Film Review: King Kong

19 Dec
I have had a problem with Peter Jackson, and it’s about “where does the man get the ego?” I suppose he is entitled to it after amassing all those awards for ‘Return of the King’, but still, where do you get it Mr. Jackson? Oh dont get me wrong, I loved the Lord of the Rings trilogy, but after seeing ‘King Kong’, I was all the more convinced about how pretentious he has become. His remake of this 1933 film is definitely one.

My gripes:
1. Way TOO long. I am sure the story could have been told in under 2 hours, an hour has gone by just getting to Skull Island. I was bored to death in the first act, but by the time they were in the island, I was wide awake, but then I have another gripe.

2. The brontosaur stampede was poorly shot, I thought it looked a bit amateurish with that other dino (not sure what kind it was) but it looked out of place between the brontosaurs. ‘Jurassic Park’ is safe as the ultimate dinosaur film. Saying that, the T-Rex showdown was fantastic. And their ship trying to find its way against the rough seas reminded me of ‘Titanic’ and ‘The Perfect Storm’.

3. Do we really need a lot of dinosaur encounters? And all them crawling things to tell a story? Or were they all just added for the Jackson fanatics to say, “look at the visual effects! Isnt it fantastic!”

Now for some spoilers galore.
It’s just me now being a bit logical, and I know you need to have some suspension of disbelief in movies like this but, can anybody help me answer the ff: How did Kong fit into the ship? Much more the theater? How come his massive body didnt splatter all over the streets of New York City after falling from that height? Why didnt the icy lake in Central Park didnt even make a crack with his heavy weight, or was he just huge but weighed lightly?

No way is this film the BEST for this year, but it was surely worth the admission ticket. (Just to quote Carl Denham).

Advertisements

7 Responses to “Film Review: King Kong”

  1. Pedro Vecino December 20, 2005 at 5:26 pm #

    Way to go, Gorilla!!!

    Good review, Simone. If I am invited, I can give this film a try. He He He…

  2. Sheila December 20, 2005 at 9:20 pm #

    peter jackson is over rated

  3. Monette December 22, 2005 at 5:32 pm #

    Some critic said this, “Jackson opens his movie with Al Jolson singing ‘I’m Sitting On Top Of The World’. And that’s where the director is – with the competition far, far below.”

    Is that right? Really? Seriously?

    Can anybody tell me what other noteworthy films did Jackson make apart from that Rings trilogy? Nada, so what is all these about?

    PLEASEEEEEEEEE!!!

  4. Pedro Vecino December 22, 2005 at 6:19 pm #

    Heavenly Creatures is a powerful movie. Mr. Jackson is not so bad, but certainly he is VERY overrated.

  5. Shrlyn December 26, 2005 at 4:39 am #

    why can’t the elephant go to school?

  6. Pedro December 31, 2005 at 2:33 am #

    Well, I have just seen the movie so I shall give my five cents.
    Things I liked:

    -The NY beginning and end sequences.

    -Hayes, the black sailor protecting Jimmy. I hated when he died.

    -Jack Black. This guy rocks!!!

    -King Kong. It´s as an amazing achievement as the original one.

    -The fight between Kong and the T-rexes. Just great.

    Things I disliked:

    -Naomi Watts. She is so cheesy in every scene I almost hated her. Take the almost. I hated her.

    -The sailing of the ship to the island. Long and dull.

    -The bugs sequence. The rythm is somewhat wrong and odd.

    -Driscoll is quite an umbeliavable all situations hero.

    All in all, a good, little excesive, very entertaining movie. More than I expected. Less than what most say.

  7. Richard December 31, 2005 at 4:30 am #

    I do agree with you Simone. However, to add a couple more flaws that stood out for me in such a long, self-indulgent dirge of a movie;

    1)Before Naomi Watts character falls in love with Kong (that in itself always troubled me with the original premise-we’re actually looking at a film that presents in essense bestiality & in Jackson’s film, it seems even more perverse because of the lengths it goes to, to establish this fact)she is thrown and swung so violently through the air as Kong gets to know her, the CGI, which incidentally the film is far too dependant on, twists her body to such extremes, she would simply be dead. No human being could cope with such stress and impact to the body.

    2)When Naomi Watts character is standing on the top of the Empire state building she’s clearly seen with extremely high heels. How on earth could she have climbed up that extremely long fireman’s ladder with small spindly steps, on the outside of the building, right up to the top, at altitude, with the wind swirling all around her, wearing high heels?

    ‘It wasn’t the aeroplanes, but it was beauty that killed the beast.’

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: