even a Dr. Morbius tells the right time twice a day.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 29 October 2005 20:04 (twenty years ago)

"there is the theory of the morbius..."

― gear (gear), Saturday, 29 October 2005 21:37 (twenty years ago)

"A TWIST in the fabric of ILX, where threads become a loop."

"Whatever was posted will be posted again."

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 29 October 2005 21:38 (twenty years ago)

This probably can't be worse than LOTRs, but a 3 hour King Kong still sounds terrible.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Saturday, 29 October 2005 21:42 (twenty years ago)

I wish Peter Jackson would eat some pies and make some more zombie movies. Or at least a big budget remake of Meet the Feebles.

― Patchouli Clark (noodle vague), Saturday, 29 October 2005 21:47 (twenty years ago)

Because they're not your average...ordinary people.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 29 October 2005 22:08 (twenty years ago)

Morbius was OTM about LOTR and (probably) King Kong, except for worrying about period-correct hairstyles.

― Are You Nomar? (miloaukerman), Saturday, 29 October 2005 22:11 (twenty years ago)

Now I'm hoping Kong climbs to the top of the Empire State Building and launches into an impassioned version of "Sodomy".

― Patchouli Clark (noodle vague), Saturday, 29 October 2005 22:18 (twenty years ago)

Don't cross the Heathers, Jed, or you won't get on TEH PROM COMMITTY!

More stuff from Empire...

http://www.empireonline.co.uk/news/story.asp?NID=17379

My fave is "It's longer than the original film [by 80 minutes] because there's more time on character, especially the relationship between Ann and Kong on the island." I can see the tears welling in Ned's eyes now...

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 1 November 2005 16:01 (twenty years ago)

Tears of laughter at thinking you think I'm troubled by your whining. Aside from that...

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 1 November 2005 16:16 (twenty years ago)

Dude, Ned this is kind of the meanest I've seen you be to someone who isn't Calum.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Tuesday, 1 November 2005 16:26 (twenty years ago)

Is mine the whine of a theremin?

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 1 November 2005 16:28 (twenty years ago)

Dude, Ned this is kind of the meanest I've seen you be to someone who isn't Calum.

Hey, far be it from me to stop someone going for Calum's brass ring. But Dr. M. lacks even that one's ineluctable joie de vivre.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 1 November 2005 16:30 (twenty years ago)

Ned, I never intended to trouble you, I was just imagining you being as emotionally invested in Ann Darrow-Kong as you were in those plausibly three-dimensional hobbits.

"Mean" must come with a learner's permit around here.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 1 November 2005 19:45 (twenty years ago)

For Ned, yes.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Tuesday, 1 November 2005 19:46 (twenty years ago)

Anyway.

Not the new trailer but close, featuring typical interview bits and snippets and etc. plus some trailer footage. You'll need QuickTime 7.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 2 November 2005 05:39 (twenty years ago)

anybody excited about the video game?

― naomi watts desperately slapped herself while masturbating in Mulholland Drive, Wednesday, 2 November 2005 23:43 (twenty years ago)

Maybe.

And finally, the new trailer in full. Frame by frame breakdown.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 5 November 2005 16:33 (twenty years ago)

three weeks pass...

The first preview appears to be not very negative.

― StanM (StanM), Friday, 2 December 2005 23:39 (twenty years ago)

A week to go. So has s1ocki seen it yet?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 15:39 (twenty years ago)

not yet!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 17:32 (twenty years ago)

Roundup of assorted bloggery on how inevitably (or specifically) racist the Kong tale is:

http://filmmakingforthepoor.blogspot.com/2005/12/king-kong-and-racism.html

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 18:11 (twenty years ago)

guys, ITS A MONKEY

― sunny successor (katharine), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 18:12 (twenty years ago)

They're talking about the natives who act like natives used to act before they got all civilized and stuff. So to be politically correct, Jackson should have portrayed a tribe wearing suits and hats, who storm out of the jungle carrying spears and making cannibalistic noises only to shake everyone's hand saying "how do you do? good afternoon."

― StanM (StanM), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 18:43 (twenty years ago)

It all depends -- if Jack Black says "Blondes ARE scarce around here..."

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 18:46 (twenty years ago)

Ah, so you're planning on seeing it.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 18:47 (twenty years ago)

i'm supposed to see a screening later this week. will report back.

― Jams Murphy (ystrickler), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 18:50 (twenty years ago)

This couldn't possibly be worse than the Lord of the Rings movies, so maybe it's worth seeing.

― Erick Dampier is better than Shaq (miloaukerman), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 18:52 (twenty years ago)

I'm undecided, Ned.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 18:57 (twenty years ago)

I'm waiting for the inevitable seven-hour director's cut on DVD.

― Erick Dampier is better than Shaq (miloaukerman), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 18:57 (twenty years ago)

The first hour is sposed to be all talky exposition (like the first 20 mins of the original, presumably, only with less entertainingly awful acting maybe).

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 19:03 (twenty years ago)

http://nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=1644

While the studio owners and big budget Hollywood distributors may be choking on their cocktails after hearing John Rhys Davies' heartfelt words, one is sure that the spirit of Tolkien himself is nodding in agreement.

http://www.bnp.org.uk/articles/gimli_battle.htm

― oooh, Tuesday, 6 December 2005 19:21 (twenty years ago)

Jack Black's a Nazi?!?!!?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 19:26 (twenty years ago)

I beat the King Kong game. It was cool. Very short though.

Anyway, it made me way more excited for the movie.

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 19:42 (twenty years ago)

http://nationalvanguard.org/images/teaser/red_rosa.gif

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 19:48 (twenty years ago)

i know!!

― oooh, Tuesday, 6 December 2005 20:00 (twenty years ago)

"kong = racist" critiques generally ignore the fact that kong is the HERO of the movie, not the villain! if anything the film's an attack on western imperialism, as personified by carl denham (who also represents hollywood! hmm!).

besides, king kong was not "made by a racist and segregated society" - studios make films, not societies.

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Wednesday, 7 December 2005 10:40 (twenty years ago)

besides, king kong was not "made by a racist and segregated society" - studios make films, not societies.

-- J.D. (aubade8...), December 7th, 2005.

studios make films for societies; societies impose laws on studios... but i'm still psyched for this.

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Wednesday, 7 December 2005 10:43 (twenty years ago)

i can certainly understand anger and sensitivity over stereotypical, "ooga-booga"-style portrayals of natives in a 2005 movie, though.

― latebloomer: The Corridor (Yes, The Corridor) (latebloomer), Wednesday, 7 December 2005 11:16 (twenty years ago)

what should the natives of remote south sea islands be doing?

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Wednesday, 7 December 2005 11:18 (twenty years ago)

Not chanting "ooga-booga"? (I don't recall what the Skull natives' behavior in the trailer was like, if seen)

Some of the arguments against the imagery are a little more nuanced than "Kong = black man."

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 7 December 2005 14:37 (twenty years ago)

what should the natives of remote south sea islands be doing?

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/6305869820.01._SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Wednesday, 7 December 2005 18:21 (twenty years ago)

Adrien Brody seemed very annoying in the previews, I don't think I want to see this movie.

― Lars and Jagger (Ex Leon), Wednesday, 7 December 2005 18:33 (twenty years ago)

im weirdly not interested in this. maybe that will change.

yes this movie is certainly racist. everything is racist. always.

― ryan (ryan), Wednesday, 7 December 2005 18:48 (twenty years ago)

see i think they should replace the natives with ewoks, because then it would be logical. little fuzzy critters worshipping a giant fuzzy critter, see?. like, they're all descended from kong. you could have a fun-time Warwick Davis cameo too. the leprechaun could swing by.

― latebloomer: The Corridor (Yes, The Corridor) (latebloomer), Wednesday, 7 December 2005 22:55 (twenty years ago)

word on the street is that this movie is going to be kick-ass.

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Wednesday, 7 December 2005 22:59 (twenty years ago)

it has to make 600m to break open

― anthony easton (anthony), Wednesday, 7 December 2005 22:59 (twenty years ago)

break even

― GET EQUIPPED WITH BUBBLE LEAD (ex machina), Wednesday, 7 December 2005 23:06 (twenty years ago)

Break ankles.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 7 December 2005 23:36 (twenty years ago)

break balls. break wind. break dance.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Wednesday, 7 December 2005 23:53 (twenty years ago)

sorry, i meant even

― anthony easton (anthony), Thursday, 8 December 2005 00:54 (twenty years ago)

I'm not sure how I feel about the girl and the monkey watching the sunrise together. Fearful, I think.

― Austin Still (Austin, Still), Thursday, 8 December 2005 01:47 (twenty years ago)

Should bestiality be illegal? If so, why?

― latebloomer: The Corridor (Yes, The Corridor) (latebloomer), Thursday, 8 December 2005 02:43 (twenty years ago)

So two days, then. (I'm actually going to catch it when I'm home for Xmas, I figure.)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 12 December 2005 20:33 (twenty years ago)

i'm seeing it tonight!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 12 December 2005 20:39 (twenty years ago)

Dr. Morbius is your date, right?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 12 December 2005 20:40 (twenty years ago)

He can't be so lucky!

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 12 December 2005 22:12 (twenty years ago)

I think you answered the question incorrectly.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 12 December 2005 22:39 (twenty years ago)

Was the answer "Yes"?

― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 00:18 (twenty years ago)

This is the first Peter Jackson movie since the Frighteners that I am positively ambivalent about. He's easily one of my favorite filmmakers to emerge from the 90s, and yet I can't really think of any way to re-make this movie that would make it interesting to me. Unless it really is a Kong-eats-brains gorefest...

(I never got around to seeing the Frighteners)

― Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 00:25 (twenty years ago)

I thought the Frighteners was Robert Zemeckis?

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 00:36 (twenty years ago)

Written by Jackson and his wife, directed by Jackson.

― Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 00:39 (twenty years ago)

bwahahahahaha, pauline kael liked the 70s kong!!!!

― hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 00:44 (twenty years ago)

Dude, she LOVED it. Which is admittedly weird and probably hilarious.

But I agree with Kael on so many other ignored and possibly bad movies -- take John Boorman's Excalibur. She drooled on that one, and I'm so totally with her. She was crazy about movies that were pure movie (cue resolutionless debate on what that "means") and man, Excalibur is fucking IT. Spectacle, fantasy, dubious moral lesson -- it's all there. In Kong, in Excalibur, in Citizen Kane, et al.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 00:58 (twenty years ago)

the 70s kong is awesome, i'm really wondering why the fuck this new one is nine hours long though, what's great about the original is how efficient it is.

― j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 01:01 (twenty years ago)

i actually don't mind the 70s kong all that much (grodin's pretty great), but i'd think kael's love (didn't she regard it as one of the best movies of all time or some such nonsense?) would be problematic for her (much too) many fans. ie, she was a TERRIBLE critic, the armond white of her day.

― hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 01:02 (twenty years ago)

hstencil thinks Pauline Kael is terrible = many people suddenly understand why they don't get along with hstencil

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 01:05 (twenty years ago)

and ad hominem attacks like that are exactly why almost everyone on this bored thinks you're a fucking idiot, kenan. way to go.

― hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 01:06 (twenty years ago)

anyway, i'll probably wait for cable on this one.

― hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 01:06 (twenty years ago)

ad hominem attacks like that are exactly why almost everyone on this bored thinks you're a fucking idiot, kenan.

That was not ad honinem. Not meant that way, anyway. Defensiveness like that is why everyone thinks you're... defensive.

I meant that if your way of thinking lines up with a way of thinking that excludes Kael's intellectual/anti-intellectual, snobby/anti-snobby, smart/smart-ass, judgemental/impartial, ugly/gorgeous way of looking at movies, which finally is simply personal and intelligent, and if you're STILL a sourpuss after reading Kael, well... that's because it's hstencil.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 01:15 (twenty years ago)

fuck off.

― hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 01:18 (twenty years ago)

hstencil otm

― j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 01:18 (twenty years ago)

remember that week when we were friends? ah... good times.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 01:19 (twenty years ago)

again, fuck off. don't even fake-lament that i'm being a jerk to you when i did nothing other than say that i think pauline kael is a terrible critic (which, news to you, doesn't mean i think she was a terrible writer per se - but much like you, mr. kenan, she had TERRIBLE fucking discernment).

― hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 01:21 (twenty years ago)

unlike kael, of course, your TERRIBLE fucking discernment is unfortunately present-tense.

― hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 01:21 (twenty years ago)

we should take this elsewhere.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 01:22 (twenty years ago)

i'm happy to take it nowhere. finito. ZE END.

― hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 01:23 (twenty years ago)

would you rather have godzilla menstruate on your head or kong jizz in your face?

― remy (x Jeremy), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 01:26 (twenty years ago)

Wouldn't I drown or choke to death either way?

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 01:27 (twenty years ago)

yeah but which?

― remy (x Jeremy), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 01:28 (twenty years ago)

ts: kate vs momus

― j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 01:29 (twenty years ago)

That's different. I choose Kate.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 01:30 (twenty years ago)

the 70s kong is awesome, i'm really wondering why the fuck this new one is nine hours long though, what's great about the original is how efficient it is.

So OTM. The original Kong is how long all films should be.

― melton mowbray (adr), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 02:47 (twenty years ago)

I saw it today and it's ever so long. Three hours, ffs.
Good- Jack Black (surprisingly effective at reminding you you're watching pure fiction), the views from the Empire State, Kong jumping around (Andy Serkis using every move he learnt working on 24 Hour Party People), all the acting jokes (and there are plenty)
Bad- endless CGI battles with horrible insects and dinosaurs. They really drag on. The unnecessary additions- most of the extra length is simply dragging out the fight scenes. The way it'll look more dated than the original very soon.
But it'll definitely be a big hit.

― snotty moore, Tuesday, 13 December 2005 03:01 (twenty years ago)

kael was a great writer but she could really be an obnoxious bully at times. she also had a bad habit of telling you what you think of a movie - "you feel cheated," "you're not convinced," "you're amused by the director's presumption" etc etc etc. just a rhetorical device, obv, but a pretty annoying one.

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 09:24 (twenty years ago)

if you read a lot of those 70s reviews it's pretty clear she's just sitting down and typing whatever comes into her head - she repeats herself a lot for emphasis, uses a lot of clumsy run-on sentences alternated with short, blunt ones, almost like she's giving an impromptu lecture instead of writing a review. i think that's how i appreciate kael - not as a critic, more as a kind of automatic writer, like kerouac, only a kerouac who had actual ideas and writing talent.

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 09:30 (twenty years ago)

xpost I dunno. I think it was just a rhetorical device.

Kael's great contribution to criticism was personalizing it -- it's not about the validity of her opinions, just as it's not about whether Ebert is right or wrong about whatever middling crap he gave three stars or two-and-a-half stars to. Kael loved movies, and wrote about them as a person first, a writer second, and a critic third. This is the correct order of priority for a movie review, I think, and I say this as someone who reads these damn things compulsively and uncontrollably. I'm that guy who HAS to know what the critics think, if only to hate them for their opinion, and I know I'm far from alone. Case in point: I read David Denby reviews. I swear sometimes I would strangle that motherfucker if I could.

Reading an old Kael review is still refreshing, no matter what you think about her powers of "discernment." She can be an excellent writer; she's an obvious lover of film; and her voice is all her own. She comes across in her writing at best as someone you would want to... I dunno... marry, and at her very worst as someone you would want to have an impassioned shouting match with. Which is more than you can say for any other movie critic.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 09:50 (twenty years ago)

yeesh guys, take it to the pauline kael thread

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 16:29 (twenty years ago)

anyway i did not take dr. morbius although he & i are cool now i think. it was beauty* killed the beast!

*me

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 16:30 (twenty years ago)

Murderer! So, any good?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 16:32 (twenty years ago)

so... king kong 05! let's go! i gotta say i really enjoyed it except it was exactly one hour too long. and that hour is the first hour. break it down:

PROS:
-naomi watts is gorgeous and awesome
-i liked kong
-i liked the battles with the beasties a lot. once the "stampede" scene kicks in the movie's good to go.
-beautiful top of empire state building stuff
-totally awesome neon-lit '30s new york, vaudeville etc
-kong stampeding through same

CONS:
-first hour, mostly aboard the ship, mostly full of horrible peter jackson "comedy," no fucking reason this whole segment shouldn't have been 15 minutes long at most
-jack black not so much
-ditto brody
-did i mention it's an horu too long

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 16:34 (twenty years ago)

mostly full of horrible peter jackson "comedy,"

I must protest in that he can do that well -- Meet the Feebles, c'mon! -- but I agree I'm not always convinced it works outside of puppets with him.

At least I know that I can take a restroom break during the first hour.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 16:36 (twenty years ago)

it's such a peter jackson movie. it shared so many exact cinematic strengths & weaknesses with the LOTRs.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 16:41 (twenty years ago)

Beautiful scenery, WETA's skills, rings and orcs...er, wait.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 16:43 (twenty years ago)

beautiful scenery, wicked sweeping aerial shots, rockin' big beasties etc

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 16:46 (twenty years ago)

how many gay endings?

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 16:53 (twenty years ago)

Why, you'll have to go and find out.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 16:55 (twenty years ago)

if you've seen brokeback mountain, you've seen peter jackson's king kong.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 16:57 (twenty years ago)

hahahaha that wins!

― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 17:47 (twenty years ago)

That is awesome slocki.

― Lars and Jagger (Ex Leon), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 17:48 (twenty years ago)

Why cain't I quit you? ROOOOOOARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 17:53 (twenty years ago)

do the CGI dinosaurs look good slocki?

― latebloomer: Deutsch Bag (latebloomer), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 18:16 (twenty years ago)

seriously i dont like apes that much. i like big nasty lizards.

heheheheheheheheheheheheh

― latebloomer: Deutsch Bag (latebloomer), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 18:16 (twenty years ago)

they look dece... it's more what he does with them though.

the big bugs are SCARY

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 18:38 (twenty years ago)

seriously i dont like apes that much. i like big nasty lizards.

So you prefer Jake to Heath?

― Lars and Jagger (Ex Leon), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 18:42 (twenty years ago)

the weirdest thing about this movie is the strong implication that the crew totally massacres the native islanders offscreen

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 18:45 (twenty years ago)

SWEET FUCKING JESUS THIS MOVIE IS WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY TOO LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG. it's like we're at some magic moment in film history where we get all the worst of the studio system and auteurism with none of the best - kubrick, lucas, spielberg, and now peter jackson, spectacle - showmanship, selfindulgence - personality. nice nod to cooper early in the flick - would that you heeded his lessons peter! rip storytelling. you could trim an hour and a half off this thing and do no damage. ye fucking gods. anyhow the two best moments in this are the moments you gotta have in every kong flick, like hamlet's monologue: THE line - 'twas beauty killed this beast' (last line of breathless too btw), which i was waiting on the edge of my seat for AND BEST OF ALL kong kills a reptilian beastie by grabbing it's jaws and SNAAAAAP, i actually applauded at this. the scene with the uncircumcised worms eating the dude, a new scene sorta, was pretty great too (the only moment that felt really peter jackson). the ape's great, naomi watts was fine, i thought 'we're along way from mullholland drive' but not so much really only this time she gets the rita part and - hooray for hollywood - this time she's not a bitch, even if showbiz still is. liked the dinosaur trapeze scene, liked jack black well enough though i probably worked out my 'imagine if you will jack black in the 30s' kinks with the cradle will rock (better, funner flick than this btw, in a better world we get cgi serkis as rockefeller and john cusack shot off the top of the empire state building). generally though? INTERMINABLE. i damn near screamed 'will something plz fucking eat jimmay already?' and a kid in the row DID actually yell out 'WHERE THE HELL IS KONG?' about eight hours into the flick when they're still on the boat. when it ends i didn't think 'wow' i thought 'finally'. i'm probably seeing it again this weekend.

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 15 December 2005 02:43 (twenty years ago)

They should replace A.O. Scott with Blount over at nytimes.

― Lars and Jagger (Ex Leon), Thursday, 15 December 2005 03:03 (twenty years ago)

So this is Peter Jackson's 'coke album'?

― Erick Dampier is better than Shaq (miloaukerman), Thursday, 15 December 2005 03:09 (twenty years ago)

i wish! adrien brody is pretty prominent though.

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 15 December 2005 03:13 (twenty years ago)

Him or his nose?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 15 December 2005 04:21 (twenty years ago)

I enjoyed it, though PJ has to stop already with the "slo-mo shakey camera" gimmick. It brought the LOTR films down a notch each time he employed it and it brings KONG down the same way. But, still, I was rapt the entire three hours - this thing looks so gorgeously, obviously artificial in parts (cf. most of the "at sea" scenes ) and I love that - and Kong was such a sad, tired and totally lovable character. Naomi Watts is great to look at, too. The dino scenes were over the top but fun and I didn't, for once, mind Jack Black. $10 well spent.

― Jay Vee (Manon_70), Thursday, 15 December 2005 04:28 (twenty years ago)

I agree 100% with the slo-mo shakey camera gimmick. Ugh.

I liked the movie; all of my friends hated it. Two of them walked out because they were bored.

Pre-Kong the movie dragged, post-Kong the movie seemed rushed at times (wtf happened to the ship's crew? Why develop those characters at all if you're just going to write them out of the movie?)

The ship stuff was boring. I don't even remember it. Kong himself was a million times more impressive than the extremely impressive Gollum, mainly because he had to convey so much thought and emotion without speaking. The dino charge scene was the worst CG in the movie. I got a lump in my throat twice, but I've always been a sucker for sad animals - even CG ones. The, um... "ice-skating" scene was somehow embarrassing. As much as I enjoyed the movie, I would never buy it, and doubt I'll ever voluntarily watch it again. Three hours is just too long. One entire evening is enough time spent on a movie with such a simple plot. I would like to watch the Kong rampage stuff again, though.

― baked beans (Royal Bed Bouncer), Thursday, 15 December 2005 06:27 (twenty years ago)

I'M A MONKEY

http://www.cameltales.com/images/osama_monkey_man.jpg

― Alfred Soto (Alfred Soto), Thursday, 15 December 2005 15:04 (twenty years ago)

My pseudogirlfriend told me she was crying durning this -- is she nuts.

Discus.

― GET EQUIPPED WITH BUBBLE LEAD (ex machina), Thursday, 15 December 2005 16:31 (twenty years ago)

It is a sign you must pound your chest and be a man.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 15 December 2005 16:33 (twenty years ago)

j.d. is basically right re. kael, kenan is wrong, dunno why he wants to marry her, but needless to say, she's yours, dude.

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Thursday, 15 December 2005 16:47 (twenty years ago)

david thomson also totally nutso for the 70s Kong but I think that's mostly down to explicable Lange pash

― Ward Fowler (Ward Fowler), Thursday, 15 December 2005 16:53 (twenty years ago)

jessica lange >> naomi watts >>>>>> fay wray

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Thursday, 15 December 2005 16:57 (twenty years ago)

Jeff Bridges >>>>>>>>>>>> Adrien Brody >> Bruce Cabot

via THE DRUDGE REPORT!

COLUMN: IS 'KING KONG' RACIST?
Thu Dec 15 2005 08:59:16 ET

Is KING KONG racist? asks Jim Pinkerton in his Thursday NEWSDAY column.

"Lots of people say it is. And, if it is, why does the film keep getting remade? What does it say about us if the new KONG is a huge hit?"

Pinkerton writes: Any movie that features white people sailing off to the Third World to capture a giant ape and carry it back to the West for exploitation is going to be seen as a metaphor for colonialism and racism. That was true for the original in 1933 and for the two remakes: the campy one in 1976, and the latest, directed by Peter Jackson. (In addition, a KONG wannabe, MIGHTY JOE YOUNG, has been made twice.)

Movie reviewer David Edelstein, writing in SLATE, notes the "implicit racism of KING KONG - the implication that Kong stands for the black man brought in chains from a dark island (full of murderous primitive pagans) and with a penchant for skinny white blondes." Indeed, a GOOGLE search using the words "King Kong racism" yielded 490,000 hits.

Comparing the new film with the original, the WASHINGTON POST's Stephen Hunter observed, "It remains a parable of exploitation, cultural self-importance, the arrogance of the West, all issues that were obvious in the original but unexamined; they remain unexamined here, if more vivid."

And by more vivid, Hunter might be referring to the natives of mythical Skull Island, where Kong is discovered. Director Jackson took people of Melanesian stock - the dark-skinned peoples who are indigenous to much of the South Pacific, including Jackson's own country of New Zealand - and made them up to look and act like monsters, more zombie-ish than human. Indeed, one is moved to compare these human devils to the ogre-ish Orcs from Jackson's mega-Oscar LORD OF THE RINGS films. The bad guys are dark, hideous and undifferentiatedly evil.

Developing...

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 15 December 2005 19:56 (twenty years ago)

Just saw it. Yes, too long, but fuckit. More movie for the price of admission. I LOVED the dinosaurs, and the vertiginous Empire State building death scene was great.

― Beth Parker (Beth Parker), Friday, 16 December 2005 01:30 (twenty years ago)

Basically, if you cut a bunch of the stuff on the boat and in NY at the start and slowed down a little bit in the jungle, this would be a perfectly worthy successor to the original. As it is, I'd say it gets about 90% of the way there.

I love that Kong really looked a lot like a crabby middle-aged schmo who can't believe his luck with this gorgeous broad. The callousness he displayed toward the wrong blondes was great, too. No foolin' this guy.

― Austin Still (Austin, Still), Friday, 16 December 2005 01:34 (twenty years ago)

I thought this movie was really fun! I don't get the hate for it...super fun.

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Friday, 16 December 2005 15:36 (twenty years ago)

even 3-hour monkey movies are overanalysed these days.

― latebloomer: Deutsch Bag (latebloomer), Friday, 16 December 2005 16:42 (twenty years ago)

x post
matt youve made my day , it was great fun :)

DR M developing what exactly? "MYTHICAL" most impt word here surely, also NZ & most of STH Pacific = Polynesian

― Kiwi likes the conflict of this thread, Friday, 16 December 2005 16:53 (twenty years ago)

I didn't mind the beginning of the film - there has to be some sort slow ascent to the first drop of a rollercoaster. Do you really expect to be immediately dropped into the action in a movie like this?

What got old for me was all the tender moments shared between Watts and Kong. Ok, they like each other - I got it. Same reaction I got in LOTR with the 2 gay hobbits.

Overall, I thought it was about 30 minutes too long.

― kickitcricket (kickitcricket), Friday, 16 December 2005 19:31 (twenty years ago)

humourless "PC lefty" types are going to once again incur the wrath of the masses if they keep barking up this racism tree. i do think there is something vaguely racist about the scenes involving the painted savage natives (the extras/actors weren't even credited for the film), but Kong himself was a sympathetic character, and honestly i'm a little bit uncomfortable with the idea that a gorilla is supposed to be representative of a black person. liberals are the only people i see making these claims. it's kind of sick.

― uncredited savage, Friday, 16 December 2005 20:04 (twenty years ago)

so why did you bring up kong being sympathetic?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 16 December 2005 20:09 (twenty years ago)

is count dracula a racist caricature of a romanian?

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Friday, 16 December 2005 20:10 (twenty years ago)

well to be fair kong is supposed to be SCARY as much as sympathetic in any king kong film (except possibly in the '76 version), so the "kong isn't racist cos he's a good guy" argument won't totally fly.

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Friday, 16 December 2005 20:13 (twenty years ago)

because even if he is supposed to be a metaphor for black people, he's a sympathetic one in the new version. he's scary, yeah, but generally misunderstood and shouldn't have been brought to america in the first place... wait a minute, now i'm starting to think maybe it is a racist movie. nevermind what i said above. but seriously i don't think kong is supposed to represent black people. after all, jackson put the one token black guy on the ship to prove that not all blacks are bad like the savages.

― uncredited savage, Friday, 16 December 2005 20:22 (twenty years ago)

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 16 December 2005 20:23 (twenty years ago)

in trying to defend the movie, i've decided that the critics are right, and the movie is straight up racist. fuck pete jackson in his atkins diet ass.

― pissed off uncredited savage, Friday, 16 December 2005 20:25 (twenty years ago)

It was way too long but there were a few great set pieces, which is enough for me. The brontosaurus shit was kind of a missed opportunity, I couldn't stop wondering how the hell they were all outrunning a bunch of dinosaurs, but the huge dino pile-up was kind of totally fucking awesome. They dragged out Kong's death way too long - I actually thought I was gonna shed a tear when they captured KK and he outstretched his hand to Darrow, so obviously I was expecting the end to just kill me. But it went on forfuckingever and snapped me out of it. The fight with the three t-rexes was so fucking great that I was pretty much pumping my fist in the air and giggling by the end of it, and the spider cave stuff confirmed to me what I'd been thinking for a while, which is that Jackson really excels at scary atmosphere, tension and character - his action stuff is merely good. My gf thought the action scenes dragged on too long, and I thought they could've trimmed some the shots of Ann & KK staring longingly into each other's eyes. It WAS the best creature animation I've ever seen. I know it's hackneyed to talk about this with computer characters, but Kong's eyes were freaking me the fuck out. I really didn't think they could make something that expressive and shit.

Jack Black was either the best or worst possible actor to deliver the "tis beauty that killed the beast" line.

― IN UR BASE KILLING ALL UR DUDES (Adrian Langston), Friday, 16 December 2005 20:25 (twenty years ago)

so um what do the dinosaurs represent?

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Friday, 16 December 2005 20:25 (twenty years ago)

rock critics

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 16 December 2005 20:27 (twenty years ago)

capatalism's unconcious, unthinking lizard libido?

― latebloomer: Deutsch Bag (latebloomer), Friday, 16 December 2005 20:29 (twenty years ago)

so um what do the dinosaurs represent?

korean shop owners in the hood

― pissed off savage, Friday, 16 December 2005 20:31 (twenty years ago)

there was more real chemistry between Naomi Watts and a computer cartoon gorilla than there was between Natalie Portman and Anakin in all three new Star Wars movie. truth.

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Friday, 16 December 2005 20:36 (twenty years ago)

kicked pigeons

― latebloomer: Deutsch Bag (latebloomer), Friday, 16 December 2005 20:37 (twenty years ago)

yeah but there was also more chemistry between wallace and gromit than watts and kong. but there was also more chemistry between jennifer lopez and vince vaugn in the cell than there was between anakin and portman.

― vague annoyed uncredited savage, Friday, 16 December 2005 20:38 (twenty years ago)

Kia ora fellow savages, Ive only got a teensy weensy bit of savage blood in me , so Im not as outraged as you but Im real concerned about a 1930s thriller monster remake, set in the 1930s dares to have people behave like, well like its 1930,luckily for me all these film crits and you guys know so much about South Pacific culture and customs because this is real real real important shit for this movie, no, for real. Like you Ive got a real grip now, metaphorically speaking of course . Tu Meke Bro.

― Albino Savage, Saturday, 17 December 2005 11:07 (twenty years ago)

It certainly wasn't flawless, but it was gobsmackingly entertaining. I adored Kong and Watts, quite liked Black and thought Brody was totally wasted in a dull, underwritten part. A good fifteen or twenty minutes certainly could have been shaved off the start, specifically the sections spent developing characters who had absolutely no pay-off.

I'm staying out of the racsism debate.

― chap who would dare to work for the man (chap), Saturday, 17 December 2005 21:58 (twenty years ago)

wow, so apparently this thing is bombing so far?

― j blount (papa la bas), Saturday, 17 December 2005 22:17 (twenty years ago)

The only racial stuff I can gather from this film (coupled with LOTR)is that Peter Jackson has no compunction against using dark skin as shorthand for evil. Given the fact that if asked, he has the excuse of fealty to the source material in both cases(and also that he largely sidestepped the racial/colonial anxiety re: Kong himself that the original film was positively steeped in, even if in a quaint half-unconscious way) I really haven't the energy to go down that road. The natives needed to be scary, he made up some scary natives. Well played, Mr. Jackson, wink wink.
Anyhow. Yes, the shitty LOTR style Moments of Emotional Exchange that start out beautifully then slow-cook themselves into self-parody, but the Naomi-Kong thing proves indestructible. Kong rocked it, truly a great film creation. The bugs were the stuff of nightmare, good going. Punchable-faced kid story arc could go, along with the bronto scene...getting bored of remembering the movie, not a good sign but I'm pretty sure I liked it a good deal.

― tremendoid (tremendoid), Saturday, 17 December 2005 22:51 (twenty years ago)

It was overlong on the island (one too many chase scenes/encounters with scary creatures etc) but it was beautifully done overall, more importantly it doesn't take anything away from the original. Jack Black was great - none does huckster better. (Except maybe Charles Grodin.) Kong was excellent: Sirkus truly has a knack for movement. I thought Naomi Watts was outstanding, not only for her closeups (which blew me away) but just how well-rounded she made Ann Darrow. The end killed me. I cried like a baby. Then again, I cried at the end of the original.

― VegemiteGrrl (VegemiteGrrl), Sunday, 18 December 2005 04:15 (twenty years ago)

blegh. overcooked.

― ryan (ryan), Sunday, 18 December 2005 06:53 (twenty years ago)

tho i have to admit the "abominable snowman" line made me chuckle. if only because THAT would be a cool movie!

― ryan (ryan), Sunday, 18 December 2005 06:59 (twenty years ago)

TOO MUCH SLO-MO

― latebloomer: Deutsch Bag (latebloomer), Monday, 19 December 2005 04:23 (twenty years ago)

the slow-mo stuff was totally awful but at least it was all in the disposable first hour

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 19 December 2005 04:36 (twenty years ago)

I loved it really.
Fay Wray was supposed to deliver the "twas beauty..." line, but she kakked. Why he didn't give it to some random tottering old lady or a little kid or even a seven foot albino viking over Jack Black is beyond me.
Yes, it's too long. No, you won't mind. No, it's not racist. Yes, Sirkus does one of the best acting jobs of the year. Yes, the meat weasel leech things are creepy. Yes, it's emotionally engaging. Yes, you should go see it now.
It's about fifty times better than Narnia.

― Forksclovetofu (Forksclovetofu), Monday, 19 December 2005 04:43 (twenty years ago)

"kakked"?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 19 December 2005 04:46 (twenty years ago)

Yes, kakked.

― Forksclovetofu (Forksclovetofu), Monday, 19 December 2005 05:02 (twenty years ago)

FWIW i actually didn't mind the slow build of the approach to the island. once they got there, it was quite entertaining for the most part.

The dinosaurs and critters were cool, 'specially the T-Rexes. The bugs were the creepiest though (goddamn that shit made me squirm). Kong himself was very well realized. Still, there was a lot of shoddy green screen shots and scenes where the CG critters failed to convincingly interact with the live actors.

As a whole I wouldn't say the film is racist but the natives made me cringe a little, considering how the non-caucasianness of their facial features was overemphasized to make them scarier.

I thought Jack Black and Naomi Watts were quite effective and appropriately cast for their roles. Adrien Brody was fine but his role was essentially superfluous.

The one part that truly dragged on for me was the climactic battle on the Empire State Building. I'm afraid of heights somewhat so that made it even more excruciating for me.

There was too much gratuitous crap like all the slo-mo and syrupy montages in odd places. Too many closeups in the first parts of the movie as well! (I'm really just bitching there.)

Overall, well done but overcooked.

― latebloomer: Deutsch Bag (latebloomer), Monday, 19 December 2005 05:08 (twenty years ago)

The ending of this movie was totally ruined for me due to my extreme fear of hights. Every time Kong took a swing at the airplanes, I got queezy.

― Spink, Monday, 19 December 2005 14:24 (twenty years ago)

wow, so apparently this thing is bombing so far?

$50 million opening versus $90 million expectations = bombing only in the weird world of Hollywood. Some flakes in the blogosphere take this as a sign that it means people are more Christian these days since they want to see Narnia more. These people are slightly curious.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 19 December 2005 14:27 (twenty years ago)

Chris Parnell's little movie on "The Chronic"les of Narnia is the only funny thing I've seen on SNL in ages and ages.

― Lars and Jagger (Ex Leon), Monday, 19 December 2005 14:33 (twenty years ago)

The one part that truly dragged on for me was the climactic battle on the Empire State Building. I'm afraid of heights somewhat so that made it even more excruciating for me.
The ending of this movie was totally ruined for me due to my extreme fear of hights. Every time Kong took a swing at the airplanes, I got queezy.

Then the scene was working!
I loved how totally fearless Ann Darrow was. It's a great movie to take little girls to. even if is does give them odd ideas of the south sea islanders. But of course, anyone who lived on Skull Island would develop some odd quirks. Weird how those actors weren't credited. The bizarre child? The white-hair-in-the-face crone? People willing to put bones through their noses for art? Come on!
Where did they film the Skull Island seacoast part? Yikes!

― Beth Parker (Beth Parker), Monday, 19 December 2005 14:49 (twenty years ago)

Indeed, a GOOGLE search using the words "King Kong racism" yielded 490,000 hits.

Results 1 - 10 of about 966,000 for king kong not racist. (0.09 seconds)

― Onimo (GerryNemo), Monday, 19 December 2005 16:30 (twenty years ago)

Forgive me for asking, but...

Is there really a debate about this film being racist?

A simple yes/no would suffice. As I am treading thin ILE ice, im not going for a debate. But a brief summary of the racism justification would be appreciated...not required.

― Spink, Monday, 19 December 2005 18:15 (twenty years ago)

A $50 mln opening is a bomb when you've got to break $600mln worldwide just to get even (or so I've read).

It was OK, certainly miles ahead of Lord of the Rings. The portrayal of the natives was, if not completely racist, then just stupid and ill-considered. Too long by an hour and most of the action sequences were kind of boring. The action was good when there was some possibility of characters being in danger - when it was just Watts or Brody, you knew they'd survive, so who cares?

― Erick Dampier is better than Shaq (miloaukerman), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 03:32 (twenty years ago)

I'm afraid of heights somewhat so that made it even more excruciating for me.
---
The ending of this movie was totally ruined for me due to my extreme fear of hights. Every time Kong took a swing at the airplanes, I got queezy.

I felt exactly the same in the scene earlier on when the boat was smashing into rocks, as I'm rather afraid of water (oceans at least). Looks like King Kong hit all the big phobias quite well - the bug bits come to mind, especially.

― melton mowbray (adr), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 03:57 (twenty years ago)

I have a terrible phobia about irrelevant Joseph Conrad references.

― Austin Still (Austin, Still), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 03:59 (twenty years ago)

that was truly the first sign of trouble. also the "he destroys the things he loves" line was a little too poignant. it wasnt all that bad though. one of the better movies i've seen this year, but then i havent seen a lot of good ones.

― ryan (ryan), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:02 (twenty years ago)

Watts is totally gorgeous throughout, at least.

― Erick Dampier is better than Shaq (miloaukerman), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:07 (twenty years ago)

The whole unrequited love story between the cabin boy and first mate could have been dropped with no harm. That whole thing where they practically talk to the audience ('It's not an adventure story, is it?' 'No, it's not.') was miserably painful. It'd be easy to ditch some more of the boat stuff, too. Then get rid of the stampede scene, which was also totally unneccesary, and you've shaved a half hour, easy. Give Brody's scenes with Watts to some other character, and eliminate the whole of the subplots about the movie studio and the irrelevant crap about movie-making politics and you're starting to get to a reasonable length with greater focus.

But still, I liked it a lot. It's just that it narrowly missed perfection, so I'm bitching.

― Austin Still (Austin, Still), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:09 (twenty years ago)

I thought it was odd that a family movie (lots of kids in the audience this afternoon) showed so much human death, but it was at the same time so white-washed. The only time the violence felt real was when Kong ripped apart the T-Rexes' jaws.

