Peter Jackson's KING KONG

[Pubrick]

And if he (Peter Jackson) had to end with a very telling line, I wish he would've chosen to leave, at least, a little up to the viewer. Why not just have said:

"It wasn't the planes that killed him......"

he ended the movie on the same line as the original.

[The Perineum Falcon]

And if he (Peter Jackson) had to end with a very telling line, I wish he would've chosen to leave, at least, a little up to the viewer. Why not just have said:

"It wasn't the planes that killed him......"

he ended the movie on the same line as the original.

He couldn't've remade one more line?

[metroshane]

I liked it.  thought it was fun but unneccessary.  Been a long time since i saw the original but it seems to me that the first one was made with imagination...and this was made with money.  Too much money.

[polkablues]

Good: close-ups on Kong; Naomi Watts; Adrien Brody; 3 hours that felt like 2

Bad: Hulk-with-hair action shots of Kong; all other CGI beasties

Winner: Andy Serkis (as Lumpy the cook)

[SHAFTR]

And if he (Peter Jackson) had to end with a very telling line, I wish he would've chosen to leave, at least, a little up to the viewer. Why not just have said:

"It wasn't the planes that killed him......"

he ended the movie on the same line as the original.

He couldn't've remade one more line?

That line works in the original because the director just keeps talking about wanting to make a beauty/beast movie.  In the remake, that is never talked about so that final line comes off as awkward.

[Pozer]

I liked it.  thought it was fun but unneccessary.

If you liked it and thought it was fun then it wasn't unneccessary.

[grand theft sparrow]

And if he (Peter Jackson) had to end with a very telling line, I wish he would've chosen to leave, at least, a little up to the viewer. Why not just have said:

"It wasn't the planes that killed him......"

he ended the movie on the same line as the original.

He couldn't've remade one more line?

That line works in the original because the director just keeps talking about wanting to make a beauty/beast movie.  In the remake, that is never talked about so that final line comes off as awkward.

That line is also THE signature line from the original.  It works just fine in the remake because there are already so many specific nods to the original film throughout (set in the year of the original's release, the Fay Wray reference, using the original's dialogue as the dialogue in Denham's film, etc.), that to not have it there would be jarring.  Besides, there's no better note on which to end the film. 

It would be like a remake of The Wizard of Oz not ending with "There's no place like home," or a Gone With the Wind remake not ending on "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn."

It's so odd that remakes of films and adaptations of books are regarded so differently when it's the same thing.  If Kong were based on a novel with that as the last line, this would never have been an issue.

[The Perineum Falcon]

That line is also THE signature line from the original.  It works just fine in the remake because there are already so many specific nods to the original film throughout (set in the year of the original's release, the Fay Wray reference, using the original's dialogue as the dialogue in Denham's film, etc.), that to not have it there would be jarring.  Besides, there's no better note on which to end the film. 

It would be like a remake of The Wizard of Oz not ending with "There's no place like home," or a Gone With the Wind remake not ending on "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn."

It's so odd that remakes of films and adaptations of books are regarded so differently when it's the same thing.  If Kong were based on a novel with that as the last line, this would never have been an issue.

Would've for me.

The line's awkward, no matter the source.

[planet_jake]

I liked this film alot.

A few things rubbed me the wrong way.

I hated the line "But you're all I've got!" in the way beginning.

The whole Hayes/Jimmy relationship was completely unnecessary and produced the films worst, most cliched moments.

But other than that I quite liked it. The CGI was amazing, which I never say about CGI... So yeah... Good job... Job well done and so on... yeah...

[metroshane]

If you liked it and thought it was fun then it wasn't unneccessary.

Sure it was.  I could have gotten the same entertainment from the first one.   Kind of like hearing someone play a cover song well.

[meatball]

I enjoyed the human characters most of all and the first third of the movie is my favorite part, despite cheesy moments. What rubbed me the wrong way was how fleshed out everything was (the creatures, the island). My mind didn't have to do any work because PJ presented everything and more. Visiting the ruins was exciting, because I was anticipating things offscreen. After Kong shows up, it becomes less about show and more about tell.

[Pozer]

If you liked it and thought it was fun then it wasn't unnecessary.

Sure it was.  I could have gotten the same entertainment from the first one.   Kind of like hearing someone play a cover song well.

And hearing their take on that song which is necessary if it's entertaining, if it amused you.  I was interested in seeing Psycho because I wanted to see what Van Sant did with it.  I personally was not entertained because there was really nothing new going on there.  Much like when a band covers a song exactly the same - booooring.  And come on, you won't get the same entertainment from the first Kong, I don't care what you say, I've seen it and it's not that great.  I'm going to see the new version today because I want to see the better job that PJ did with that story.

[Tictacbk]

I found about 45min-1 hour of this movie entertaining.  Perhaps I would've been more excited if i had seen the original but i haven't.  I don't want to write too much about this movie because I left the theatre hating it, then woke up this morning thinking maybe it wasn't so bad.  So i've gotta give it some time i guess.

Spoilers...
Good stuff: The action on the island (minus the fact that once they had dealt with one obstacle on the island it was never seen again), Kongs eyes, Naomi

Bad Stuff: Bad post slo-mo stuff, anything with Jimmy, Adrien Brody watching his own play and hearing his own voiceover again, the ice skating scene.

[matt35mm]

Spoilers...
Bad Stuff: the ice skating scene.

I liked that.  Knowing how it's gonna end makes that scene heartbreaking.

Well, I liked the movie quite a bit.  I didn't think the beginning was too slow or awkward... I think some people were just too anxious to get to Kong, but I don't think Kong fit into the story until he came in.

Some scenes were too long (the ship crashing, some of the dinosaur fighting stuff, some of the native stuff), and the Jimmy story wasn't all that interesting.  But when it scores, it scores.  So, overall... B+.

[Pubrick]

What rubbed me the wrong way was how fleshed out everything was (the creatures, the island). My mind didn't have to do any work because PJ presented everything and more.

what the fuck? your complaining cos the effects and production design were too good? cos the story was too well developed?

and to the other stuff ppl are saying.. who deems something as too long? as i already said it's your own subjective perception of time, so that argument is meaningless. secondly, the jimmy scenes, uh that was like 5 minutes out of the whole movie, and then you even admit the rest was good. so in tictacbk's case, how can you leave the movie hating it if u liked some (if not most) of it? jesus it's not Diary of a Black Woman.

if these are the kind of criticisms ppl are making, you're all a bunch of wackjobs.