Jump to content
aberdeen-music
Sign in to follow this  
Guest bluesxman

King Kong

Recommended Posts

Guest bluesxman

Has anyone else been to see this piece of shit yet? Most disappointing cinema experience of my life. Peter Jackson has blown it big style, total cheese fest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely awful. I've never been more disappointed with a film. It was such utter balls, even the dinosaurs didn't make me happy. There was no way it needed to be so long, they could have cut that crap bit with the giant bugs (so unneccesary), shortened that ridiculous half hour Empire State building bit (by the way, people cannot stand on top of the Empire State building and not be blown off) and Naomi Watts was terrible too. TERRIBLE.

Poor Adrien Brody, what a tainted man he is now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bluesxman
Absolutely awful. I've never been more disappointed with a film. It was such utter balls' date=' even the dinosaurs didn't make me happy. There was no way it needed to be so long, they could have cut that crap bit with the giant bugs (so unneccesary), shortened that ridiculous half hour Empire State building bit (by the way, people cannot stand on top of the Empire State building and not be blown off) and Naomi Watts was terrible too. TERRIBLE.

Poor Adrien Brody, what a tainted man he is now.[/quote']

Kong sliding about on the ice definitely sealed it for me. The guy swinging on the vine was the other worst bit. But there were so many bad bits it's hard to choose....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yeah those bits were awful. I also detested the blurry slow-mo fighting scene with the tribe of freaks. Clearly a massive hideous cover up for some pretty bad directing. Gash gash gash. My poor sister took me to see it (I don't work at the cinema anymore and refuse to pay) even though she'd already seen it. Bless her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just back in from seeing it. really enjoyed it. the ice bit was a tad cheesy and i did think the same about getting blown off the top of the ES building, but i thought it was an enjoyable watch in all.

also, the dinosaurs were quality! the raptors didn't look as cool as those in JP, but the classic Kong vs Rex finale was great :D

/x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(by the way' date=' people cannot stand on top of the Empire State building and not be blown off) [/quote']

because im betting that is the most unrealistic bit in a film about a massive gorrilla and dinosaurs................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, i feel so PWND by cineworld that there wasn't a disclaimer outside saying that anyone with a smigeon of taste shouldn't see this film. It was the worst, most formulaeic 'action blockbuster' i can remember watching. CGI was totally stolen, not even updated, from Jurassic Park.

"We're in trouble, oh were saved. In trouble again, someothing else saves us... guess what more trou, wait we're saved."

Utter pish, i'd rather spend 3.5 hours watching a boring movie about pilgrims than waste my time watching that poop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have to agree with the masses on this one. Myself hardcore mel and another wonderful chum of ours went to see it this evening. All though it was a good film it could have been waaay shorter and still been a good film. Someone earlier said the bit with the bugs was pointless - have to agree with you there. Seemed like it was constantly drilling in just exactly HOW MUCH peril they were in. Although that bit with the bugs - did anyone else think the things (I assume giant leeches) that came out of the water looked like giant penises with teeth?

Although good, it totally dragged when will Peter Jackson learn to just end a film?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Have to agree with the masses on this one. Myself hardcore mel and another wonderful chum of ours went to see it this evening. All though it was a good film it could have been waaay shorter and still been a good film. Someone earlier said the bit with the bugs was pointless - have to agree with you there. Seemed like it was constantly drilling in just exactly HOW MUCH peril they were in. Although that bit with the bugs - did anyone else think the things (I assume giant leeches) that came out of the water looked like giant penises with teeth?

Although good' date=' it totally dragged when will Peter Jackson learn to just end a film?[/quote']

I thoiught the bugs part was an important part, if nothing else than for tying in with the history of the original. The bugs part was part of the 1933 film that was cut out and when they wanted to put it back in they realised that it was missing and they never managed to find it to reinsert it.

I may be biased but I'm a big fan of the original and thought the new one was very good, a very good updating. For Christmas I got a box set of the original 2 disk special edition with commentary by the legendary Ray Harryhausen and the sequel Son of Kong, and Willis O'Brien's other monkey movie "Mighty Joe Young", all incredible film making for its day, you cant beat stop motion.

Cheers

Stuart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What the fuck' date=' King Kong was brilliant and is tied with Sin City for being my favourite film of the year. Peter Jackson is Jesus.[/quote']

indeed

it was very good

i didnt feel that it was too long or stupid in many points.

alot of the scenes may have been silly to alot of you but i saw them as character development and the humanising of kong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked it although I agree it was a little drawn out - especially at the start. Yes, it's cheesy all over the place but is it not meant to be? I think it adds to the charm of the film personally. But maybe I’m just getting soft in my old age…

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest tv tanned
by the way' date=' people cannot stand on top of the Empire State building and not be blown off[/quote']

if you dislike films for failing to be 100% scientifically accurate, then you're going to find very few films to enjoy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bluesxman
I'm looking forward to seeing it' date=' it seems that to please the people wh oare complaining about it Peter Jackson would have had to completely disregard the original.[/quote']

Actually the reason i'm so disappointed is because I love the original and allegedly PJ does too, so I was confident he would remake the original faithfully with more up to date special effects. However althouh it started off fine, slightly long winded journey to the island, island looked great, sacrifice scene great, then it turned into a series of ever more ridiculous scenes. Brontosaur chase scene, Anne's slapstick routine on the cliff, guy on the vine, escaping the cliff via a bat's leg....it went on and on and I felt ever increasing desires to track Peter Jackson down and ask what the hell he was thinking. If people enjoyed it, well great for them, I never thought I'd come out still saying the 30's movie is the best version to date.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
if you dislike films for failing to be 100% scientifically accurate' date=' then you're going to find very few films to enjoy.[/quote']

Actually I enjoy lots of films and am prepared to let a lot slip but it just seemed like it was one thing after another that had me thinking "oh dear god."

Thinking about it more, the worst part was just cutting to New York as if to say "we clearly can't explain how this handful of people could manage to get this massive beast back on their tiny boat".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest tv tanned
Actually I enjoy lots of films and am prepared to let a lot slip but it just seemed like it was one thing after another that had me thinking "oh dear god."

And yet, as milner says, you went to see a film about a giant ape on an island inhabited by dinosaurs and giant creatures.

And yet you shake your head at the fact someone was standing on the Empire State Building?

Had you ever watched the 1933 movie before going to see the remake?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Man' date=' i feel so PWND by cineworld that there wasn't a disclaimer outside saying that anyone with a smigeon of taste shouldn't see this film. It was the worst, most formulaeic 'action blockbuster' i can remember watching. CGI was totally stolen, not even updated, from Jurassic Park.

"We're in trouble, oh were saved. In trouble again, someothing else saves us... guess what more trou, wait we're saved."

Utter pish, i'd rather spend 3.5 hours watching a boring movie about pilgrims than waste my time watching that poop.[/quote']

I really enjoyed it, bar the first 30 mins, a bit too long winded..

what everyone is forgetting, is that Jackson re-made a film from the 1933 original, so, all you haters that diss the plot / sequences, are forgetting, that the "formula" was actually the original action film! (it's just you hacks have seen it so many times, you are numb to it).

what jackson "said" he wanted to do, was simply re-create the original, with better special effects. (which I think he did) (and a bit more character development), hence the extra 1 and a half hours!

there were some dodgy CGI bits (the herd of dino's running with the crew), but, the jungle + rex + kong footage was great. (Pisses on jurrasic park) and, to the person that wrote this :

I also detested the blurry slow-mo fighting scene with the tribe of freaks. Clearly a massive hideous cover up for some pretty bad directing

you've obviously no knowledge of jacksons signature camera effects / shots.

this was a classic bit of jackson style. Loved it. (it reminded me so much of the monkey capture in "brain dead", (probably filmed inthe same place! (as was the land of the dead, in the Return of the King).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe if the film wasnt so long winded and the sliding on the ice bit wasnt in it ide give it a rating.....

I wudnt recommend to be honest alot of it in my opinion was pointless and boring also very long winded...

Peace

Aaron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was good big dumb entertainment and the sort of films cinemas were invented for. It was cheesy maybe but it's impossible for an ape/woman realtionship not to be, so if you take away the cheesiness you totally take away the heart of the film. I was pleasantly suprised with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...