― Erick Dampier is better than Shaq (miloaukerman), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:47 (twenty years ago)

A $50 mln opening is a bomb when you've got to break $600mln worldwide just to get even (or so I've read).

yeah, but all this handwringing about movies having to make X amount of dollars to break even is sort of wierd cuz it totally discounts DVD sales, which I imagine is close to or even more than what they make at box office these days...

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 22:32 (twenty years ago)

i still maintain that hours 2 & 3 are a great movie

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 22:40 (twenty years ago)

I dunno. You've got to sell a lot of DVDs to make back $600mln - and DVD sales are closely linked to the success of a film in the box office. A blockbuster is going to have blockbuster sales, a flop will have fewer, etc.

― Erick Dampier is better than Shaq (miloaukerman), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 22:42 (twenty years ago)

x-post --- My friend Rich who saw it, and is no slouch on his films, actually really enjoyed the first hour for its setting up the characters so you'd miss 'em when they went down (or the ones who did go down, at any rate). YMMV, obv.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 22:43 (twenty years ago)

I maintain that 40 minutes from hour 1, 40 minutes from hour 2 and 30 minutes from hour 3 would make a great movie.

xpost - the first hour was good at setting things up, but it had too many portentious omens (Conrad, Jimmy being found in hold, etc.) that never paid off, and the way the crew apparently fell in love with Watts was never shown - suddenly Jimmy was just itching to save her.

― Erick Dampier is better than Shaq (miloaukerman), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 22:45 (twenty years ago)

no way are hours 2 and 3 great--too sappy and 80% of that is Watts and Kong staring listlessly into the sunset.

kong is just too unambiguous a hero for whatever reason. maybe it's impossible culturally to make a scary kong, but he was a giant goddamn puppy in this movie.

― ryan (ryan), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 23:00 (twenty years ago)

I agree with lots of what other people said:
The fights with insects and dinosaurs went on too long.
The character development of everyone on the boat took too long, I don't mind the ones that died (taking Ned's friend's point) but those that vanished when the action shifted to New York. I kept expecting the discovery of Jimmy the stowaway to have a Skull Island connection.
The Heart of Darkness thing was a bit much.
I think the crew was taken with Ms Darrow because she danced for them at one point.
Also, what happened to the male actor? he was a plausible coward then got all brave and was yodelling around with a tommy gun, then in New york he is a coward again.

― isadora (isadora), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 23:17 (twenty years ago)

i liked that the movie took a while to build. but unfortunately it also took too long to end!

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Wednesday, 21 December 2005 04:56 (twenty years ago)

ill be honest though: all i care about are nasty critters.

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Wednesday, 21 December 2005 04:58 (twenty years ago)

not having seen any of the lord of the rings movies, i have to ask: what's the big deal? i mean, obviously the guy is no novice and he can handle FX and a big budget, etc. but otherwise totally banal visually. bad use of slomo. way too many push-ins.

some really nice money shots,and the dinosaur stuff made me jump a lot. but is this really the best they can do? sheesh.

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Wednesday, 21 December 2005 06:15 (twenty years ago)

nice fritz lang's "m" reference though

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Wednesday, 21 December 2005 06:17 (twenty years ago)

still haven't seen this, but i watched the original this morning for the first time in a decade and it's still as glorious as ever. i have a hard time imagining jack black could be funnier than robert armstrong.

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Wednesday, 21 December 2005 06:50 (twenty years ago)

"I don't see how the sexual sub-text or the love story can go much further. We are not ready - are we? - for a movie in which Ms. Darrow contrives to give the ape a tasteful blow-job." - David Thomson

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Wednesday, 21 December 2005 07:19 (twenty years ago)

Just got back from seeing it. Ugh. I'll pass on the rest of the "trilogy" and may not give Peter Jackson the benefit of the doubt again until he proves he can make a 100-minute film, good or otherwise.

― I do feel guilty for getting any perverse amusement out of it (Rock Hardy), Thursday, 22 December 2005 05:40 (twenty years ago)

What "trilogy"?

― Austin Still (Austin, Still), Thursday, 22 December 2005 13:39 (twenty years ago)

King Kong, Sing Song and Ding Dong

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 22 December 2005 13:59 (twenty years ago)

...and don't forget the prequel, Ping Pong

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Thursday, 22 December 2005 15:06 (twenty years ago)

We might be going to see this tonight, I dunno though, it's awfully long.

― Pashmina (Pashmina), Thursday, 22 December 2005 15:10 (twenty years ago)

Ling Long? *is beaten*

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 22 December 2005 15:17 (twenty years ago)

One of the early teaser trailers talks about Jackson deciding to make a trilogy with Son of Kong and Return to Skull Island (I think), and there's a production diary where he talks a bit about going ahead and doing it. Interestingly enough, it looks like all official mention of that has been scrubbed from kongisking.net, though there are still some fan and media references. Maybe it was all a big put-on, I don't know.

― I do feel guilty for getting any perverse amusement out of it (Rock Hardy), Thursday, 22 December 2005 15:33 (twenty years ago)

It was a big put on. It was part of an April Fool's production diary.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 22 December 2005 15:37 (twenty years ago)

Heh...scammed again. Well, I'm glad it's not true.

― I do feel guilty for getting any perverse amusement out of it (Rock Hardy), Thursday, 22 December 2005 16:55 (twenty years ago)

needed massive amounts of editing. pre-kong setup takes a lifetime then next thing you're playing brontosaurus dominoes and watching t-rex acrobatics. action mostly felt overloaded and poorly paced.

i can't really watch jack black in a not-entirely-comedic role, i kept expecting him to lift his eyebrows and say something like "guuuuuuuys? you with me here?"

depiction of evil natives could've done with a 2-lecture postcolonialism course but, eh, it's king kong.

nice new york shots at the end. liked the intro too.

― jermaine (jnoble), Thursday, 22 December 2005 19:31 (twenty years ago)

Do not see this movie. But if you must, heed my advice: in the middle of the very long skull-island segment, you will suddenly feel that you need a break -- maybe to take a piss, maybe just to get out of the theater for a moment. If you feel this urge, relieve it. You will not miss anything. If you leave when the girl is getting chased by a giant Tyranosaurus, when you come back she will still be getting chased by a giant Tyranosaurus, or maybe now there will be two giant Tyranosauri, or maybe giant roaches, or giant bats, or giant squids, or velociraptors gnawing on a giant squid that's grappling a blue whale which is in King Kong's fist, but King Kong's other fist is holding a rope saving him and the girl, also in that same fist, from certain doom.

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Saturday, 24 December 2005 06:47 (twenty years ago)

omg a blue whale. that would have been fantastic.

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Saturday, 24 December 2005 06:49 (twenty years ago)

amt, what's a push-in?

― I GUARONTEE ::cajun voice:: (Adrian Langston), Saturday, 24 December 2005 07:12 (twenty years ago)

However, there was one surprise in this movie -- I really, really didn't think Peter Jackson would actually do the classic noble-black-guy-dies-first bit.

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Saturday, 24 December 2005 07:18 (twenty years ago)

But RAPTORS people? Come the fuck on! Before Jurassic Park no one had ever heard of a velociraptor and now any movie involving dinosaurs just has to have them! It's like they're unionized or something!

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Saturday, 24 December 2005 07:19 (twenty years ago)

So is this officially in danger of being called a minor flop now?

― Erick Dampier is better than Shaq (miloaukerman), Monday, 26 December 2005 21:07 (twenty years ago)

amt, what's a push-in?

generically i guess it's when you track forward with the camera, but i meant it as a particular use of this device when you're in close up on someone's face and you "push in" even closer to highlight or underline some expression or simply in an attempt to lend gravity to the moment.

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Monday, 26 December 2005 22:06 (twenty years ago)

(i thought this film overused such devices)

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Monday, 26 December 2005 22:06 (twenty years ago)

So is this officially in danger of being called a minor flop now?

Maybe it's in danger of being called a minor flop now, but I doubt it will be long-term. Titanic also opened in mid-December to weak numbers because people don't have time to see a 3-hour movie when they're getting ready for the holidays. It's back at #1 in the US this weekend, too.

― Brian Miller (Brian Miller), Monday, 26 December 2005 23:06 (twenty years ago)

too many notes!

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Tuesday, 27 December 2005 18:33 (twenty years ago)

Not that great.

Did anyone else notice the weird timing SNAFU in the New York scenes? They start at the performance, which has to be at, what 9 PM or 10 PM? Kong escapes, goes on rampage, finds Watts, goes ice skating, which takes about 30 minutes of movie time, and it implies this is roughly real-time. Then he climbs up the Empire State, and all of a sudden it's dawn?

― n/a (Nick A.), Tuesday, 27 December 2005 19:36 (twenty years ago)

but n/a there's an ellipse during the ice skating scene where we're supposed to understand that naomi ******s the monkey's ******.

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Tuesday, 27 December 2005 19:39 (twenty years ago)

tickles the monkey's armpits?

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Tuesday, 27 December 2005 19:40 (twenty years ago)

ridicules the monkey's performance?

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Tuesday, 27 December 2005 20:36 (twenty years ago)

riddick's the monkey's perfume?

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Tuesday, 27 December 2005 20:39 (twenty years ago)

grooms out the monkey's grapefruit-sized nits?

― truck-patch pixel farmer (Rock Hardy), Tuesday, 27 December 2005 21:07 (twenty years ago)

OMG what if Vin Diesel had played Kong? It would have been movie of the year.

― Lars and Jagger (Ex Leon), Tuesday, 27 December 2005 21:07 (twenty years ago)

OTM.

― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Tuesday, 27 December 2005 21:15 (twenty years ago)

I saw the last 20 minutes of the original on TCM last night as an inoculation vs seeing this one.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 27 December 2005 21:17 (twenty years ago)

Is everyone serious though, about this ice skating thing? Because that might be worthwhile.

― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Tuesday, 27 December 2005 21:18 (twenty years ago)

The Kong on Ice scene is terrific, don't listen to the PH-in'.

― Austin Still (Austin, Still), Tuesday, 27 December 2005 22:46 (twenty years ago)

I thought the triple lutz took it a step too far though.

― n/a (Nick A.), Tuesday, 27 December 2005 23:16 (twenty years ago)

it reminded me of those coke commercial with the penguins and the polar bears.

probably because i saw one of those ads before the movie.

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Wednesday, 28 December 2005 00:55 (twenty years ago)

there were too many fucking creepy crawlies. you could easily cut 2/3 of the middle of the film.

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Wednesday, 28 December 2005 02:08 (twenty years ago)

However, there was one surprise in this movie -- I really, really didn't think Peter Jackson would actually do the classic noble-black-guy-dies-first bit.

But he didn't! The one white film-crew guy died first, with a spear through his chest.

― phil d. (Phil D.), Wednesday, 28 December 2005 16:35 (twenty years ago)

there were too many fucking creepy crawlies. you could easily cut 2/3 of the middle of the film.

-- Theorry Henry (miltonpinsk...), December 28th, 2005.

there can never be enough creepy crawlies. less PEOPLE is what the movie needed. they should've just made it a pseudo-documentary about the wildlife of Skull Island.

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Wednesday, 28 December 2005 16:39 (twenty years ago)

xpost Yeah, I guess you're right. But he still died pretty early, and was sort of the first "meaningful" character death.

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Wednesday, 28 December 2005 16:43 (twenty years ago)

they did get rid of the minority characters rather early. i'm not saying this is "racist" or anything, just so we don't have that conversation, it's just ... conspicuous is all.

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Wednesday, 28 December 2005 20:49 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, let's not have "that" conversation.

I guess I was put off in general by the way the black guy has to be specifically defined as the "good" black guy throughout the movie (so you know he's not the *other* kind) -- he served in the army! He's actually read Heart of Darkness! The movie feels no particular need, for example, to assure you that the German guy isn't one of those Nazi dudes, and actually, the Chinese character pretty much IS an ethnic stereotype.

Anyway, just rubbed me as a variation on the "magical Negro" theme, which also explains the early, noble death. But then again, none of the characters were exceptionally lifelike or human.

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Wednesday, 28 December 2005 23:42 (twenty years ago)

yeah I think it's a case of Jackson taking the "throwback filming" concept to uncomfortably ignorant extremes, resurrecting racial tropes so antique that they prompted more confusion than anger(speaking for myself), at least initially. I mean if nothing else, Bill Nunn played the same black dude in Legend of 1900 not 5 years ago. No, really, I don't want to have this conversation.

― tremendoid (tremendoid), Thursday, 29 December 2005 00:00 (twenty years ago)

But I don't buy the whole Kong=Black Man thing for a second. Sound more like racist projection on the part of the person who suggested the connection was there in the first place.

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Thursday, 29 December 2005 00:15 (twenty years ago)

I don't buy it either and I said so upthread(1933 is a different story(in case you were talking to me)).

― tremendoid (tremendoid), Thursday, 29 December 2005 00:21 (twenty years ago)

It's 2005 and a black man still can't date a white woman without getting fucked by The Man.

― Erick Dampier is better than Shaq (miloaukerman), Thursday, 29 December 2005 02:01 (twenty years ago)

I guess I missed the scene where Kong makes his escape in a white Esplorer art 40 mph.

― Austin Still (Austin, Still), Thursday, 29 December 2005 02:04 (twenty years ago)

if yhou don't feel queasy @ the islanders, you = racist.

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Thursday, 29 December 2005 02:25 (twenty years ago)

Nah, I just have a high tolerance for nasty teeth.

― Austin Still (Austin, Still), Thursday, 29 December 2005 02:27 (twenty years ago)

A bit long. (Still liked it, though.)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 29 December 2005 04:52 (twenty years ago)

xpost No, the islanders on the other hand bothered me A LOT, especially since Peter Jackson is Australian and I thought they looked like rough caricatures of Aboriginees.

There was very little that *didn't* bother me about this movie though. I actually enjoyed the campy period stuff in the pre-island part and the theater scene the most, though I had a hard time telling if I was laughing with or at the movie.

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Thursday, 29 December 2005 04:56 (twenty years ago)

he "quoted" the islanders from the 1930s version in the stage show toward the end.

i thought the islanders were designed as an amalgam of all "native peoples" so as not to offend any particular group. some of them even looked "white." (albeit scarred/tatooed/zombified.)

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Thursday, 29 December 2005 05:54 (twenty years ago)

yeah the natives were a cross between orcs and a bennetton ad - lotta diversity for a small, remote, isolated island (didn't really achieve it's purpose either)(maybe try MASKS). i wish this movie were better so i could root hard for it against narnia.

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 29 December 2005 06:01 (twenty years ago)

especially since Peter Jackson is Australian and I thought they looked like rough caricatures of Aboriginees.

I thought he was from New Zealand. Makes a nice change, I suppose, for a famous Kiwi to be from Australia, rather than the other way around.
I kind of liked that it was a film about mentors and about teaching (since, obviously, it was the film that Peter Jackson first learned about film-making from). Ann Darrow has a strong male influence in the first part of the film - her teacher, mentor, father figure - who leaves her for Chicago leaving her looking for someone to replace him with. The First Mate mentors Jamie Bell by teaching him about literature and so on. And I was intrigued by the 'natives', who didn't look like they could have been from there at all. Mr. Monkey and I theorised that there was an ancient civilisation on the island which died out over time (or possibly as a direct result of contact with these new islanders) and that the islanders we saw were actually descendants of some wrecked convict ship who were being slowly bent out of recognisable humanity by whatever it is that makes Skull Island so scarey.
See, Christmas gives you time to think about these things. I really enjoyed the film and cried like anything when Kong tried to stop them from stealing Anne off the island. But then, I was well disposed towards it on the way in. I can't imagine it creating any new Peter Jackson fans.
I was also surprised by the number of small children at the film. Its certificate here suggests that under 12s shouldn't see it at all, although they are allowed in if they are with an adult. I wouldn't bring a six year-old to see a film like that.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Thursday, 29 December 2005 09:27 (twenty years ago)

People people people. The Kong On Ice In The Park was PJ's sly nod to Astaire/Rogers, cause he lurvs, lurvs, lurvs teh old-time movies, get it?

― Redd Harvest (Ken L), Thursday, 29 December 2005 13:44 (twenty years ago)

Are you people making this Kong on ice thing up???! I swear to god if I go see this movie, which I won't, but maybe I'll netflix it, and the ice thing isn't there, you will all so be on notice.

― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Thursday, 29 December 2005 15:47 (twenty years ago)

I swear by everything I care about that King Kong festures Kong on ice. I swear.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Thursday, 29 December 2005 15:48 (twenty years ago)

It's totally there. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the Reiner/Hanks/Ryan axis hadn't already recreated some wacky romantic gazebos'n'ice-skating moments in one of their laudable attempts to bring back the old-time movie magic.

― Redd Harvest (Ken L), Thursday, 29 December 2005 15:51 (twenty years ago)

― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Thursday, 29 December 2005 15:54 (twenty years ago)

"Kong On Ice" will open the '06 Oscar telecast, surely.

― truck-patch pixel farmer (Rock Hardy), Thursday, 29 December 2005 16:16 (twenty years ago)

especially since Peter Jackson is Australian and I thought they looked like rough caricatures of Aboriginees.

I thought he was from New Zealand.

Oh, you may be right. My bad.

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Thursday, 29 December 2005 16:32 (twenty years ago)

And yes, Kong is on ice. There is no Adrien Brody on ice.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 29 December 2005 16:53 (twenty years ago)

Festures? What the hell?

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Thursday, 29 December 2005 18:18 (twenty years ago)

i haven't read this thread yet, but I must register my displeasure with king kong on the internet immediately.

― born-again christians in the old corral (Jody Beth Rosen), Saturday, 31 December 2005 00:09 (twenty years ago)

re racism: i just didn't think the scenes with the skull island natives were necessary. they're obviously going to set off people's "racism" alarms, and we've already got all the prehistoric creatures and bugs on the island to scare the shit out of the audience and serve as an obstacle course for the characters. why not just have the island be uninhabited by people?

― born-again christians in the old corral (Jody Beth Rosen), Saturday, 31 December 2005 00:24 (twenty years ago)

for me the issue wasn't so much racism as imperialism.

― born-again christians in the old corral (Jody Beth Rosen), Saturday, 31 December 2005 00:26 (twenty years ago)

"why not just have the island be uninhabited by people?"

Because you (Peter Jackson) are trying to duplicate and expand on the original film as faithfully as possible. This is, I admit, not a very good answer. But I maintain that it is the most likely explanation.

― Austin Still (Austin, Still), Saturday, 31 December 2005 00:33 (twenty years ago)

a likely explanation, but SO MUCH could have been cut from this movie, and cutting those scenes wouldn't have hurt.

― born-again christians in the old corral (Jody Beth Rosen), Saturday, 31 December 2005 00:41 (twenty years ago)

it doesn't have to be three hours. it's not berlin alexanderplatz. it's a gorilla picture.

― born-again christians in the old corral (Jody Beth Rosen), Saturday, 31 December 2005 00:43 (twenty years ago)

And not much of one at that.

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Saturday, 31 December 2005 01:24 (twenty years ago)

Or as my Aunt put it, "Three hours and he dies anyway. We already know the ending."

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Saturday, 31 December 2005 01:24 (twenty years ago)

Further proof that King Kong = The Passion of the Christ.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 31 December 2005 01:34 (twenty years ago)

haha OTM

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Saturday, 31 December 2005 01:38 (twenty years ago)

See, they were both follow-up films by Oscar-winning Antipodean directors based on well-known stories and...

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 31 December 2005 01:39 (twenty years ago)

i haven't read this thread yet, but I must register my displeasure with king kong on the internet immediately.

King Kong has gone off the internet because of you, Jody!

― Redd Harvest (Ken L), Saturday, 31 December 2005 01:41 (twenty years ago)

It was Jody that killed the beast.

― My Name Is Redd (Ken L), Saturday, 31 December 2005 01:52 (twenty years ago)

i wanted the top of the empire state building to myself!

― born-again christians in the old corral (Jody Beth Rosen), Saturday, 31 December 2005 02:02 (twenty years ago)

I think we could write a hit movie about a group of Apostles trying to capture a giant Christ on the remote island where he lives.

