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)
― s1ocki (slutsky), Saturday, 23 April 2005 01:38 (twenty years ago)
― s1ocki (slutsky), Saturday, 23 April 2005 01:39 (twenty years ago)
― s1ocki (slutsky), Saturday, 23 April 2005 01:42 (twenty years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 23 April 2005 01:43 (twenty years ago)
― efil4zelffor (deangulberry), Saturday, 23 April 2005 01:46 (twenty years ago)
(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)
― David R. (popshots75`), Saturday, 23 April 2005 03:02 (twenty years ago)
― s1ocki (slutsky), Saturday, 23 April 2005 03:04 (twenty years ago)
― ryan (ryan), Saturday, 23 April 2005 04:42 (twenty years ago)
― Failin Huxley (noodle vague), Saturday, 23 April 2005 05:21 (twenty years ago)
― Øystein (Øystein), Saturday, 23 April 2005 06:10 (twenty years ago)
― Failin Huxley (noodle vague), Saturday, 23 April 2005 06:13 (twenty years ago)
― j blount (papa la bas), Saturday, 23 April 2005 06:26 (twenty years ago)
― keith m (keithmcl), Saturday, 23 April 2005 13:59 (twenty years ago)
― David R. (popshots75`), Saturday, 23 April 2005 14:11 (twenty years ago)
― jones (actual), Saturday, 23 April 2005 15:02 (twenty years ago)
― shookout (shookout), Saturday, 23 April 2005 15:38 (twenty years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 23 April 2005 16:51 (twenty years ago)
― s1ocki (slutsky), Saturday, 23 April 2005 16:57 (twenty years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 23 April 2005 17:04 (twenty years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 20 June 2005 00:54 (twenty years ago)
― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Monday, 20 June 2005 01:00 (twenty years ago)
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)
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)
― latebloomer: now with 20% less cetacean content (latebloomer), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 01:41 (twenty years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 01:42 (twenty years ago)
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)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 01:52 (twenty years ago)
― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 02:05 (twenty years ago)
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)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 02:07 (twenty years ago)
― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 02:08 (twenty years ago)
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)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 02:12 (twenty years ago)
-- 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)
It's a remake. What is there to spoil?
― fields of salmon (fieldsofsalmon), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 03:53 (twenty years ago)
― latebloomer: now with 20% less cetacean content (latebloomer), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 04:28 (twenty years ago)
― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 07:30 (twenty years ago)
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)
― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 08:14 (twenty years ago)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091344/
― latebloomer: now with 20% less cetacean content (latebloomer), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 08:44 (twenty years ago)
― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 08:59 (twenty years ago)
― latebloomer: now with 20% less cetacean content (latebloomer), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 09:23 (twenty years ago)
― latebloomer: now with 20% less cetacean content (latebloomer), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 09:24 (twenty years ago)
― nickalicious (nickalicious), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 12:07 (twenty years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 13:13 (twenty years ago)
― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 14:42 (twenty years ago)
― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 28 June 2005 14:43 (twenty years ago)
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)
Overall, it wasn't any better than, say, Episode 3, for eg.
― jel -- (jel), Sunday, 1 January 2006 18:32 (twenty years ago)
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)
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)
― Erick Dampier is better than Shaq (miloaukerman), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 00:22 (twenty years ago)
Intentional confusion or not?
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 00:30 (twenty years ago)
― I GUARONTEE ::cajun voice:: (Adrian Langston), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 09:08 (twenty years ago)
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)
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)
― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 16:30 (twenty years ago)
― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Tuesday, 3 January 2006 16:31 (twenty years ago)
― RJG (RJG), Monday, 9 January 2006 00:04 (twenty years ago)
― miss michel legrand (Jody Beth Rosen), Monday, 9 January 2006 00:07 (twenty years ago)
... I'd enjoyed King Kong second time round
Charlie Brooker Friday January 6, 2006The 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)
now that woulda been something.
― miss michel legrand (Jody Beth Rosen), Monday, 9 January 2006 00:12 (twenty years ago)
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'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)
― RJG (RJG), Monday, 9 January 2006 00:19 (twenty years ago)
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)
― RJG (RJG), Monday, 9 January 2006 00:27 (twenty years ago)
― Ste (Fuzzy), Monday, 9 January 2006 11:46 (twenty years ago)
― RJG (RJG), Monday, 9 January 2006 12:03 (twenty years ago)
― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Monday, 9 January 2006 13:55 (twenty years ago)
― jed_ (jed), Monday, 9 January 2006 13:56 (twenty years ago)
― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Monday, 9 January 2006 14:05 (twenty years ago)
― Alba (Alba), Monday, 9 January 2006 14:20 (twenty years ago)
― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 9 January 2006 14:21 (twenty years ago)
― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 9 January 2006 14:22 (twenty years ago)
― Ste (Fuzzy), Monday, 9 January 2006 14:23 (twenty years ago)
― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Monday, 9 January 2006 18:13 (twenty years ago)
― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Monday, 9 January 2006 20:14 (twenty years ago)
― Zwan (miccio), Saturday, 29 July 2006 12:39 (nineteen years ago)
― Zwan (miccio), Saturday, 29 July 2006 12:42 (nineteen years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 29 July 2006 13:01 (nineteen years ago)
― Whitman Mayonnaise (Rock Hardy), Saturday, 29 July 2006 13:07 (nineteen years ago)
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 anti-Spielbergian! How else does one make movies!
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 29 July 2006 13:58 (nineteen years ago)
― latebloomer (latebloomer), Saturday, 29 July 2006 17:02 (nineteen years ago)
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)
xpost
― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Saturday, 29 July 2006 17:06 (nineteen years ago)
― RJG (RJG), Saturday, 29 July 2006 17:10 (nineteen years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 29 July 2006 17:12 (nineteen years ago)
that said, i did like naomi watts in this movie.
― latebloomer (latebloomer), Saturday, 29 July 2006 17:16 (nineteen years ago)
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)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Sunday, 12 November 2006 20:55 (nineteen years ago)
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)