Hi, everyone. "Moriarty" here with some Rumblings From The Lab...
Well, no more speculating or wondering or hoping or dreaming. KONG has arrived, and people are starting to weigh in left and right on the film. FANGORIA, for example, called it a masterpiece. I know Quint saw it last night in NYC at the premiere, and I went to a press screening here in LA. I’m sure both of us will have our reviews up soon, but in the meantime, plenty of you guys have written in about it, and I want to give you the room to vent, good or bad. Be warned... there are spoilers in many of these reviews, and I’m not going to be holding your hand in case you stumble over them. If you want to know nothing, then turn back right now.
First up is our long-time occasional contributor, Bungion Boy:
Hey Harry, et al. Bungion Boy here, live from New York with a review of King Kong! I probably could have gotten a lot of work done today, but I decided to ditch my post and go to Lincoln Square and see the film I’ve been waiting for for I don’t know how long. I love Peter Jackson. Love everything he’s ever done, but I was looking forward to this especially because watching the original “King Kong” is one of my earliest memories. As much as I loved the Lord of the Rings films, I was even more thrilled for this because, while I love the books and the films, I’ve never been a huge fantasy fan boy. What I love is classic Hollywood films. Films such as say, let me select one at random, “King Kong.” It’s films like that from the 30’s and 40’s that fuel my geekdom, and Jackson has truly delivered this time with a loving tribute to the original film, that in some respects does the unthinkable. It surpasses it.
I’m sure you’ll be getting lots of reviews today so I’ll try my best to keep this brief. There are some spoilers below but most of which will come as no surprise to those who have seen the original. First of all, the film looks fantastic. I know. Der. But I’m not just talking about Kong himself, or the dinos, or the millions of other effects shots. Just the opening sequences alone gave me chills. I live in New York and I think it’s one of the greatest cities in the world. However, walking home tonight it won’t be as grand because it looks so beautiful in this film. It actually sparkles. Well, not all of it. We also get amazing shots in the opening of the poor, depression affected parts of town. I loved the boxing scenes in “Cinderella Man” but thought it really failed in showing us in detail the poor streets and camps in Central Park. But this film gives a better depiction of all that in its opening montage than “Cinderella Man” did in 2 1/2 hours.
It’s about 30 minutes before the boat takes off for Skull Island, and what we get in that time is a lot of character development and back-story. I can’t complain about that. It was all good and added some depth, but I will say that some of it felt a little weird, only because I’m so used to the original jumping right in and meeting Ann at the apple stand. Here there is more, and while the film is three hours long, it is never dull. In fact, some of the subplots and side stories suffered a bit from minimal screen time (especially the scenes with Jamie Bell). Sometimes they tell us too much to just go ahead and deprive us of more, but I anticipate a much longer directors cut on dvd, which I look forward to. Everyone is well cast here. Naomi Watts looks as stunning as ever and has a scream that Fay Wray would approve of. Adrian Brody appropriately has little do but he does it well. And then there’s Jack Black. My god, what perfect casting. Until you see Kong, the film is all about Carl Denham. It really is his story, as we see his obsession to make his film before making any apologies. As people are killed throughout the film we see him show regret but we never see him stop. He’ll save a tripod before saving a friend from death. He feels bad about this but he has a look that suggests that he’d rather answer for his sins in hell than sacrifice his work on earth. Jack’s performance seemed a lot less like Cecil B. DeMille, and more like Orson Wells. Oh. And I almost forgot, he’s also hilarious. If there’s a laugh line in the film, 90% of the time it came from him. It’s also nice to see him with his “Orange County” co-star, Colin Hanks. They’ve got great chemistry. And there’s a great homage to the original by making the star of Denham’s film playing a crusty sailor who thinks that women just get in the way. I can’t be sure but I think the dialogue from that film that Denham films, is lifted straight from a scene with Ann and Jack in the original.
Then of course there is Kong. Once you see him, you won’t be able to take your eyes off him. Forget what you saw in the trailers. It’s nothing compared to everything else. He moves so beautifully. So gracefully. The special effects I think intentionally don’t make him look completely realistic (that wouldn’t be as much fun) but the movements always seem like a real gorilla. I especially loved the scene and his reactions when Ann dances and juggles for him. Just beautiful. But another thing that makes him work so much is that he doesn’t look totally beautiful. He is old. He has a silver back, gray whiskers on his chin, and dozens of scars and cuts, presumably from his many battles on the island. I don’t know how much credit should go to Andy Serkis for Kong’s performance, but he is so natural and realistic that I became devastated very early on when I realized I would have to watch his inevitable death later in the film. Serkis is also fun in his non-Kong role, as the ship’s cook.
(Some spoilers) So the action. Thrilling. Terrifying. It doesn’t stop, and yes, in a good way. The sequences on the island could have been really repetitive, but they’re done in such a creative way, that trumps our expectations, that I was never bored. After about an hour on the island I realized my face was sore from smiling too much. The T Rex fight is unbelievable, and he fights more than one of them simultaneously. The reveal of each creature made the audience squeal with joy. I’ve always loved dinosaurs, (which is why I still love “Jurassic Park,” like “The Lost World: JP” more than I should, and sat through all of “Jurassic Park 3,” shudder) but the dino effects in this film surpass all of those combined. The brontosaurus stampede may have been my favorite sequence just because it showed those animals with as much grace as they probably actually had, which is to say, none whatsoever. They are massive, clumsy, and end up in a huge, er, dog-pile. Jackson’s modern version of the Spider-Pit sequence is also great and scary, although some of the creatures REALLY look like uncircumcised penises with teeth. But again, in a good way. They are probably the second scariest thing, after the freaky, crazy natives with more piercings in more painful places than I’ve ever seen.
And of course Kong’s escape from the theatre and chase through Manhattan is breathtaking, but I believe I preferred the quieter scenes in New York, with Kong and Ann sliding on ice in Central Park. It only makes it more romantic and heartbreaking that Ann goes to Kong willingly, instead of being grabbed through the window. It’s one of those changes that improves on the original. The Empire State Building of course looks great, especially with the sun rising over New York in the background. I can hear the complaints now that the ending is dragged out just as long as in “Return of the King.” It’s true. Kong and Ann are on top of the Empire State Building for a long, long time. But it’s so beautiful and sad that I didn’t mind it at all. By that point in the film, I didn’t want it to end anyways. Now of course, the last line. For all you fans out there, it is said by Denham (I had heard that it was going to be Fay Wray) and it is kept intact. There is no tidy closing scenes to follow. It ends just like it’s supposed to. And there aint a dry eye in the house.
I’m sorry. I just left the theatre an hour ago so forgive me if I have virtually nothing but praise for this. I’m sure if I were to write something up tomorrow I would be able to think of more things that are wrong with it, although I hope not. It’s just such pure entertainment that I’m so buzzed by the fun of it now. I won’t know until I see it again, but right now I think I like it more than Lord of the Rings, for the aforementioned reasons. This is going to be a huge hit and will probably push a very deserving film out of the Best Picture category. But you know what? I don’t really care. It made me that happy. Now I’m going to leave the office and try to see the statue at Times Square. Perfect end to a perfect day. Enjoy, fellow geeks. This is Bungion Boy, signing off.
This next guy’s got a great point about how younger children are likely to react to this film. Remember, folks... Peter Jackson loves to freak you out. He pushes the PG-13 as hard as he can a few times in the film, and I’d warn that some kids won’t handle it well. Anyway, here we go:
I apologize in advance for the length of this "review." If you use it, call me TokyoSpike.
Thanks to Universal Studios and KongIsKing.net, I was lucky enough to be awarded two tickets to Monday's premiere of King Kong in New York. Only two subway stops from home! I took my 11-year-old daughter. More on her experience later.
I'm about the same age as Peter Jackson, and like him (and Ray Harryhausen) I first saw the original Kong when I was about nine. Unlike them, I didn't much like it. The effects were mesmerizing alright, but I couldn't quite make out what the story was about, and all the characters seemed to be behaving in ways too stupid to be believable, and it was really sad. I got dragged to the 1976 remake against my will, and it was worse than I anticipated. You can't make a King Kong that I'm likely to care about.
But then, in 1999, I said loudly and repeatedly that The Lord of the Rings was unfilmable. The combination of Jackson proving me wrong on that one with his passionate determination to remake Kong was enough to get me interested in his production diaries on KongIsKing, and everything I saw there was enough to convince me I really wanted to see this movie.
Times Square and 42nd Street on premiere night was neon-lit with a dusting of snow. Perfect. Manhattan may be the only place in the world where you can block off huge chunks of sidewalk and cram hundreds of cops, thousands of fans, a host of working press, and a string of celebrities into one block and have it seem like just another day in the life.
We collected our tickets, had a quick bite on 42nd Street, and entered the Loew's E-Walk, where it turned out due to a mixup on the tickets we were going to a 7:00pm screening instead of 6:00pm, and we sat in the auditorium for over an hour - but the good news was it was the auditorium where cast, crew, and celebrity guests would all be watching with us. Sure enough, over the next hour Richard Taylor, Tania Rodger, Grant Major, Dan Hennah, Christian Rivers, Alex Funke, and many less recognizable Kiwis filed in, eventually followed by George Lucas with his son Jett and his younger daughter, followed by Billy Boyd, James Newton Howard, and eventually the cast of King Kong. When things got rolling, a lovely woman, the chief executive of Universal Studios (didn't catch her name) stepped onto a small stage at the front of the theater to tell us how tickled pink Universal was with the whole thing. She introduced two New Zealand women I'd not seen before who share producing credits on Kong with Peter and Fran - they were quite nervous - and they introduced Peter himself.
Bob Burns was in the audience, and he brought the 18" steel armature used to animate Kong in the 1933 original; Peter held the armature under his left arm the whole time he was talking. The thanked Universal, had the crew in the audience stand up and receive applause, thanked Fran and the Queen of the Geeks (who were in the audience, but who we didn't see), and then had the entire cast of the film join him on stage one by one, concluding with Jack Black, Adrian Brody, and Naomi Watts, looking lovely in a cream satin gown and hair permed in 1933 style. The cast took a bow, and then it was on to the main event.
We sat front row, just off-center, which was great for being arms length from Peter and the actors, but not so good for watching the movie; many of the action scenes are rapid jump-cuts between shots of giant creatures moving at high-speed, and couldn't really be followed well that close to the screen, but still . . .
Jackson said in a recent interview that even though he exposed a lot of what he was doing in his production diaries and in the trailer, he saved all the coolest stuff to spring on the audience. I'm not going to spoil the surprises for you, but he was telling the truth. The production diaries and trailer only hint at the kinds of things you'll see effects-wise, and don't begin to represent the dramatic depth in the writing and acting.
Act I is the set-up in New York City and the voyage to Skull Island. I was dying to see how the master creators of Middle Earth were going to reconstruct 1933 Manhattan. We've only ever seen it in grainy black and white photographs and scratchy black and white newsreels. Not any more. Sheer brilliance. All of the characters have three-dimensional personalities and clear motivations. The mood of Act I is growing desperation followed by ominous signs and portents leading to the first tingling of primal fear.
Act II is Skull Island, and this is where you get your money's worth and then some. I have some quibbles with some of the effects shots relatively early on, but that's just me (and maybe had to do with having my nose pressed to the screen), but they just keep getting better and better (you lose sight of the fact that they are effects shots) - and the environments and especially Kong himself are utterly, reflexively, instinctively convincing. There are more set-piece action sequences crammed onto Skull Island than in any two Spielberg movies you could name. I lost count. The mood of Act II is foreboding overtaken by fear building to terror - except when your adrenaline is pumping too hard to allow time for terror - but also the slow discovery that Kong is not just a mindless brute, and doesn't perhaps deserve his fate.
Act III is back to Manhattan. Sitting in a theater at Times Square for a premiere in 2005 and watching the destruction of a Times Square theater premiere in 1933 was a rare treat. (Where's that Exit sign again?). Jackson twists the locations and motivations of several characters around from the original here, and to great effect. He also adds one quiet scene in Central Park that was, for me, the biggest surprise of the film and I strongly suspect in the future will be seen as the single most archtypical Peter Jackson scene ever. I wish I could say more, but take it from me, it could never have been filmed before Jackson/WETA, and no one else would ever think to do it, and if they did they wouldn't do it with this level of emotional resonance. Jackson always walks the line of strong emotion close to the edge of cloying sentimentality, and so far he's never fallen off. The Central Park scene is also the quintessential example of what I mean by that. And of course, we all know where the story goes. It's brilliantly staged, both from an action point of view, and also to give Kong his big acting moment, letting Ann and the audience know that he's quite aware of what's going on, and ready to accept the inevitable. The mood of Act III - mounting dislike for one greedy and deranged character coupled with desperation and sadness. Fade to black.
Howard's score, by the way does a lot to create the moods I described above. It wasn't flashy, but it seemed to fit perfectly. One last thing: there are about a dozen really funny moments, especially for people who know the 1933 original and get to see how Peter integrates some scenes, musical cues, and references into his movie.
ABOUT TAKING CHILDREN - The movie is a hard PG-13. My daughter's 11, but then she and I have sat and watched at least a movie a week for the last 5 years. She likes scary stuff, the Jurassic Park, Star Wars, and Lord of the Rings movies are mother's milk to her. STILL I made sure that she saw the original 1933 movie last Friday night, and I told her exactly what to expect in Jackson's version of the "spider" pit sequence. Unless you've got a similar close understanding of what your child can take, please don't take anyone under 13 to this movie. Jackson's "spider" pit sequence was too intense for me, and my daughter wisely kept her face buried in my shoulder for all of it.
My daughter, by the way, loved the movie, but I believe there were tears toward the end - this Kong's a heartbreaker, and no mistake.
Thanks to all at AICN for the many years of great stuff!
-TokyoSpike
This next guy may seem like he’s being needlessly venomous to the film, but I can actually understand where he’s coming from. KONG will not work for everyone, and I think he’s perfectly justified in his gripes. I think some people just aren’t going to dig Peter’s vision, and for some very fundamental reasons. Check it out:
I saw a screening tonight at the Arclight in Hollywood. Normally I would respect the request of the screening company not to write an online review of a private screening but I am writing this out of spite for the way my girlfriend and I were treated by the head jerk managing the screening.
I so wanted this to be a great movie. All the way through the screening I kept asking myself, “Do I like this movie?” A few minutes after leaving the theater I cleared my mind of all the cinematic flash and excess and realized it was mediocre at best. It takes a couple good ideas from the 70’s remake but also makes similar mistakes. There was no great character in this movie. Not even Kong. You may not agree if you are impressed by watching real apes. Kong had great realism. But that’s not why I always liked Kong. I found his realism was as interesting as watching a documentary on apes. Even if it’s a good documentary it’s still nothing more.
There were a few good moments in the first third of the film like the way Carl first notices Ann and…well I can’t think of another at the moment. But I was disappointed by the pussied down version of Jack Driscoll. They even spoof the original character in a test shoot onboard the Venture. At first I laughed but then I realized they just made fun of a great, strong, classic character of which not one can be found in this movie.
Once they arrive on the island it’s pretty cool but a lot of it is shot in “Jackson-cam”, that weird way of zooming in on something and playing it back in a stuttery way. Looks like a music video effect. I was impressed by the way the natives were able to skip across stormy water to the Venture to grab the golden cooze and skip back to land, though it looks much like a Cirque De Soliel bit.
Once they’re on the island it gets cool. But Jackson overstuffs us with “coolness” to the point that I just wanted it to stop. Far too many creatures doing far too many things for far too long. The idea of Kong fighting three T-Rex’s is nothing more than excessive. But what’s worse is the way it’s presented. It’s as if they strapped the camera to Kong’s foot to film the scenes. The best part of that scene was when he was down to fighting just one. But by that point I was tired of the situation. One scene I always found oddly fascinating in the original was when Kong shakes the men from the log. This version was really weak. I didn’t think we would see bodies smashing on the rocks below but I thought we’d see something cool. Maybe showing men puncturing a deep muddy floor or tripping over vines on the way down. Actually most of them survive to enter a scene that was cut from the 1933 film, and for good reason. It was excessive. But excess is the theme in Jackson’s remake.
The movie went on to disappoint me when they replaced the Pterodactyl scene for medium sized bats that Jack and Ann could hang from to flee Kong. They eventually capture Kong and get him to New York. This is where the movie could desperately use an intermission. What made it worse was that it felt like the movie’s engine shut down and went through a slow gradual restart with some boring thought and reflection on the part of Snatch Driscoll. Suddenly the movie is exciting again when the stage show taking place at Kong’s chained feet features replica costumes from the tribe in the original and even uses the original score. From there Kong busts loose, tramples the audience and heads down Broadway. He wanders the streets flinging around cars and blondes trying to find Ann. Kong then proceeds NOT to wreck a train but instead chases Driscoll’s car underneath the raised train tracks, teasing us about a scene we won’t get. Kong then proceeds NOT to clutch a woman from her bed in a high rise and drop her to the street but instead finds Ann and goes ice skating with her.
From there the military start firing on him and he runs right up the Empire State Building where I found myself more impressed with the realistic cityscape than the drama. By now we’ve all scene Kong slap the plane out of the sky a hundred times over in the trailers. After that there’s another “boomerang” plane wreckage that went exactly as you might predict. By the time Kong finally dies I’m thinking, “It’s about frigging time”. We get to look at him for a bit as his eyes go dry and Ann’s gush glycerine. Then he slides off the roof and slowly falls as we listen to some leftover “Titanic” music. Hey, I was sad at the end of Titanic. But either it didn’t work here or I just didn’t want to feel that way about King Kong. But it gets a little worse still. There’s no “thud” whatsoever when Kong eventually hits the street. Maybe the sap softened his fall.
Then finally Carl Denham approaches the dead Kong to deliver the famous line. I knew he was going to say it and I thought I wanted to hear it. But just as he said it I realized it was totally wrong for him to say it. Black’s slimy portrayal of Carl made me realize that it wasn’t beauty killed the beast but greed and self-importance. After all, Kong didn’t follow her back to NY, Denham dragged him back. Jack Driscoll the writer should’ve said the classic line with Carl Denham standing beside him pondering his own fault in the matter. I really did want to love this movie. Overall I thought the original is still better and there will probably be another remake in years to come. Hopefully next time they won’t have 200 million to over do it.
If you publish this, call me The Creature.
This next one’s short and raises some questions, but overall seems to be fairly positive:
Hey Harry,
Mindseye here. Been awhile since I sent in but I saw Kong tonight so I figured here goes with a few thoughts (NOT SPOILER FREE):
In short, it was great. The ape had soul. You believe in that lonely, tired ape. The smallest furrowing and release of his brow gave Kong fantastic facial expression and character. The set pieces were fantastic and the Kong vs T Rex fight is multi-faceted and long and the "vine" portion of it is draw-dropping. The natives were genuinely menacing. New York looked amazing - really surprising that it was all green-screened.
Jack Black was good, and I expected him to be annoying and too Jacky Blacky, but he wasn't. He played straight nicely. Naomi Watts was luminous. Boy, does she have the overcome ingenue expression down pat. She goes to it a lot, but you don't get tired of it. Brody is a bit of a pussy, sorry, even when he is supposed to be heroic.
In general, very well-casted. Somehow, the actors all had a thirties-quality facial structure to them - they made the period piece work, particularly Thomas Kretschmann as the captain and Evan Parke as Hayes who had rip-roaring charisma. Both of these guys should break out. Evan Parke was cool as hell.
My main complaint is that KK may be too action-packed. Kong's roar gets monotonous and we have seen the dinosaurs done before and probably better. The stampede did not work for me at all - it really looked fake.
During the "spider-pit" scene there was melodic "downtime" music which worked in the scene but under-scored how non-stop it all was. It was as if James Newton Howard made a decision to take a break from the ACTION!!!! music for a change. This, however, was no downtime scene. All of the action made for somewhat undeveloped character and relations, which you would not think you would find in movie of this length... I did not really buy into the Darrow/ Driscoll relationship very much and, as such, it made some of his choices seem a bit unbelievable.
There are questions I have:
How did Driscoll know where Kong and Darrow were on that giant island after he decided to go after them on his own?
The "Beautiful" thing - what was up with the sign language? Was Ann Darrow indicating herself when she said "beautiful"? Weird scene, a bit.
Here's hoping the deleted scenes on an inevitable extended addition shows how they got Kong back to NY on that boat.
Anyway, the Kong in Times Square is fan-fucking-fastic and actually worth going to Times Square in Christmas season.
Best,
Mindseye
Here’s a pretty much unmitigated gush.
Here's mine!
Okay, I guess you don't need to count me surprised at this point. This movie, given astronomical expectations, what can I say? It totally met them! Two years ago, however, I would have been very surprised. I mean, faced with the unsettlingly daunting prospect of having to follow up the utterly-obnoxiously-down-in-history Lord of the Rings movies, especially with probably one of the most unneccessary remakes ever, well it looked like it may have... well.. done that! I think Peter, Fran and Phillipa have utterly cemented themselves as surprisingly competant filmmakers, of blockbuster films no less! I think the most surprising thing is the fact that PJ is one of the most completely self indulgent filmmakers alive. Ok, so... I can't say there's a major choice with the movie that I didn't utterly agree with. The only thing that started to grate on my nerves a little was PJ's proclivity for stodgy slow-mo towards the beginning of the film. This dissapeared once Kong came into the picture, oddly enough.
Jack Black is an odd choice for any dramatic movie, I'd say even more so than Jim Carrey. At least Jim changes his tone from character to character. Jack Black's mere existance is funny. Whenever he's talking to Ann, directing her in a scene or the like, you kind of half expect him to start singing "Take off yo' blouse, and yo' undapaaaaants!" Especially the fact that it was him that was given the infamous line, "It was beauty that killed the beast" (yes, they ended the movie with it, and I shouldn't have been surprised at all that they did, though there was a part of me that was hoping that they wouldn't). It's... Jack Black! I don't care how right he was for the part, and would have been if you didn't know who he was, his Jack Blackitude is distracting.
All the same, the more I think about it, the more perfect he seems for the role. Jack Blacked up though he may be.
Then of course there was Jamie Bell as Jimmy and his Magical Negroe, the one real black spot on the movie, as it were. Aren't we past the whole inexplicably Wisened Negroid Mentor Figure Who Dies So Our Young White Coming of Age Character Will Learn and Live thing, Peej? I'm over it.
Then there was this... lovely young German fillie that strode onto the scene. We knew not his actual name, Captain Tighpants? Captain Sexy? Captain Plot Device? At any rate, he is the bastion of slash instigation, newly introduced fangirlitued and saving the day on multiple occassions alike. Who is this Thomas Kretchmann? Why does he bring Germany so high up in the world? What is it about his allure that makes every pair of panties and more than a few boxer-briefs start sweatin'?
And What can I say about Adrien Brody in a wifebeater? How does he look somehow sensitive? And the conversation he instigates with Ann in the hallway while he's walking past her shirtless all "'scuse my pecs". I mean, maybe it's my slight inconventionalness in regard to man-taste, but Adrien Brody... very likeable love interest. Love interests in Hollywood movies like this tend to be strained at best. I mean hell, they walk into the movie and your brain goes "Love interest" and you kind of grin and bear it. But Mr. Mistyeyes just makes it be all like... wow, this is seamless! When hell, it isn't! This is the very prototypical Hollywood movie! And up until everyone gets to Skull Island, it just flows fairly well. The trip on the USS Venture is a little lengthy, yes, but given the non-stop 90 minute action sequence that's about to happen on Skull Island, well, it becomes something o a necessity. And take in all that lovely Brody action.
And then Kong happens, and we really don't care about Brody anymore. Sorry, no, we don't. Truly, the star here is Kong and his quirky little interactions with Ann. Adrien who? I find it reminiscent of the Prince and the Beast in Beauty and the Beast. To quote the great Kirk Wise, "I want my bison!" Or in this case bigass monkey.
Poor Adrien becomes something of a too little too late sort of deal, and every time he shows up it's probably only interesting because Kong is chasing him, infuriated or somesuch. I don't care if you did inexplicably kick a raptor in the head, I mean sure, twenty foot silverbacks probably don't look as good in wifebeaters as you do, Mr. Brody, but will you shamelessly slide on your ass across ice in Central Park? Didn't think so. Moreover, who the hell is going to effortlessly carry her down the Empire State Building after the infamous Last Stand? Yeah, didn't think so.
While I'm on that let me just comment on how AMAZED I was at how well and tactfully that was pulled off. A little drawn out, but no where near the emotional effects milk that it could have been (a la Return of the King - and the way he actually fell off? So much with so little).
But while I'm on the Love Triangle aspect, let me address the lack of Kong Lust that we had in the last two. And thank god, you know? Thank GOD. Peej, I salute your nine-year-olditude. As mind numbingly racist as your movie was, it avoids the iffyness the other two had with the lack of Kong-lust, so go you!
I heard one response saying that PJ missed it- in that removing Ann's horror and disgust, the real tragedy of Kong is pretty much tossed away. While I agree, and that in the original that aspect just made me HELLA angry/sad (seeing Kong pet her and love her while she screams like a... 30's person even though he's being gunned down to his death is pretty tragic) but I think we're working on different levels of tragic here. Namely that this Brave New World is simply not one in which Kong can survive.
And it is hard to think of something in such an action/adventure/fantasy/sci-fi genre to even begin to come to the emotional complexity and depth that it did. The movie's a two hour roller coaster that Lord of the Rings didn't even begin to approach and yet at the end the whole theater finds itself tearing up even more. Kong is wisened and a survivor, but an innocent just like Ann, and here we have the real tragedy of this movie- in order to survive in the world he's brought into, innocence is not allowed (as evidenced by Colin Hanks' "rape" scar at the end as he beholds the whole spectacle with resigned sadness). Kong knows he can't make it in this world, and maybe doesn't even want to, despite his valiant last stand. So as important as it was for PJ to end the movie with "It was beauty that killed the beast"- nep, sorry. It wasn't beauty; it was the rest of the world.
If you use this call me Singe
Here’s our first KONG review to mention fellatio. Only on AICN, huh?
Hi Harry, Bad Lieutenant here, took some time out from smoking crack and harrassing young girls into simulating fellatio to check out the afternoon screening of King Kong at the Loews Theater on 68th and Broadway in NYC. It was jammed, lots of people. Getting into the joint was tough, as people were getting yanked from the line left and right for one reason or another. But once inside it was fine, they even gave out free bags of popcorn, free bottles of Coke and water, and a cool collectible Kong cup. Unfortunately, that was the highlight of the afternoon, because then we had to sit through the movie.
I won't bore you with what the movie is about, for everyone knows the basic story. Let's just cut right to the point. Peter Jackson is an overwrought filmmaker. The guy truly has no sense of the difference between good drama, and very bad drama. That, combined with the fact that he refuses to edit any scene, makes for one heck of a disappointing film.
The problem actually arises from the commentaries on the LOTR DVDs, wherein Jackson, Walsh and Boyens reveal themselves to be screenwriting hacks, throwing around buzz words from books like "How to be a Successful Screenwriter" and "Screenwriting from A-Z." The script for this film is so painfully embarrassing in parts, I actually winced. All of it is on display here, first with the moronic exposition at the beginning. I refer you to the scene where Naomi Watts' theater has been shut down, and some old man talks to her, telling her all the exposition about herself that he would never say in real life. It's almost like, okay Old Man, explain to us why this woman would get on this boat. Everything is so formulaic, so forced in the first hour. And scenes just go on and on, with all these pregnant pauses for what I suppose was dramatic effect. Just bad.
The Skull Island stuff is pretty good. The natives are pretty scary, but Jackson resorts to the same stupid motion/shutter effect he did in the scene with Pippin and the Palantir in ROTK, totally out of place in both films. One awesome sequence is when the natives kidnap Ann. They do this cool pole vaulting thing to get through to the water. Unfortunately the natives disappear soon after they sacrifice Ann. We never see Kong stepping on them, or eating them, none of that cool stuff from the original. Kong eats some of the shipmates and steps on them, but no natives. It was pretty weak from that standpoint. I only remember Kong eating one person, and you don't even really see anything after Kong puts the guy in his mouth. There's no Kong leering into women's bedrooms, or undressing Naomi Watts. I remember that shit from when I was a kid being some of the scariest stuff cause it was real. None of that. Kong is too much of a good guy in this movie, which is a mistake.
Ann with Kong was good, but too quick and forced. Their connection happens too soon. If Kong is supposed to have been alone all this time and stuff, would he really take to her so quickly? Maybe, maybe not, either way it happens too quickly in the film. Which points to a greater problem here, a general feeling of a rushed, slap dash job. There are no good details in the film, everything is so glossed over, weird for a 3 hour film.
Like when they capture Kong, he's laying on the rocks by the water, then they cut straight to the opening night of Kong's appearance on Broadway!!! It just seemed abrupt and weird. We want to see how Ann feels on the long trip home, knowing what Kong is going through. We want to see just something, anything. But nothing. We spend all this time setting up these characters, like stupid Jimmy and Mr. Hayes, and then we gloss over a huge event, like the transport of Kong back to the states. The movie felt incomplete.
Jack Black is fine in the beginning for the most part, but gets worse as the movie demands more of him. You want to laugh everytime you see him, which doesn't really work in the second half of the film. Naomi Watts is good for the most part. She has nothing to do really except run around barefoot in the forest, never wincing or getting hurt once. Adrian Brody doesn't make much of an impact. The script hampers all of them, especially by devoting time to Jimmy's fear of looking like a coward and Mr.Hayes saying "Jimmy" everytime he talks to Jimmy. I'm telling you, the script is putrid, pure by the numbers.
The effects in the film are quite good for the most part, with some stunning shots of Kong on the Empire State Building, great shots from the planes as they circle. But we never really connect with Kong, because really, in the end, he's just a giant CGI monkey, and it's kind of laughable sometimes. I know that might seem sacrilege, but it is true. The audience today attested to that, as there was inappropriate laughter several times in the film. As well as some hissing, which was surprising.
The music was overwrought, the script was overwrought, the editing was overwrought, the direction was overwrought. PJ is really just an effects guru, a good visualist who is a hack writer with hack writing partners. His weaknesses are exposed when the material is not there. Frighteners was awful because there was nothing there. LOTR was good, except for ROTK, cause the material was strong, and the truly bad parts were ones invented by Jackson, Walsh, et al. Let's face it, King Kong is not quite a compelling drama, it is a good adventure movie, but Jackson tries to inject all this false pathos which comes across as...you guessed it, false!
The movie had its moments, but for the most part it was kind of boring, and kind of just....there, which is sometimes the worst thing you can say about a film. At least if it's bad you can have passion about how bad it was, but if a movie is merely OK, what is there to say?
I would wait for the crowds to dissipate before venturing to this one. There's really nothing spectacular or ground breaking about the film. It has no idea what it wants to be, and has really drained all the horror elements from the story. And PJ really has some balls making this thing 3 hours long. If he had something to say, as in LOTR, okay, I'll buy that, but there is nothing to this movie and it is 3 hours long for no reason. 45 minutes could be cut out without skipping a beat. Ah, who cares, most of you will disagree with me now, but you'll agree with me five years from now.
I need to go take some bets. Remember, leave it on the Mets.
And, after that disappointed review, we’ve got another disappointed review:
Greetings.
I know you love all things Kong, but I'd like to submit a review that may flat your tire a bit. I have posted some of my angrier comments in a Talkback, but I'd like to elaborate if I may:
Like I've stated before, i went into this film as a skeptic. However, because of my love for Dead Alive and The Lord of the Rings Trilogy, it would not be right to at the very least give Mr. Peter Jackson the benefit of the doubt.
SPOILERS AHOY! (actually, this is not so much a review as a run-down of what I remember mixed with a bit of commentary)
And at the start of the film I'm glad I did. As a matter of fact, I'd go so far to say that the representation of New York (as cartoony as it was) was great, as was the performances of Naomi Watts and Jack Black. It should be noted that Black is seemingly playing drama. (though the audience I saw it with laughed at EVERY movement and statement he made until they realized he wasn't in comedic territory) After a movie producer boardroom scene (which liberally lifts a Bill Hicks joke), they're off to make a movie on....(to be typed one finger at a time in shakey slo-mo)... S-K-U-L-L...I-S-L-A-N-D!
On the boat we're treated to the rest of the cast, including a weird relationship between Mr. Hayes and Jimmy. Note: You will want them dead. Immediately. Quicker, if possible. There is a scene missing on the boat, but we will have to wait for the EE DVD. On board, it's revealed that the captain is a master at capturing exotic animals and has a shitload of chloroform. For those with eagle-eyes, you'll notice that the captain has bagged a Sumatran Rat Monkey! But alas, we don't see any stop-motion in THIS Jackson film.
So....they get to the deserted island. Well, that's not entirely accurate. Their ship dances on the jagged rocks for about 10 minutes while the captain navigates them out of a sticky situation. This is where it starts to go wrong. There are orcs on Skull Island. Or Mordor. Or wherever the hell we are. New Zealand Aborigines? Man, I don't know. All I know is that I've seen it before. How about some African influences?
Okay, girl offered to Kong... check!
Girl kidnapped... check!
Guys go in pursuit... check!
Then all these dinosaurs come out of nowhere and the men in pursuit are kind of amazed, but not really. They're more amazed by a 25 foot gorilla. Fine. It's his movie.
THIS IS WHERE YOU SHOULD ENTER THE THEATRE.
So Kong defends his damsel from about 5 T-Rexes. It is good and fun. The fight that is. There's nothing more to it than that. You should see it. Eventually.
The guys in pursuit are dealing with giant insects and slugs in order for there to be more excitement in the King Kong video game (now on sale!). If this uninvolving action set-pieces didn't exist, sure the movie would move along quickly, but then the King Kong video game (now on sale!) would play like Rampage. Remember Rampage? Ahh...
Kong keeps the girl to himself and she's not really that scared. So she dances and juggles to make him laugh and smile (as much as a gorilla can). But after the battle, Kong wants to reflect on the beauty of a sunset. Naomi taps her chest and says 'beautiful'. (I hope this pays off later!)
Anyway, they get the girl back and catch Kong (with a shitload of chloroform). And Carl Denham says we're going to Broadway--
THIS IS WHERE YOU SHOULD LEAVE THE THEATRE.
Cut to Broadway. (Somehow, 5 men dragged a temporarily sedated Kong to their awaiting ship and take him to NY. No word on how long that boat ride was. But it WAS a shitload of chloroform.
Ape gets loose... check!
Naomi offers herself to the beast... check!
And away they go to spend about nine hours ice-skating in the park like the Coca-Cola polar bear. I know it's nine hours because when army guys open fire, they head to the (SPOILER) Empire State Building (END SPOILER) just in time for dawn. King Koko-- I mean, King KONG-- signs 'beautiful' to show that he appreciates beauty. Got it? No? Not yet? You will...
Girl in a slip outdoors all night and on top of a skyscraper when there's snow on the ground without getting hypothermia... check!
Ape shot down... check!
Finally, at the end of the movie Carl Denham tells you what it's all about when he states, "It was beauty that killed the beast." Crap! I thought it was about robots or something. I'm glad they didn't let me miss the point.
THE END.
There are a few inside jokes about Fay Wray and Cooper's RKO film thrown in, but there's not much to get other than that.
Like I said before, I wanted to like this, but it felt like someone rushed the writing process so that he could see some Kong. He's been waiting since he was nine, as we're told over and over again.
The audience reaction was mixed-to-negative. For one of the first US showings, there was little or no applause as we exited the theatre.
Don't shoot the messenger...
HypeEndsHere
And we’ll wrap things up with “NotTomServo,” who takes us out on a high note:
Big doings for a Monday morning: Through a fortuitous series of events and two hours of toe-freezing waiting outside, I just got back from a critic's showing of Peter Jackson's King Kong over at the Loews on 68th St. (As an aside, the screening was run terribly - From the color-coded seating to the random security lines, everything was organized just enough to unnecessarily complicate everything and to reward bad behavior.) But let's get down to brass tacks here: How much for the ape? Well, in essence PJ's King Kong is the Mother of All B-Films - the Skull Island action sequences are spectacular, Kong's adventures in New York seem appropriately mythic, the special effects throughout (particularly the Great Ape himself) are mind-blowing...Without a doubt, Kong is one of the best movies I've seen this year. That being said, I'd be lying if I didn't admit that the film has some serious pacing problems, particularly in the first hour, and at times I thought it seemed almost too reverent of its source material. At the very least, Kong, while definitely a Wonder of the World and no mistake, could have benefited from some minor grooming.
Fortunately, many of the most glaring missteps in Kong occur relatively early on. The film begins very auspiciously with a choice montage of Depression-Era New York, during which we're introduced to beautiful young vaudevillian Ann Darrow (Naomi Watts) and, soon thereafter, director-on-the-make Carl Denham (Jack Black) and his long-suffering assistant (Colin Hanks). From here throughout, both Watts and Black are excellent - One would never think Watts was interacting with anything less than a grotesquely large primate in the scenes to come, and Black is surprisingly good and unobtrusive as Denham, even if there are a few too many shots of him...slowly...turning...to look at...something huge, amazing, and/or ghastly.
That being said, after the opening, the film slows to a crawl for a good 30-40 minutes, as Denham, Darrow, & co. wend their way to Skull Island about the S.S. Venture. Frankly, I was reminded a lot of the first hour of The Matrix Reloaded during this sequence - There's nothing as flat-out embarrassing as the Bacardi Silver rave here, but there is a lot of hamfisted expository dialogue masking as character development. Particularly egregious in this regard is everything involving the ship's First Mate (Evan Parke) and a young stowaway (Jamie Bell) he's taken under his wing. Frankly, this whole subplot is a mistake - It's laden with stilted groaners (the digression on Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness, for example) and comes off as cliche-ridden as the tough general and his fresh-faced recruit in that other Matrix film.
Fortunately, right around the time the Venture loses steam, the film starts picking some up. The run-in with the natives is rather creepy. (Although, once again, it could use some tightening - We only need one slo-mo Bad Taste-ish zoom to a human skull and one frightening Zombified Skull Islander in the throes of an epileptic seizure...but PJ gives us four or five of each.) But, right around the time Kong first appears to acquire his new sacrificial plaything, the film starts to gather the hurtling momentum that'll characterize most of the rest of its run.
And, indeed, the rollicking next hour of the film is, for the most part, Jurassic Park on 'roids. Throughout the Skull Island tour (which includes many death-defying stops and Shelob-esque reveals), Peter Jackson and the WETA gang really let their freak flag fly, and the fun here is infectious. This is a monster movie maven at the top of his game, and some of the sequences here - most notably Kong vs three T-Rexes - are jaw-droppingly (or jaw-rippingly, as the case may be) spectacular. I don't want to give away some of the twists and turns in this middle chapter...but, if you're not really enjoying the heck out of this hour of the film, I'm not sure why you went to see Kong in the first place.
Of course, the story returns to New York in the final hour, when Denham brings his newly-acquired Eighth Wonder of the World to the Great White Way. (Look for the now somewhat-unfortunate cameo by Howard Shore, doing what he might well have done best...To be honest, the James Newton Howard score sounded mostly like incidental music. If there was a "Kong theme," I didn't catch it on first viewing.) And, at this point, the film forsakes the mayhem of its middle hour to bask in the Gothic-in-Gotham resonance of the Kong mythos. There are some really beautiful moments here in the final act, although I do have some quibbles: The timing of night and day makes very little sense, and streets seem to clear of fear-stricken bystanders at the most opportune times for Kong and his ladyfriend. (Then again, we are talking about a 25-foot ape here, so perhaps I should just shut up and suspend the disbelief.) Also, there's a scene in Central Park here that I expect will divide audiences - particularly fanboy audiences - down the middle. I found it somewhat touching, but I also couldn't help imagining Kong & Ann visiting Coney Island and/or partaking of a Gray's Papaya while they're at it. "Something tells me I'm into something good..."
And, then, of course, we end atop the Empire State. At this point, you're either with the movie or you're not, and I was definitely moved by Kong's last act. That being said, I can also see the argument that some folks made of Return of the King being made here...the last few scenes are exquisite and heartfelt, but they're also just ever-so-slightly redundant. You can forgive PJ being a trifle indulgent here, I think - this is the big payoff, not only the culmination of a three-hour viewing experience but the most memorable moment in his favorite movie of all time. That being said, I have to admit that at a certain point, as the biplanes went around for yet another pass and Kong looked increasingly miserable, that the horrible cynic in me noted this was somewhat akin to watching a remake of Citizen Kane with a fifteen-minute sled scene.
I was also somewhat reminded of Old Yeller in the closing moments, which - it must be said - speaks for how amazing PJ, WETA, and Andy Serkis' King Kong turned out to be. In fact, this even far outshines their amazing work on Gollum - At no point did I find myself questioning the reality of this Kong, even in the midst of some severe Tyrannosaurus Rex bashing. The Dian Fossey gloss on the relationship between Darrow & Kong helped too - In perhaps the cleverest update of the old Kong, Darrow utilizes a very unique set of skills to bond with the Great Ape. And it's those scenes - and their other quiet moments together - that are the most memorable aspects of this Kong, which is no small feat given the action flourishes of the second act.
In sum, King Kong is an amazing film, and easily one of the best movies of this year. But, to be fair, it's also undeniably too indulgent at times, and I think it ultimately fails to achieve the transcendent heights of the Rings trilogy. (But I'll freely admit to having more of an emotional investment in Tolkien than I do in the original Kong.) At the very least, it's definitely worth seeing, not only as a world-class monster movie but also as a worthy retelling of one of the cinema's greatest stories.
So there you have it. An exhaustive trip through a variety of opinions. In just a little over a week, everyone else is going to have their chance to join the debate, and I’m really curious to see what fandom does. Should be an interesting time.
"Moriarty" out.