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Saturday, 31 December 2005 02:04 (twenty years ago)

does he die on an art deco cross?

― born-again christians in the old corral (Jody Beth Rosen), Saturday, 31 December 2005 02:06 (twenty years ago)

"Not to worry ladies and gentlemen, these nails are made of CHROME STEEL!"

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Saturday, 31 December 2005 02:13 (twenty years ago)

http://www.fotos.org/galeria/data/520/medium/31954-02-Crucifixion-Corpus-Hypercubus-1954.jpg

― Dali, Saturday, 31 December 2005 02:15 (twenty years ago)

This seems like a perfectly reasonable explanation really...

― Jimmy Mod Is The Damnation (The Famous Jimmy Mod), Saturday, 31 December 2005 02:30 (twenty years ago)

Well, the main reason the natives bothered me, regardless of what race they were or how "campy" they were supposed to be, was that they had 0% humanity and were essentially bloodthirsty imps. If you want bloodthirsty imps, fine, just don't make them people, because THAT'S what makes it seem racist. But I'm talking about it much more than I actually care.

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Saturday, 31 December 2005 02:39 (twenty years ago)

So whaddaya want, then? Jawas?

― Austin Still (Austin, Still), Saturday, 31 December 2005 03:04 (twenty years ago)

i am not gonna read this whole thread, but this movie was not that great. it was entertaining, but i kinda wanted to leave part way through. it felt like a couple of distinct movies (ship voyage movie, prehistoric tropics movie, gorilla in new york movie.)

I just think I wanted an intermission maybe. Or a snack, or a smoke break.

― Special Agent Gene Krupa (orion), Saturday, 31 December 2005 07:27 (twenty years ago)

I for one welcomed the extra hour, as I got to take a much-needed sixty minute nap and still see a two-hour movie! (Plus 20 minutes of commercials plugging crappy Now Out On DVDs and ANOTHER 15 minutes of previews!) If an intermission is not offered, sometimes you gotta take it yourself.

During my nap, I dreamt of a Eurodisco tie-in album for the Dino DeLaurentis version, King Kong Live At Kling Klang.

― Redd Harvest (Ken L), Saturday, 31 December 2005 08:19 (twenty years ago)

the head-sucking monsters were ACE! ditto jack black

rest = oh dear

me = very disappointed that they had to CGI watts' JUGGLING.. for christ's sake, her whole agenda as an actress had to have consisted of 3 things, tops -- 1) look effortlessly gorgeous 2) practice acting w/non-existent things, i.e. blue screen 3) learn to JUGGLE...

those scenes and the ice skating one put me in mind of this thread from jerry the nipper - Happiness

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Saturday, 31 December 2005 12:29 (twenty years ago)

(ship voyage movie, prehistoric tropics movie, gorilla in new york movie.)

I do not see a problem with making any one of these movies, and therefore greatly welcomed the chance to see three of them in a row, with the same cast.

Obviously if you don't have the natives then you don't have anyone to sacrifice Anne Darrow to Kong. She's not going to climb up there all by herself, is she?

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Saturday, 31 December 2005 15:13 (twenty years ago)

could we make them ROBOTS?

― is this an institution of learning or a teenage brothel? (Jody Beth Rosen), Saturday, 31 December 2005 15:17 (twenty years ago)

(j/k, sorta)

― is this an institution of learning or a teenage brothel? (Jody Beth Rosen), Saturday, 31 December 2005 15:17 (twenty years ago)

did you really think the juggling was cgi'ed??

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Saturday, 31 December 2005 21:58 (twenty years ago)

i thought it was real! :'(

― I GUARONTEE ::cajun voice:: (Adrian Langston), Saturday, 31 December 2005 22:31 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, looked real to me. She probably had a dance double for some of the more acrobatic stuff, though.

― Austin Still (Austin, Still), Saturday, 31 December 2005 22:35 (twenty years ago)

Wasn't she doing the basic beginner juggling? Three balls with a kind of crossover motion. She wasn't even doing the yellowbelt stuff of juggling the three in a circle.

― Redd Harvest (Ken L), Saturday, 31 December 2005 22:49 (twenty years ago)

hrmph, jugglist.

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Saturday, 31 December 2005 23:22 (twenty years ago)

ok, it took until Ken L's most recent post before I figured out you people were saying JUGGLING and not JIGGLING.

― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Saturday, 31 December 2005 23:47 (twenty years ago)

the breasts were CG

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Saturday, 31 December 2005 23:53 (twenty years ago)

ok, it took until Ken L's most recent post before I figured out you people were saying JUGGLING and not JIGGLING.

not feeling the difference

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Sunday, 1 January 2006 00:09 (twenty years ago)

I think it was the magic number three that tipped Ally off.

― Redd Harvest (Ken L), Sunday, 1 January 2006 03:35 (twenty years ago)

She may have really juggled but they Spiced it Up. Especially with the ball under the leg bit. It would have been nice to see her drop one, get flustered, deal with it somehow, but that's the kind of thing this movie never had. For instance Kong On Ice - he would have fallen through! This is Central Park ice here, not Finland. It would have been great to see him skid a couple of times, then stomp too hugely and wind up shin-deep in it (too powerful for own good, destroys thing he loves, blah blah) but the movie was just Too Directed to allow these kind of moments, moments which stand or fall on performance alone.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Sunday, 1 January 2006 17:38 (twenty years ago)

The ice skating bit was quite good.

Overall, it wasn't any better than, say, Episode 3, for eg.

― jel -- (jel), Sunday, 1 January 2006 18:32 (twenty years ago)

I agree with common consensus on most of this, particularly how you could cut the first hour to no great detriment.

The reason the islanders aren't cut is because Peter Jackson still has a horror director inside him, thank Jesus, and their introduction is terrifying. Though not as much as the bug scene, which was worth the price of admission by itself (that + the Monkey vs Dinosaur are the really great bits).

But he still died pretty early, and was sort of the first "meaningful" character death.

He was the only meaningful character death, apart from Kong. Unless the DVD version will give us the story of how the guy who carried the tripod was devoted to his craft/Carl.

Jack Black was FANTASTIC. Renee Zellweger, less so.

i can't really watch jack black in a not-entirely-comedic role, i kept expecting him to lift his eyebrows and say something like "guuuuuuuys? you with me here?"

I thought this was great, playing his untrustworthiness for menace rather than comedy. I wish they'd played the last line like this. "That's right, it WAS beauty that killed the beast" (get Jack Black twinkle in his eyes, drums his fingers on his chin)

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Monday, 2 January 2006 23:59 (twenty years ago)

or instance Kong On Ice - he would have fallen through!

Actually one of my biggest problems with most CGI, even in this supposedly advanced time, is that the things always move like they're weightless.

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 00:10 (twenty years ago)

The islanders' introduction wasn't scary at all. I was too distracted by going "Oh, so that's why they were calling it racist."

― Erick Dampier is better than Shaq (miloaukerman), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 00:22 (twenty years ago)

Renee Zellweger, less so.

Intentional confusion or not?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 00:30 (twenty years ago)

the more i think about this the more i hate it

― I GUARONTEE ::cajun voice:: (Adrian Langston), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 09:08 (twenty years ago)

i can't really watch jack black in a not-entirely-comedic role, i kept expecting him to lift his eyebrows and say something like "guuuuuuuys? you with me here?"

I thought this was great, playing his untrustworthiness for menace rather than comedy.

hey, if you're an actor playing a filmmaker and you just happen to look an uncanny amount like orson welles, milk it!

― it was jody that killed the beast (Jody Beth Rosen), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 09:16 (twenty years ago)

the head-sucking monsters were ACE!

i saw this with my mum and that scene was like one fite too far -- it was only a 12a and it was more violent than many 15s.

and by that point i was pretty bored with it.

what's the point of hiring jack black and Serious Actors like brody if you don't bother hiring a screenwriter?

obviously, jack black shd have been played by werner herzog.

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 09:27 (twenty years ago)

That is an ingenious idea.

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 16:30 (twenty years ago)

"You must not love Kong, but you'd better respect Kong." "In Kong's eyes, I see no feeling, no emotion, only a half-bored interest in white poon."

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 16:31 (twenty years ago)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v515/RJG/kong.jpg

― RJG (RJG), Monday, 9 January 2006 00:04 (twenty years ago)

too bad you didn't post the crime and punishment cover here.

― miss michel legrand (Jody Beth Rosen), Monday, 9 January 2006 00:07 (twenty years ago)

Supposing ...

... I'd enjoyed King Kong second time round

Charlie Brooker
Friday January 6, 2006
The Guardian

Last night I saw Peter Jackson's remake of King Kong for the second time. This makes me an idiot. Partly because it's three hours long, and partly because it's rubbish, but mainly because even though I'd already seen it, I'd been in such a state of denial about it being three hours long and rubbish that, on being invited to see it again, I cheerfully accepted.
Ten minutes in to my second viewing, I suddenly realised I'd made a terrible, baffling mistake. And now not only was I going to have to sit through the whole thing again, but I'd somehow have to explain to my two companions (who spent the duration yawning, writhing and fouling themselves with disgust) just why I'd been prepared to waste six hours of my life watching such a mammoth fountain of toss.

There simply isn't space to list everything wrong with it; its most glaring flaw is being 16 times more overblown and histrionic than necessary. For instance, Kong doesn't just fight one T-Rex, as per the original. No, he fights a whole bunch of them, while entangled in vines, dangling above a ravine, and tossing Naomi Watts from paw to paw like a Hacky Sack - for ages.
If there'd been a scene in which Kong went to the toilet, it would've run like this: 1) Kong unfurls his 10km penis and piddles into an erupting volcano for 45 minutes; 2) Kong turns around and passes a stool the size of a blue whale, in slow motion, to the strains of a 20,000-strong choir, while Naomi Watts stares at him, her eyes brimming with love; 3) his bowels emptied, Kong plucks the planet Jupiter out of the sky and swallows it for no reason, while fighting 15 giant crocodiles. And a robot. And a pig.

What's more, the cast are just plain weird to look at. Jack Black looks like he's playing the lead in Young Prescott, Adrien Brody resembles a cross between Ross from Friends and a disappointed sundial, and Naomi Watts spends the entire film gawping, sobbing, screaming or turning into Nicole Kidman in your head. Until the final scene, when she does all three at once. In slow motion. Atop the Empire State Building. In 3D.

As a film, it's the fattest, most swaggering, numb-headed and pointless assault on the senses it's possible to imagine. What I can't understand is why I enjoyed it first time round.

I suspect it was something to do with my state of mind at the time. I'd been Christmas shopping in a particularly miserable shopping mall -one of those modern ones consisting entirely of shiny floors and echoes, JD Sports and Nando's Chickenland. I was thoroughly sick of it, and by extension, of life itself.

At which point I was faced with a choice. I could drop to my knees and headbutt the floor until my skull split open in front of thousands of horrified shoppers. Or I could go and see King Kong, which I figured would probably be far too long and not very good. My expectations thus lowered, I actively enjoyed it. I'd adjusted my filter beforehand.

It's all about adjusting your filter. Just don't try adjusting it twice.

http://film.guardian.co.uk/features/featurepages/0,,1680381,00.html

― jed_ (jed), Monday, 9 January 2006 00:09 (twenty years ago)

1) Kong unfurls his 10km penis

now that woulda been something.

― miss michel legrand (Jody Beth Rosen), Monday, 9 January 2006 00:12 (twenty years ago)

just kidding

I thought this was pretty great

some of the effects were v. ropey w/ people flying and going 5x faster than their legs and the brontosaurus run/tumble was so ridiculous and confusing that it had me turning to nick 3/4 of the way through it saying "what the fuck is going on?" and him saying "I have no idea!" but I didn't REALLY mind. nice to know the effects will age and make this look even sillier, in the future

crossposts

the t-rex fight was a bit long too but OK and the bugs were disgusting and quite good. the fleshy thing that got the andy serkis/popeye guy was terrifically scary and disgusting

the ship and island bits were both a bit long but I don't know what you would cut except a whole lot of little bits and, yeah, the too-long fights but maybe I would be upset if kong victored too easily or something. didn't find myself getting too tired/restless and only looked at the time once, about two hours in, just wondering how much had gone

quite funny in parts (good moments of maybe less intentional ridiculous laughs as well as deliberate comedy) and rather emotional in the end

well acted, for the most part. lots of j black's eyes. not so sure abt a brody but never have been but, apparently, he does drive a hummer

― RJG (RJG), Monday, 9 January 2006 00:17 (twenty years ago)

"they should've just made it a pseudo-documentary about the wildlife of Skull Island."

They've written a book, would you believe, including all the ecology they didn't get to include in the film.

― isadora (isadora), Monday, 9 January 2006 00:19 (twenty years ago)

was that a real joke, jody?

― RJG (RJG), Monday, 9 January 2006 00:19 (twenty years ago)

the brontosaurus run/tumble was so ridiculous and confusing that it had me turning to nick 3/4 of the way through it saying "what the fuck is going on?" and him saying "I have no idea!" but I didn't REALLY mind. nice to know the effects will age and make this look even sillier, in the future

It was so ridiculous! Wasn't the whole audience sitting there with "WTF? You're taking the piss Mr Jackson!" faces on? Or am I confusing myself with the world at large again?

Overall, entertaining. I cried a bit at the Kong persecution, and I liked it when he beat his chest. I only just realised he was Martin Hannett!

― Alba (Alba), Monday, 9 January 2006 00:25 (twenty years ago)

oh, shit, so he was

― RJG (RJG), Monday, 9 January 2006 00:27 (twenty years ago)

boy did this suck!

― Ste (Fuzzy), Monday, 9 January 2006 11:46 (twenty years ago)

go see match point

― RJG (RJG), Monday, 9 January 2006 12:03 (twenty years ago)

just kidding: do not

― RJG (RJG), Monday, 9 January 2006 12:03 (twenty years ago)

I have never had less interest in a film than I have in seeing Match Point. It just looks so dull and unoriginal from the trailers. And, despite its much-touted Golden Globe nominations, I have to reckon that Woody Allen wouldn't be doing so much press for it if it wasn't shit.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Monday, 9 January 2006 13:55 (twenty years ago)

what about King Kong though?

― jed_ (jed), Monday, 9 January 2006 13:56 (twenty years ago)

I believe I made my feelings on King Kong clear earlier in this thread.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Monday, 9 January 2006 14:05 (twenty years ago)

If this film had been made in the 90s it would have just been called KONG, I bet.

― Alba (Alba), Monday, 9 January 2006 14:20 (twenty years ago)

longest rjg post ever?

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 9 January 2006 14:21 (twenty years ago)

surely 'kong', alba?

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 9 January 2006 14:22 (twenty years ago)

actually alba, until you just said that, I thought it was !

― Ste (Fuzzy), Monday, 9 January 2006 14:23 (twenty years ago)

"a disappointed sundial" = most fantastic description of adrian brody, or possibly anyone, that i've ever read

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Monday, 9 January 2006 18:13 (twenty years ago)

I was just about to post that myself.

― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Monday, 9 January 2006 20:14 (twenty years ago)

six months pass...

I don't know how anybody could watch this movie without fast forwarding or skipping a chapter or two. I felt like Milhouse waiting for the Fireworks factory.

― Zwan (miccio), Saturday, 29 July 2006 12:39 (nineteen years ago)

Also, once you realize they can show anything through CGI, CGI is only impressive when you don't realize that's what you're seeing.

― Zwan (miccio), Saturday, 29 July 2006 12:42 (nineteen years ago)

I dunno, I like the idea of CGI being such a common tool as to not be impressive in and of itself.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 29 July 2006 13:01 (nineteen years ago)

I appreciate Jackson most for being able to pump millions of R&D dollars to Weta, which will enable some really cool movies to be made (I hope). As for his own films, eh, okay I guess.

― Whitman Mayonnaise (Rock Hardy), Saturday, 29 July 2006 13:07 (nineteen years ago)

I dunno, I like the idea of CGI being such a common tool as to not be impressive in and of itself.

That's part of what I mean, though. You don't have long shots of characters staring in awe at your goddamn animation while the music swells. You just tell a story and do your best to make us focus on something other than the Mary Poppins 2000 of it all.

― Zwan (miccio), Saturday, 29 July 2006 13:23 (nineteen years ago)

You don't have long shots of characters staring in awe at your goddamn animation while the music swells.

You anti-Spielbergian! How else does one make movies!

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 29 July 2006 13:58 (nineteen years ago)

she was clearly in love with the ape in this version. i didn't really like that. i prefer the ambivalent fear/pity of the 1933 version rather than the star-crossed lovers/"i would marry you if you weren't 30 feet tall" shite.

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Saturday, 29 July 2006 17:02 (nineteen years ago)

and there are so many arbitary, unecessary editing quirks in this movie. the heart of darkness bit was bullshit, too. and don't get me started on the natives.

however, i love the creature stuff. i can't get enough of that shit.

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Saturday, 29 July 2006 17:05 (nineteen years ago)

TOTALLY!! that was the whole problem. Actual tension = 0. When Adrien Brody takes her away at the end it's like "ho hum, second best."

xpost

― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Saturday, 29 July 2006 17:06 (nineteen years ago)

"ho hummer, second beast"

― RJG (RJG), Saturday, 29 July 2006 17:10 (nineteen years ago)

Ew.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 29 July 2006 17:12 (nineteen years ago)

haha

that said, i did like naomi watts in this movie.

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Saturday, 29 July 2006 17:16 (nineteen years ago)

three months pass...

Not sure why i waited nearly a year to see this but finally watched it via on-demand home TV service the other night and enjoyed it a lot more than i thought i was going to. maybe watching films at home you don't notice/care about the length so much but it seemed pretty good for a 3 hour film tho i agree there was a bit too much build up. The three D's all seemed so blase about sailing halfway round the world. Loved all scenes with any dinosaurs and the pit of bugs was one of the creepiest, gruesome things I've seen in a long time. I think the sense of despair was captured superbly during this lengthy scene esp. with the cook getting eaten alive head first. I like that Jackson managed to keep out any sense of 'humour' during this sequence - it's just pure terror and you can almost feel overwhelmed by the creatures yourself. Probably the most powerful apeless part of the film (I don't usually watch horror films tho admittedly).

The funniest bit may even have been the jump back to NYC after Kong was captured. Just like that (how'd they keep Kong sedate for what must've been such a lengthy journey back?) Loads of other boring issues (e.g. Black's character is harder to sympathise with compared to the original) but lots to enjoy so...

― 2 american 4 u (blueski), Sunday, 12 November 2006 20:02 (nineteen years ago)

Apparently a four-disc DVD edition is due soon. Crazy.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Sunday, 12 November 2006 20:55 (nineteen years ago)

one year passes...

Watched this tother day on ITV for the first time since it came out, and was thoroughly entertained. The first act is way overlong and tonally very odd, but as soon as they get to the island the pace doesn't let up for a second, and some of the action sequences are amongst the most thrillingly audacious I've seen. What makes it really work, though, is how Jackson makes Kong totally sympathetic without ever playing down his animalistic brutality.

― chap, Sunday, 14 September 2008 16:24 (seventeen years ago)

They should have called the movie Kong of Skull Island and ended it after the dino fight.

― Sparkle Motion, Sunday, 14 September 2008 17:24 (seventeen years ago)

they should have STARTED it right before the dino fight.

― s1ocki, Sunday, 14 September 2008 17:59 (seventeen years ago)

sure, and ended it shortly thereafter.

― Sparkle Motion, Sunday, 14 September 2008 18:01 (seventeen years ago)

I totally agree with everything here. If you can just get past the first act, the rest of the movie is very good, everything just works on a primal, emotional level without any plot gimmicks or irony or other stuff most Hollywood movies these days have. The love story between the ape and Naomi Watts was quite well done, so sweet and sad. And the scene in the park where Kong gets to know snow and ice for the first time is wonderful, it shows how good Jackson is at doing stuff that's simple yet highly effective, pure cinema.

― Tuomas, Sunday, 14 September 2008 18:51 (seventeen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.

Come anticipate Peter Jackson's _King Kong_ with me