Registered: 08/22/05
Posts: 120
Loc: Northern Florida, USA
Is the story of King Kong really worth a three-hour movie? It is when Peter Jackson tells it. This 2005 remake is an amazing film not just because the special effects are spectacular, but because it is very faithful to the original, but fleshes out the story well, especially the pre-Kong part, by delving into the depression gripping New York and the nation in the 1930's, yet it never, ever, gets boring.
It's all here. A desperate film producer finds a vaudeville actress down on her luck, and transports her on a tramp steamer to a primitive lost island to film a movie that will, he hopes, save his career. They stumble onto a monstrous gorilla, who snatches the actress, but then falls in love with her. With the help of the ship's crew, the producer captures the ape and transports him to New York. Miserable at captivity and missing the actress, he escapes and terrifies New York until he is killed, much to the sorrow of the actress.
Naomi Watts deserves a lot of credit for her role as the actress, because not only did she do a good acting job, but because they beat the crap out of her. First the natives who captured her manhandled her terribly, then Kong really smacks her around in a bunch of scenes. Yes, it was all pretend, but it still had to have been a demanding role.
Incredible action, and a really well done and well-acted story make this a top-notch, must-see film. This is absolutely NOT a typical monster movie, and of course, it's head and shoulders above the 1933 original. Oh, and you didn't expect a small collage for King Kong, now did you? - - - Naomi Watts - - -
_________________________ Dann Visit my site for video clips and other collages.
You're incorrect in saying it is better than the original. The 1933 film was a landmark that continues to impress the critics to this day. It was an amazing accomplishment for its time. Can you even fathom filmmaking in the year 1933? Only this version's F/X has made a dent in the awards presentations this year.
The film´s really good entertainment with an utterly cute Miss Watts. I like looking at her running around in a cold New York with that night dress; the effect´s the best in the whole movie
And I like the new King Kong, for sure. But it is too long. The original is practically half as long and is better paced. And as someone else said, people couldn't even imagine the original's special effects at that time. Jackson did a great job, but the effects are merely the next small progression from Jurassic Park.
Watch the old one from 1933. Yes, it has overacting, but that was the style then. To see those guys make so much of a fantasy with so little to work with is absolutely amazing.
Back to Naomi -god she's beautiful!
_________________________
My avy reg. date is inaccurate! I actually joined 11/10/04, same day as my bud bh13.
Longshot
Space Cowboy
Registered: 01/26/05
Posts: 32172
I haven't seen this film yet. There's talk that an Extended Edition DVD may come out in the future, with even more scenes, and a Jackson commentary track (the DVD versions just released don't have any commentaries on them).
Naomi's barefoot in it, you say? Nice.
And from the looks of those caps above, her nipples get some good screen time. Even nicer.
Registered: 08/22/05
Posts: 120
Loc: Northern Florida, USA
Quote: I haven't seen this film yet. There's talk that an Extended Edition DVD may come out in the future, with even more scenes, and a Jackson commentary track (the DVD versions just released don't have any commentaries on them).
Huh, an even more extended version? There is already a 2-disc set, although I didn't bother to rent the second disc. Supposedly, the second disc is loaded with goodies. Dunno about a comentary track, though, but sounds like they're gonna milk this puppy for all it's worth.
_________________________ Dann Visit my site for video clips and other collages.