Peter Jackson's KING KONG

[Spike]

Any thoughts or opinions on this upcoming remake?

[Kal]

its gonna be cool

[MacGuffin]

Rings king keen to start on Kong

Director Peter Jackson, fresh from the Return of the King world premiere, will start work on his $200 million King Kong film in Wellington next month.

Universal Studios is to pay Jackson a record $32 million to direct the film which is expected to provide between 1500 and 2000 jobs.

Jackson, who will be in Los Angeles tomorrow for The Return of the King's United States premiere, said he still had to edit an extended version of the third Lord of the Rings film for DVD late next year. He wanted it done before Christmas.

But after taking a short holiday, he would spend most of his time from January working on King Kong, inspired by the 1933 film.

Shooting is planned for August mainly in Wellington.

Jackson said that, because the film would be set in the 1930s, to create the period it would be easier to shoot about 80 per cent of the film at his Miramar studios. Some of the natural locations, including King Kong's home, Skull Island, would also be shot at the studios.

A key feature of the film is a freighter ship, Manuia, – believed to be berthed at Miramar – which takes King Kong from Skull Island to New York.

"I'm interested in (King) Kong being quite stylised and the jungles of Skull Island I want to be very over-the-top, like a jungle from hell. I imagine we are going to be more successful pulling that off in the studio or in a back lot than we are trying to find a beech forest in the South Island," he said.

There would be some location shooting for scenes on beaches or in boats, "but I'm not imagining a huge amount".

Jackson confirmed it was likely that Australian actress Naomi Watts, 35, would play Ann Darrow, the role made famous by Canadian Fay Wray in the original. The contract still had to be sewn up, "but it's looking okay".

He met Watts in London in October and showed her some designs for King Kong.

"She got really excited and it was great. Naomi's the only person that we've really approached because she's becoming so eagerly sought after by everybody."

No other cast decisions would be made until he, partner Fran Walsh and writer Philippa Boyens had completed the script by February.

"A lot of the characters are members of the ship's crew and we don't really kind of know who they are because we are going to write the script from scratch again."

Wellington special effects companies Weta Workshop and Weta Digital will work on the film.

"Once we get started on Kong we get a few months of what I call gentle work because I am writing, having meetings at Weta and looking at designs," Jackson said.

"It's actually going to be easier. . . (than The Lord of the Rings) the logistics involved don't seem as daunting."

[Find Your Magali]

I just want it over with, so that Jackson can start work on The Hobbit before the end of the decade.

I think King Kong was very much a movie of its time. What was dazzling about it then simply isn't grandiose enough to capture our imaginations now, I fear.

[nix]

I'm interested to see what he's gonna do with it. He uses CGI better than most directors, so I hope he doesn't over do it in this one.

[Gold Trumpet]

What can he really do to advance the story in regards to the original? This film seems like a waste of time and Jackson only extending his special effects power to limits he thinks he has to achieve. And as much as people can say she is talented, Naomi Watts is trying to be a major star as well. This movie to just film will be a large chunk of time for her. Its a guranteed hit.

Also, I don't believe his special effects are even any good for LOTR. They are quite wide spanding and varied in use, but they never convinced me for one second I was looking at another world. I just saw computer effects everywhere. These films would have been more effective and more beautiful if done in animation.

[modage]

What can he really do to advance the story in regards to the original? This film seems like a waste of time.

yup, although ill be lined up to see it on opening day, its really a pointless remake.  when the originals a classic, why try to clone that?  you cant really improve on something, so why bother?

[NEON MERCURY]

...i think like godzilla ......p. diddy and page should ruin another zeppelin classic for the King Kong sounndtrack..... make it a monster movie tradition

[©brad]

it saddens me how much $$ they are putting into it. and he's getting paid $32 million?! that' got to be the record. spielberg's base salary ain't even close to that.

[Kal]

I hope the remake is not done like Godzilla... effects were cool but damn... they can do better... they could do it like the old one but with better technology and it would be awsome... I hate it when they just try to add shit that doesnt make sense and they blow it (Italian Job, Truth about Charlie, etc)

200 million is really a lot... I think thats the biggest budget ever (for a single movie)... isnt it? That means they expect to get at least double that in Box Office... Hmm... well lets wait and see

[Ghostboy]

The reasons I condone it:

a.) It's Peter Jackson, and he rules (this is not a legit reason, of course, merely an opinion, but whatever).

b.) Peter Jackson is passionately obsessed with King Kong, owns the original stop motion puppet used in the classic film, and so hopefully he'll play the remake game right and make a film that is great in its own right while not treading on the original. If anyone but him was making it, I'd be uninterested.

[modage]

The reasons I condone it:

a.) It's Peter Jackson, and he rules.

i know and thats why i'm going, but i still say its a completely pointless thing to remake.  like ted turner colorizing black and white movies, the studio just wants a 'new' version of this to make more money from people who dont like old ones.

[GoneSavage]

Yeah, I don't get it either.  He's wanted to do King Kong for years, because he's such a big fan of the original, but that doesn't make sense.  If you're such a big fan of something, why not let it stand on its own without you trying to make it better, er, "re-interpret" it.  That's just ego talking.  

Speaking of Jackson, anyone know the story on why he of all people was picked to do the LOTR series?  Honestly, he nailed it, I'm not saying he was the wrong choice, but before I heard about that series, I was a HUGE fan of his low-budget masterpieces Dead Alive and Bad Taste, and that's all I knew him for (let's not mention The Frighteners).  What studio exec was drunk at a party watching Dead Alive or Meet the Feebles and shouted "THAT'S OUR GUY!"?  It's so funny buying the SE DVD of Bad Taste and having in huge print on the cover "From the Director of Lord of the Rings".

[Ghostboy]

I think it went like this: he was developing King Kong after The Frighteners, but the studio balked at the budget. He really wanted to do LOTR also, so he either convinced Miramax to buy the rights, or went to them because they already had them and convinced them to do the movie. It was originally going to be one two hour film, and then Miramax decided to split that into two -- and then they decided it was too expensive, handed the film to New Line (while retaining exec producer credits), who decided to go all out and make the trilogy the way it was supposed to be. And the rest is history.

If he hadn't made Heavenly Creatures for Miramax and received an Oscar nomination, it would likely have never happened.

[Reinhold]

I just want it over with, so that Jackson can start work on The Hobbit before the end of the decade.

I think King Kong was very much a movie of its time. What was dazzling about it then simply isn't grandiose enough to capture our imaginations now, I fear.

what he said.